In late 2007, student Meredith Kercher was found brutally murdered in a hillside cottage in Perugia Italy. Her murder sparked a media frenzy due to the alleged sexual nature of the crime. News out of Perugia told unsubstantiated tales of a satanic ritualistic sex orgy that led to murder. At the heart of these accusations was Meredith's roommate Amanda Knox. This outrageous fantasy all began with a kiss.

The morning following the murder, Amanda Knox and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were standing outside the cottage watching investigators and members of the media converge on the murder scene. As both stood there in the cold, Raffaele held Amanda keeping her warm and at one point they shared a few short kisses. At that moment cameras flashed, images of the two kissing were viewed around the world, instantly creating the fictional satanic ritualistic sex crazed killer "Foxy Knoxy." The media failed to note that Amanda was scared and shaking, looking for comfort in an extreme moment of shock. They also failed to note that the nick-name pulled from Amanda's MySpace page was actually a childhood nickname earned for her skills on the soccer field. "Foxy Knoxy" made for salacious headlines in a story that was becoming more sexually charged with each coming hour. Sex sells and the media saw the opportunity to cash in. Unfortunately the truth was nowhere on their radar.

In the days and weeks that followed, the fantasy of a lust driven and sexually motivated sex killing was the topic of conversation about a case that in reality had absolutely nothing to do with sex. Police moved forward with their investigation of what they would call a "threesome sex-orgy gone wrong." False claims fueled what quickly became a sexual obsession that overwhelmed every media report. One story in particular sent the obsession into overdrive. It was reported that Amanda went to a lingerie shop with Raffaele shortly after the murder to by a g-string. Readers were told they were seen laughing and talking about "wild" sex in the store. As it turns out, the witness claiming to hear the sex talk didn't speak any English. Amanda and Raffaele just so happened to be speaking English in the store. We would later find out that the witness was paid by a tabloid. Even worse, the store wasn't even a lingerie shop. Elizabeth Vargas, an ABC reporter, reported on the Oprah Winfrey show that she visited the store and observed that they didn't even sell the sexy lingerie that was described in the media. She described the store as being similar to a Target store in the United States. Unfortunately, the security camera footage that showed a brief moment when Amanda smiled at Raffaele was all the media needed to propel the lie around the globe.

 

Barbie Nadeau

One of the most salacious writers in the case, yellow journalist Barbie Nadeau was front and center when it came to fueling the sexual obsession hovering over the case. She printed outright lies regarding excerpts leaked from Amanda's prison diary stating that Amanda claimed to have slept with seven partners during the time she was in Italy. The truth is, in a dishonest attempt to gain information about her sex life, Amanda was told by corrupt prison officials that she tested positive for HIV. In a very responsible manner, Amanda put together an honest list of partners she had been with during her lifetime. Little did she know that immoral journalists such as Barbie Nadeau would use this information to formulate egregious lies to be used against her.

Nadeau consistently shows how out of touch she is with the current culture in Perugia Italy. For example, Nadeau left college students in Perugia baffled when she made this observation:

"I don't think it's completely out of the picture to assume that group sex is part of the university experience now.  Based on interviews I have done, it's just what kids are doing in Perugia. These kids are not strangers to what I would consider to be extreme sex games."

Most readers would probably be quite interested in hearing from those Barbie claimed to interview. If group sex is a normal part of college life, Barbie Nadeau is the only one to realize this.

But Barbie's salacious style is not just used to sexualize the students of Perugia or Amanda Knox. Instead, Nadeau is one of the few yellow journalists willing to take her constant sexualization to the next level by disrespecting the murder victim, Meredith Kercher, in her book Angel Face, describing her lifeless naked body in lurid and sexualized terms ( as viewed during autopsy). There was no reason whatsoever to mention anything about the appearance of Meredith’s private parts and Nadeau should be ashamed for stooping to that level to promote her career. 

Sexually charged headlines for articles written by Barbie Nadeau, and others like her, came easy for editors all around the world.  For those who haven't followed the case, salacious headlines like the following were the norm:

"Lesbian Sex Plea to Knoxy"

"Foxy Knoxy plays the field from her jail cell with new romance"

“Diary reveals Foxy Knoxy’s sex secrets"

“Hayden banned from seeing sex monster Knox”

 

The Prosecution and the Court

The media carries much of the blame for fueling the sexual obsession, but we must not forget that they were being fed erroneous information from the prosecution's office led by Giuliano Mignini. Mignini was the media's source for many of the lies that were spread early on. Prosecutor Mignini would change his theory of the crime many times throughout the course of the trial. He eventually dropped the sex game theory that filled the headlines for over two years leading up to the verdict, going with an equally ridiculous theory that Amanda simply hated Meredith enough to kill her. Along with the baseless motivation of hatred, he was able to keep lust in his narrative. He created dialog for Amanda during his closing argument and imagined her saying this to Meredith during the attack: "You are always behaving like a little saint. Now we will show you; now we will make you have sex."

Judge Massei, the head magistrate in the case, didn't buy Mignini's theory and instead created his own lust driven theory of the crime. Massei suggested that Amanda and Raffaele were being intimate in Amanda's room when they overheard Rudy Guede attacking Meredith. Instead of coming to Meredith's aid, Amanda and Raffaele decided to join in on the attack. The amazing thing is that Massei's theory is even more ludicrous than Mignini's. Why would Amanda decide to help a virtual stranger attack and murder her friend? How would they have known that Rudy would not attack them? Common sense was nowhere to be found and apparently any sexually driven theory would do.

 

Peggy Ganong and Perugia Murder File

The sexual obsession fueled by the court and observed in the media was quickly adopted by a group of individuals running an ongoing hate campaign against Amanda Knox online. This group assembles on a discussion board called Perugia Murder File (PMF) run by Seattle resident, Peggy Ganong. The same group also runs a so called informational site called True Justice (TJMK) run by New Jersey resident, Peter Quennell. This group claims to be dedicated to preserving the memory of Meredith Kercher but in reality their only goal is to smear Amanda Knox. They continuously show an obsession with sex in their daily conversation attempting to paint Amanda's supporters as middle-aged men that only support Amanda because they are sexually attracted to her. Here are a few quotes from PMF, the site moderated by Peggy Ganong:

"They are middle aged Perverts who dream of being the foxy to Amanda's knoxy"

"All are middle-aged men driven by fantasies of recapturing lost youth, being a hero and carrying the damsel in distress off into the sunset."

"those middle aged one hand typists who spend their sleepless nights imagining romantic interludes with Amanda."

"seriously sick, pitifully perverted, lust aided attraction that some bored middle aged males with keyboards, have for a unanimously convicted, justly incarcerated young female"

Recently, this group suggested that Wikipedia Founder Jimbo Wales became interested in the Amanda Knox case because he was looking to have sex with Amanda.

"I don't see the pay-off in the end. Right now, Jimbo is on the verge of losing any sense of respect as a new media entrepreneur (lying about his checkuser results, for example) just for a chance to catch a peek of some tender young sex killer flesh."

"Jimbo is precisely the profile of the aging Lothario looking for access to tail through his powerful media connections. He isn't thinking with his correct head and everything he's proposed is straight out of the FOA manual."   

"Somebody should give Jimbo a cold shower. He's really lathered up and ready for brunette sex killer action"   

Peggy Ganong should have been ashamed to be part of that conversation, but as moderator she not only endorsed the dialogue but joined in with a zinger of her own: "In all seriousness, what is it with these wiki guys and their wicks?"

 

Peter Quennell: The worst of the sexually obsessed

Peter Quennell, who runs the website True Justice, does nothing to hide his obsession with murder victim Meredith Kercher on his site, giving readers an experience that is outright creepy. He doesn't hesitate to carry on the sex laden talking points of his group. He had this to say about me when he felt the need to talk about my daughter while accusing me of lusting over Amanda:

"Hmmm. Someone now tells me that Bruce Fisher who runs some FOA website claims to have a daughter. I have never paid much interest in him, but one has to wonder why he is slobbering kinkily over Amanda Knox while at the same time undermining those public institutions that are the bedrock of the future of his daughter and, when she has them, her own kids."

Even though many of the people that support Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are women, Peter Quennell, Peggy Ganong and their followers, like to spread lies that the support comes primarily from perverted middle-aged men. This line of thinking is disgusting, but not surprising.  More likely than not, followers of Quennell and Ganong project their own shameful and creepy sexual obsessions onto others.

Recently, Quennell showed his obsession with young women when he stalked and attempted to extort money from a young woman who resisted his advances. This young woman's name will not be mentioned in this article in order to protect her privacy. Quennell attempted to lure this young woman into a business deal in which he would create a promotional website to help build her career. She was new to the United States and Quennell's offer sounded pretty good in the beginning. Quennell proceeded to create a website telling the young woman that he was creating the site free of charge to show her the benefits of his promotional expertise. The site included many personal details of the young woman's life and she did not approve. The young woman was shocked at the website Quennell had created and also became concerned (and was warned by at least one friend) that his interest in her was not solely business-related. Quennell's emails were at times sexual in nature, repeatedly asking for her to take trips with him. He refused to cease communications with her when asked, and he appeared to her to be obsessed.

The young woman asked Quennell to take the website offline but he refused, demanding money to remove it. Quennell sent the young woman hundreds of emails encouraging (pressuring) her to work with him. This disturbing daily barrage of emails led the young woman to become afraid of Quennell and she decided to go to the police. It was only after being contacted by detectives that Quennell finally removed the website ending this young woman's nightmare.

Quennell has been instructed by the police to have absolutely no contact with this young woman. In fact, if, as a result of this article or any other catalyst, Quennell decides to disobey the instructions of the police and contact or harass this young woman, or repost the offensive website he created, he knows that he will be in violation of stalking laws, and will be subject to arrest.  Additionally, individuals close to the case are in possession of several hundred emails sent by Quennell to this young woman. To this point, they have been kept confidential, and will remain so, unless Quennell violates stalking laws by any of the previously mentioned actions or continues to harass the young woman in any way, shape or form.

I know of other women that have been mistreated by Quennell that have chosen to stay silent for personal reasons. I encourage anyone that has been wronged by Peter Quennell to come forward. Exposing the truth will help to prevent Quennell from mistreating others in the future. Peter Quennell is one of the leaders of the ongoing hate campaign against Amanda Knox. If this information doesn't cause readers to pause and reevaluate what kind person Peter Quennell is and how credible his website is, nothing will.

The truth in this case has been clouded over by a disturbing sexual obsession that began with the prosecution. This obsession spread like cancer throughout the media, distorting public perception, fueling a hate campaign, eventually leading to the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, who now face a quarter century behind bars.

The murder of Meredith Kercher was a brutal crime but not a complicated one. Rudy Guede ambushed Meredith when she arrived home while Guede was in the process of burglarizing the residence. Meredith endured a violent attack which included rape. This crime was not one of lust acted out by three sex killers. This crime was one of extreme violence inflicted by one man in an act of pure evil. The sexual obsession that overwhelmed this case was based on pure fantasy; it was never about sex.  

The Democracy Manifesto (go to the manifesto) represents a significant moment as far as the global conversation on democracy is concerned. It is also a moment of new beginnings.  A good conversation is one that produces more of it. I hope this one snowballs into more debates and dialogues. Democracy is worldly, primarily an artifact. Like other human artifacts, it too needs care, continuous attention, ingenuity and passion. The ongoing conversation on democracy, as I can recall from my own experiences, never suffered from dearth of ambition. Yet it has always been an exercise in humility and deep engagement.

Imagine that you go into a ‘sleep mode’ today and are revived after a gap of several decades. What do think will have been the history of democracy while you slept? What narratives will emerge? Will experiences in different parts of the world, particularly in the global south, be a part of the larger story of democracy?

You only need to ask the question to sense the importance of an affirmative answer. If currently existing democracy in India has merely overcome corruption and ensured the rule of law, if China has moved towards democracy, if Brazil continues to have popular government and there are elections in South Africa that change the ruling party, if there is democracy in Egypt (who would have thought of writing that three months ago?) and Palestine… or if there are not any of these things…

It is clear that the dominant ways of thinking of democracy are and continue to be narrow. They tend to make the political clamour, experiments and mobilizations in different parts of the world invisible. But it is surely the case as our experiment shows that if we think of democracy and look forward then the still dominant view is quite inadequate. The future of democracy will be shaped and even decided in countries that are more experimental than its traditional homelands. The ‘frontier’ of democracy to borrow an image, is no longer found in the ‘west’ or the global north.

This is the starting point of our global conversation. It questions the dominant view, and shows that other ways of engaging with democratic experiences are possible. Not only possible but also necessary and now in the public domain. 

First, a bit of history. 

A few years ago a group of scholars and activists from South Asia wanted to reflect on democratic experiences in their countries in the region. They all agreed that knowledge about democracy must be produced in a democratic fashion and that this demands a methodology that does not devalue specificities of experiences. They initiated a conversation within the region and finally produced a report - State of Democracy in South Asia.  The impetus for a further, global conversation on democracy emerged from several regional conversations that followed especially this South Asian one. No doubt, in the past there were discussions on democracy. But this time round, the conversation delves deeply into the fundamental questions regarding the ways in which democracy has to be explained and evaluated.  It attempts to re-define what it means to be democratic.

The Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), in Delhi, coordinated the initiative, and thanks to the intellectual energy of Professors Rajeev Bhargava and Yogendra Yadav, and a grant from the Ford Foundation, the global conversation took off to a good start three years ago.   During this period, three major international meetings, involving participants from Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America and North America, were held (two in India and one in South Africa). Besides academics, a good number of participants came from the world of civil society and social movements.  The conversations thus far have been focused and productive.  

As I write this, activists and ordinary citizens have gathered in different parts of India to raise the issue of corruption in politics and public life. To them, fighting against corruption is a struggle for democracy. Like the continuing upsurge in the Arab World, the mobilization in India reflects the local concerns, dreams and aspirations. In some of these cases, practices on the ground seem to run way ahead of the dominant democratic thinking. However there are occasions when these events fall far short of the high normative standards of democracy. The lack of fit between theory and practice, in the above sense, is what grounds the substance of the ongoing conversation on democracy.

Being conversationalists we decided that we would produce only a draft of a Democracy Manifesto and ask for further thoughts, comments and even asides. Here it is. Let’s see what happens. We already have responses from Anthony Barnett, Laurence Whitehead, Jorge Heine and Melissa Williams. Hope more will join in.

The Democracy Manifesto: Re-imagining Democracy in Our Time 

To the introduction

The Arab democratic upsurge of 2011 inspires democrats all over the world. It has fired up the imagination of all those struggling for self-rule under authoritarianism. It also gives hopes to those engaged in deepening democratic practices everywhere. To all those who see democracy as a shared journey of humanity, it provides an occasion to reflect on what democracy means. This is a moment to re-imagine democratic ideals and practices in our time. 

1. Democracy as a political principle and as a form of government has expanded to nearly all corners of the world. It is recognized now that every human being must have an effective say in the decisions that affect their life. The notion that every government must respect this fundamental principle has greater acceptance than ever before. The ideal of self-rule has begun to fire up peoples’ imagination all over the world.  Democracy may not be a form of government that is experienced globally, but it has become an aspiration that is shared across the globe. This aspiration takes different forms. The ideal of popular self-rule has multiple readings.  Theses will depend on which people are being talked about, what understanding of self is being invoked and what  is accepted as self-rule.  “ The people” could mean all the citizens of a national state, the citizens at a region or locality, or the planet’s entire population. The self could be seen in terms of the individual citizen or in terms of a social community. Self-rule could be interpreted as voice, consultation, consent or consensus in any authoritative and binding decision-making process. A standard understanding is that democracy means free and fair elections, but it can also take other forms.
2. The globally dominant notion of what democracy means, however, does not reflect the journey of democracy. The prevailing orthodoxy about democracy  draws upon the limited experience of a small part of the globe. Selected facts of European and North American history have been turned into abstract principles. One of the many strands of western political thought has been assumed to be the sole repository of the normative imagination for democratic practices in different societies at different points of time.  An idealized notion of western liberal democracy hegemonizes the democratic imagination. It is assumed that capitalism and modernity have an intrinsic relationship with democracy. This hegemony of the western experience and imagination may not always affect popular struggles that are being waged in the name of democracy all over the world. Yet, it does constrain the translation of popular aspirations, practices and struggles into a set of norms, institutions and theories in the Global South. It also constrains the deepening of democracy within the global North.
3. Enriching our democratic imagination in line with the expansion of democracy would involve several things: widening our conceptual apparatus to accommodate diverse languages and idioms of democracy;  enriching our normative standards to reflect multiple histories and traditions of democratic thinking; and  correcting our explanations to account for radically different experiences and trajectories of democracy. Reimagining democracy along these lines is one of the most pressing ethical and political tasks of our times. It is imperative not just for democrats in the ‘aspiring’ and ‘new’ democracies, but equally in ‘established democracies’.
4. The prevailing orthodoxy on the democratic imagination assumes that democracy is strictly the gift of western civilization.  Yet, an honest genealogy of democratic ideas and practices must acknowledge that these are rooted in multiple trajectories. Ancient Greece was but one of the sources of democratic imagination. The ideas of democracy can be traced to Buddhist Sangha, Ganatantra traditions in ancient India, Islamic traditions in many societies and practices among the indigenous communities across the world. Much of the modern ideology and language of democracy has spread to most parts of the world from Western Europe and North America. Many of the well-established democratic institutions and practices in today's world were secured first in Europe through a series of popular struggles. The gains of these struggles are now part of our global human heritage.  Yet the western legacy is neither singular nor unambiguous.  For every advance in democracy, there is also the history of denial of democratic rights. Besides, the history of the expansion of self-rule for one's own citizens was inextricably woven with the history of denial of self-rule to larger subject populations outside and ethnic minorities inside the territory of a ‘democratic’ state. For most of the world, the contemporary practices of democracy are neither a direct off-shoot of the various ancient traditions nor an imitation of the modern west. The democratic aspiration spread to most of the world by way of anti-colonial struggles and the various movements for self-determination and self-rule in the last two centuries.
5. Enriching the democratic imagination requires questioning the simple-minded democracy/non-democracy binary canonized by the dominant orthodoxy. As democracy becomes the most sought after regime label, the quest for self-rule is reduced to a contestation about the latter. This promotes binary, either-or, thinking over a graded understanding of the spectrum from democracy to non-democracy. The dominant orthodoxy’s focus on classifying a country either as a democracy or a non-democracy encourages façade democracies. This binary distinction has resulted in an excessive focus on the threshold of when a non-democracy turns into a democracy.  This summative and static judgment performs the function of putting some ‘established democracies’ beyond reproach. This artificial binary construct must come to an end.  Democratic practices may exist in apparently non-democratic regimes. Established democratic states can embody a vast array of non-democratic practices. There is no "finished product democracy" and there never will be.  The aspiration for democracy is open-ended. Each fresh step opens new horizons.
6. The dominant orthodoxy espouses teleology. Democracy is the ultimate and inevitable destination. This often leads to thinking in terms of stages or pre-conditions to the ‘transition’ to and ‘consolidation’ of democracy. Yet, there are multiple sequences and routes by which different political regimes come to be democratic. The route taken by democracy in the west is but one sequence of many. In turn, there are multiple trajectories within the west itself. Material prosperity and cultural uniformity are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for democracy.  We also need to move away from an instrumental and determinist view of the outcomes of democracy.  Democracy leads to different outcomes in different historical settings.  Democrats need to be aware of the dysfunctions of democracy, and not just in 'new' or 'developing' democracies. The case for democracy cannot rest on dubious and instrumental grounds such as its purported usefulness for desired economic outcomes. Democracy must be cherished for its intrinsic value, for what it means to human dignity.
7. Reimagining democracy requires a fundamental shift. There is a tendency to assume that democracy is an attribute of political regimes rather than that of political practices. This leads to privileging form over substance, to making too much of formal political institutions and to reducing democracy to electoral democracy. An emphasis on practices would require a more careful and painstaking sifting of the substance of political action, its contextual meaning and its consequences.  This also enables us to think of democracy beyond the formal domain of politics. Practices within the domain of the family or the market, for example, need to be viewed in terms of the extent to which they enable or constrain self-rule. Democracy needs to be thought of as a way of life.
8. Questioning the dominant orthodoxy also leads us to the search for an appropriate level of analysis. There is a need to move beyond a fixation with the national state as the natural unit within which one thinks about self-rule. The locus of national power is no doubt the principal level of struggles for self-rule. But to focus exclusively on it side-steps the colossal inequalities among and within nation states. The latter deny vast numbers of people across the globe an effective voice over decisions that affect their lives and livelihoods. The quest for democracy must go wherever effective and binding decision-making occurs.  Shifting sites of sovereignty require that we begin to think of inter-national relations as an arena of democratic contestation. The same could be extended to the level of continents or other groupings of nations. At the same time, the unit of analysis needs to be extended downwards, to regional and local units, for this is the level at which most citizens experience self-rule or its absence.  
9.  The idea of democracy is becoming global, and it acquires multiple meanings. As democracy becomes a global aspiration, it attaches itself to different and often competing values.  This entails a conversation with pre-existing cultural values. Many of these values are contradictory to the democratic ideal; they must go. Some of the pre-existing values are not fully compatible with democracy; they must change. At the same time, the idea of democracy itself does and must undergo a change.  As the idea of democracy is interpreted and re-interpreted in different parts of the world, misunderstandings and misuses will arise. Therefore democracy is and will remain a contested concept.  This contest is resolved by entering on a case by case basis. It cannot be resolved a-priori by insisting upon an original, all-encompassing definition of democracy.  The demand that democracy all over the world must conform to a fixed definition first worked out in one part of the globe is inherently undemocratic. The ideal of democracy requires a respect for the democracy of knowledge. Knowledge production is not limited to some privileged sites, some societies or some period in history. The ideal of democracy has emerged from a dialogue of the various expressions of self-rule in human history. If democracy is anchored in reason, dialogue is the custodian of reason.

10. Current definitions of democracy threaten to reduce it to an institutional checklist derived from idealized notions of the experience of a small part of the globe.  The ideal of democracy is seen to be synonymous with the historical form of liberal democracy in advanced capitalist societies of Western Europe and North America.  Often this is further reduced down to a few key institutional features.  Yet, the historical experience of democracy in most of the world provides overwhelming evidence against this approach.  More often than not, imported institutions do not produce the same consequences that they did in their home context. Similarity of form is no guarantee of democratic substance.  In fact, a search for familiar form is an invitation to cynical and superficial copying for extraneous gains. On the one hand, the experience of ‘established democracies’ shows that the appearance of a democratic form of government can very well go hand in hand with the de facto rule by experts, the dominance of corporate power, social control by private networks and  the decline of citizen participation. On the other hand, the experience of democratic success outside the global North suggests that a departure from the mandated institutional form is often a pre-condition for success.  Mass democracies of post-colonial societies tend to acquire depth through practices that may not have a legitimate institutional expression in the conventional wisdom on democracy.  Institutions are crucial to the formation and strengthening of democracies, but what institutions do depends on the context in which these are located.  We need to shift the focus from the form of an institution to its real- life consequences in a given context. Democracy is an ever-evolving principle that can take different institutional expression at different points of time in different societies.

11. Thus, the principles and practices of democracy have to be open to multiple sources of learning. There are several living 'traditions' of consultation and consensus making all over the world. Such local practices need to be 'critically transformed' in order to make them relevant for democratic practices today. New power sharing arrangements are being worked out all over the world in different contexts, in response to different needs. Various monitoring tools are being invented in different democracies. So far only a few of these appear on the radar of  the democratic imagination. The search for a richer democratic imagination requires that we look for practices, institutions, intellectual traditions and thinkers everywhere to help us reshape democratic theory.

12.  The very notion of exporting democracy is inimical to the spirit of democracy. Democracy promotion can turn into democratic imperialism. Like all ideologies, democracy too can turn into a dogma. Strengthening democracy is about deepening the values which shape the principles of democracy within a society. The 'culture of democracy' of a given society is vital to building democracy. The idea that some people lack 'culture' and are not ready for democracy also goes against the principle of democracy.

13.  To deparochialize the idea of democracy is not to privilege an Eastern or Southern view of democracy over existing Western or Northern views. To the contrary: it means universalizing our understanding of democracy and democratic practices. The insistence on difference and divergence is designed to synthesize the multiple experiences of democracy. This is a necessary condition for reclaiming the global heritage of democracy and for reimagining a truly global future for it. FROM SOUTH TO NORTH.

Of the various values that the idea of democracy attaches itself to, four deserve a special mention.  First, democracy requires individual and collective freedom, for self-rule cannot exist in the absence of a basic guarantee of freedom.  Any kind of coercion or violence thus goes against the spirit of democracy. Second, the idea of self-rule requires that everyone have an equal say in matters that concern them.  Democratic deliberations require a level playing ground, free from widespread inter- and intra-group inequalities. Third, the ideal of self-rule requires a recognition of communities that often constitute the self. Thus democracy requires respect for deep diversity. In a world where most political units contain diverse communities, any attempt at cultural homogenization is not in keeping with the spirit of democracy. Fourth, given that democracy requires maintaining the conditions for democratic deliberations for future generations, it implies an ethic of responsibility towards nature.

When Marco Pinotti (HTC-Highroad) finished 9th overall in last year’s Giro d’Italia, a discerning minority regarded the performance, and not Ivan Basso’s victory, as the most significant of the Corsa Rosa for Italian cycling. For years an unheralded journeyman, Pinotti had slowly risen to prominence in the latter part of the noughties as contemporaries like Ivan Basso and Danilo Di Luca’s stock fell, their reputations and palmarès sullied by doping scandals.

Few, though, would have batted an eyelid at Pinotti’s five Italian national time trial titles, his four days in the pink jersey in 2007 or indeed his 2010 Giro campaign were it not for the anti-doping convictions he wore so forthrightly on his sleeve. A graduate engineer, he also spoke eloquently about the environment, the challenge of attracting kids to cycling and just about any topic on which his views were solicited. He was, in short, a worthy spokesperson for a cycling nation that for years had placed its trust in men of straw.

Last December, on the eve of the 2011 season, we sat down with Pinotti to retrace his career path up to this point. With just ten days to go to the start of the Giro in Turin, we’re about to discover whether cycling’s voice of reason – and Pinotti’s palmarès – will continue on the same heartening upward curve.

A shorter, adapted version of this interview appeared in the April issue of Procycling magazine.

Cyclingnews: Marco, let’s go right back to the start. How and why did you start cycling?

Marco Pinotti: I started riding when I was 16. I was Matteo Algeri’s teammate. One summer I went round to his house to do homework and we went for a bike ride together. He said I was quite good, that I should give it a go and so on. Then I went to watch an Under 23 race that October. I liked it so I started looking for a team. I found out there was one in my village. So I joined and the next season I started racing.

Did cycling run in the family?

No one rode bikes in my family but my granddad always liked cycling and wanted me to race. He died in January 1992 and that was the year I started racing. He never saw me on a bike but I know he’d have been my biggest fan. I was lucky to be from an area where there’s a lot of passion for cycling, which really developed after the war with Gimondi. He was winning in the sixties, then the oil industry was in crisis in the 1970s and people started using bikes as a mode of transport. So it really grew, then in the 1980s and 1990s you got the ripple effect of Gimondi and that generation. There were lots of clubs in the area then. In the second half of the 1990s, there were something like 27 professionals living in Bergamo, some born there, some from other regions or countries. They were all guys who had started riding in the late 1980s. Now it’s very different; now there are only a handful of pros in Bergamo. I think there are two reasons why it’s changed so much. One is that people just don’t ride bikes as much any more. The other is that the foreigners aren’t coming to Bergamo any more. There’s still Kanstantin Siutsou, Alexander Kuchinski, one of the Efimkin brothers, but that’s about it. That’s because it’s no longer a good place to train. If a young rider, someone like Tejay Van Garderen, asks me to recommend a place to stay and train in Italy, I’d like to say Bergamo but I tell them to go somewhere else.

Kids of your generation in Italy grew up very aware of cycling and the top riders, didn’t they? Do you think that’s changed now?

Italian kids are maybe as aware of cycling as they once were but it’s changed. There are a lot fewer races. There are a lot fewer kids too, when you think of it. Now families have one, two kids on average. There’s more traffic, so parents don’t want their kids on the road. And there’s a lot of competition from other sports. I don’t know…On one hand, the Federation will tell you that the numbers are going up but those statistics are “doped” slightly by the numbers doing mountain biking, which is safer. Granfondos have really taken off too – but those are generally over 30s who are doing it for health reasons. And again, Bergamo’s not at the forefront of that trend.

Did you follow the Giro, the Tour?

Even before I started racing, I followed cycling. I followed all sport. I loved the Tour – with LeMond, Bugno, the back end of Hinault’s career. But I didn’t have any idols as such. I can remember the Fignon and LeMond Tour really well. But I wasn’t a “fan” of any one rider.

You were more focused on your academic work? You went on to get a degree in engineering….

I was certainly more focused on my school work than cycling at that time. I started racing but I didn’t intend to turn pro. That idea only really entered my head the year before I turned pro. I always had to juggle academic work with cycling, so I was always a bit pressed for time. I thought I’d turn pro for two or three years and see how things went, whether my body could take the strain. But I would never have expected a career like I’ve had, so long and successful.

How successful were you as an amateur?

I won races but I was never up there with Basso and Di Luca, those guys. I was always in a small amateur team. Now, and even more so then, there was a massive difference between the big, very organized teams who went on training camps and were basically run like pro teams, with riders who were effectively pros because they’d left school and cycling was all they did. I never went to training camps. I just used to race on a Saturday then go back to my parents’. So, I won races but small ones. I was never really in the set-up for the national team. Time trials were the only way for me to get noticed on a national level. Without those, I would never have gone beyond a few good results in regional races. There was a bit of a dearth of good time triallists so that’s where I slotted in. That’s what got my name out there on a national level

They were rough, unpleasant times in Italian amateur cycling….

Yep. Absolutely. I don’t know what it’s like now but it certainly wasn’t easy then. History has taught us that a lot of victories in that era were the fruit of illegal short-cuts and not talent.

Pinotti in his element

You came into contact with professional cycling for the first time immediately after the Festina affair, when you joined Polti as a stagiaire in August 1998…

I guess I was conscious of what was happening…but the Festina affair was a good thing because it opened up the possibility for change. It gave cycling a big jolt. When I turned pro, I heard mentalities were already changing. Or at least there was that hope. So that was the first jolt, which made people finally take the war on doping seriously.

But did you know what you were getting into?

No, I had no idea.

And you hadn’t seen team-mates or opponents doping with your own eyes?

No.

So it wasn’t as though you were going to races and your team-mates were filling the minibar with EPO…

No. I think if that was ever the case, it probably changed in 1998. After Festina there probably wasn’t much organized doping. It was individual riders making their own choices then. Perhaps the teams were closing their eyes to it but there was no organized doping. I don’t know what it was like before Festina. But something definitely changed there.

Had you already asked yourself the question of whether you would dope or not?

I was lucky that I was turning pro just because I could. I also had an education behind me. I turned pro in 1999 and graduated in 2000. My main aim was to get my engineering degree, then I was going to evaluate whether I could still race my bike. If I could survive with my values and not do too badly…I like racing my bike, so why not continue? Then when I got my degree I felt even more secure because I had something to fall back on. I even went for interviews after I graduated just to see how attractive the offers were. But they weren’t so attractive that I wouldn’t rather carry on racing.

And in fact, in those first two years, you…

Did nothing [laughs].

Well, yeah, you didn’t get amazing results but you did OK.

Yes, yeah. I mean, I turned pro and rode and finished the Tour in my first year. It was one of my biggest achievements in the first part of my career. It was the first Tour that Armstrong won. I finished and the directeur sportifs were all happy with me. 

But it must have been tough.

Well, I didn’t do anything exceptional but, honestly, I finished without ever having been on my knees. I was OK. It was actually a really good thing to do the Tour in my first year because I said to myself that was as hard as it could get. The level was high but the others also had two legs, just like me, and there I was with them. It was a good first experience of the Tour.

Your friend Matteo Algeri had bit more trouble than you adapting to the pro scene.

He did two and a half years. He was passionate but he had lots of physical problems which maybe came from overextending himself to get up to scratch. He’d eventually had enough.

What were your sporting highlights in those first couple of years?

Finishing the Tour in 1999, coming second in a stage in 2001… I was in a break with Rik Verbrugghe. That was the first time I really became aware of Jonathan Vaughters because that was the day he had to quit the race because his eye was swollen from a bee sting and he couldn’t take cortisone. I saw the photos in the paper the next day. I was second in that stage and I was fifth or sixth in the young riders’ classification. I was 30 or 40 minutes behind on general classification but still one of the best Under 25s. That was good for me because I was coming off a few physical problems. Even then I realized that I recovered pretty well. I might have been 50th overall in that Tour but I was in the top five young riders and that was having lost a bit of time in the flat stages. In the mountains I was in the top 40 or 50. I can remember the Alpe d’Huez stage that Armstrong won, when he bluffed Ullrich. I was in the first group of around 40 at the bottom of Alpe d’Huez. I can remember Armstrong bluffing, the penultimate climb…

The Glandon.

That’s it. There were a few hard sections and I could see Armstrong dropping back behind me. He didn’t look too bad but it seemed strange that he was there at the back of the group. There was Livingston on the front, then Ullrich…I can remember Telekom working the whole day. Then we descended, got to the foot of Alpe d’Huez and I got dropped. I can remember being puzzled when I saw him on the Glandon.

With hindsight and everything that’s happening now, what are your impressions of Armstrong?

When I rode the Tour in 1999 he was a source of inspiration. I was like a lot of other people. Looking back now….when he gave up the first time and L’Equipe published the article about his 1999 urine samples, it was a bit of a kick in the stomach.

You believed in him before that?

Here’s the thing [long hesitation]. As long as you don’t have proof, you always hope. I hoped. But there I thought, blimey, everything people said, the rumours…it was all confirmed, albeit not from a legal point of view. Now all I know, I read in the newspapers, and when I read about this investigation in the United States, I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago.

Would context be any excuse? If one were to say, if he’s proven guilty, that plenty of other people were doping?

No, it’s not.

There’s an argument that he also dictated, created the context. He was the standard bearer for the sport. If he had sent out strong signals, would the context have changed?

OK, but it’s not the riders’ responsibility to send out signals. His job is to race his bike and win. Armstrong never tested positive. OK, there are those tests from 1999 but he was never convicted. What annoys me is the role the authorities played or didn’t play. A few months ago I read Paul Kimmage’s book, Rough Ride. As I read it, I was thinking, blimey, this was 1990! And if my memory serves me, Kimmage said that one of the reasons he was writing it was so that the UCI would finally see what was happening. He talked about how the riders all knew there would be no dope tests in the last stage of a major tour, so they took amphetamines. And this gave him a dilemma: he didn’t want to take amphetamines but he did want to help his team leader. So what could he do? In the book, he was effectively asking why the UCI let this kind of thing happen. He wrote it as an invitation to the authorities to open their eyes. They didn’t and so they’re maybe the guiltiest ones.

OK, but there wasn’t always the technology to detect certain substances. The riders also had to take responsibility, let their own ethics govern the sport.

Agreed, but for years these people underestimated the problem. In 1997 it was the riders who applied pressure to introduce a haematocrit limit. Maybe it did more harm than good – I don’t know – but it was the people at the base of the pyramid, the riders, who demanded action before the authorities. I wasn’t there at the time but…I’m more angry with the people who facilitated all this or who didn’t do enough. But then yeah, you’re also right about riders and their ethics. Now there are people trying to undermine the credibility of the biological passport, which is a positive thing that the UCI have introduced. A lot has changed but when Landis says there are riders who the UCI has protected, if that’s true, it’s very serious.

Allegations don’t come much more serious that that.

Yeah, because there is this conflict of interests between promotion and organization. If I was in the UCI’s shoes, it’s clear that I would want to create heroes, drama. The two roles, promotion and legislation, should be separated. There ought to be collaboration with the UCI but they shouldn’t be in control of both areas.

Doping is a completely selfish act, isn’t it? Would you agree that these riders have no concern for the wellbeing of the sport?  

I agree.

For example, Danilo Di Luca gave an interview this winter explaining why he collaborated with the Italian Olympic Committee’s (CONI) anti-doping commission. He said he’d done it “because he couldn’t stand being away from races”. There was no notion of him doing it to serve the sport.

This is hypocrisy at its worst. Don’t get me started on Di Luca because if you do we’ll still be here tomorrow morning. I don’t want to talk about him.

But it’s obvious that you’d like to…

[long sigh] You can’t say what he said. I don’t know what he told the investigators – he must have said something if they reduced his ban – but compare Di Luca and Tom Zirbel. Zirbel was banned for two years by USADA having tested positive for DHEA. He didn’t know how it got into his body and he definitely didn’t take it intentionally. Nonetheless, he admitted that what enters an athlete’s body was his responsibility and he wasn’t able to prove that it was contamination, perhaps because he didn’t have the money and the lawyers. Anyway, he couldn’t prove it and he got banned for two years. There was another case - Zirbel heard about it - of an athlete who did manage to prove that he’d taken a contaminated supplement and the company got sued – but the athlete still only got a three-month reduction to his ban. Then along comes Di Luca, who’s already been charged twice -  once for consulting a doctor who’s banned from cycling for life and now for this. Di Luca tests positive, admits he did it and then he provides the investigators with information, which he can do because he’s an expert in the field, and they give him a nine-month reduction. Then what? He throws his hands up in the air and says, “I didn’t name any names. I didn’t spit in the soup. I just explained my doping methods.” So as an expert in the field, he’s told the investigators how you go about doping. At this point Zirbel says, “Ah, it’s a shame that I’m not an expert in doping. I should have pretended to be one then I’d be able to start racing again next year. Because I’m an idiot, though, and I let this substance get into my system without knowing how, I’ve got two years and I’m stuck with it.” You see these are the inconsistencies of the system. I read what Zirbel wrote and I thought, yeah, he’s right.  I respect him. I mean, they are two different bodies making the decisions, USADA and CONI, but the lack of uniformity is still unacceptable. It’s things like this that undermine cycling’s credibility.

And yet it’s a lot better than it was.

I say that if things remain as they are, it’s at least a big improvement on fifteen years ago. There’s been some progress. Everyone whinges about McQuaid but ever since he took over at the UCI – I don’t know, maybe under another president there would have been even greater strides – but things have improved. Maybe it’s because he’s come under pressure from WADA, the riders, the media, but efforts have been made. Cycling must be one of the cleanest sports now. I mean, I don’t know anything about other sports, but I know what happens in cycling. Sure, if you read WADA’s report on the Tour de France, you think to yourself that they’re still not doing enough, that the holes in the net are still too wide, but what do you do?

Is one of the reasons you still “hope” Armstrong was clean his charisma, his presence?

He definitely has that. I rode the 2009 Giro alongside him and you could see his charisma. Cycling has benefited from that. Do I hate him? No, because I’m more upset with the authorities. I never said a word to Armstrong all those years when he was winning the Tour. He was a lot more accessible at the Giro in 2009. Someone from the hospital in Bergamo called me during that race to ask whether Armstrong might agree to have his photo taken with the oncology department, since there was a stage finishing in Bergamo. I thought to myself there was no way, he’d have people asking him for stuff every two minutes…but I’d told this person that I’d try anyway. So at the first opportunity, in the middle of a stage one day, I found him in the bunch and asked him whether he might be able to help. He was really gracious, actually. He said they should look in the roadbook, find out where his team were staying at the end of the stage to Bergamo and meet him there in the evening. He even asked for their name, so he knew who it was. Sure enough, the day after the Bergamo stage, he found me in the bunch and told that the people had come and got the photos they wanted. Apparently the people from the hospital had invited him to some kind of conference in October but he couldn’t go because his girlfriend was due to give birth then. He was very approachable, really, which is not what you’d expect of someone that famous and in demand.

Another charismatic rider whose career overlapped with yours was Gilberto Simoni, your team-mate at Lampre and then again at Saunier Duval.

His was a different kind of charisma. He came to Lampre in 2000 and rode with us until the end of 2001, when he went to Saeco. Then in 2006 I rode with him again at Saunier Duval. I have good memories of him. He’s not someone who brings a team together, not that kind of leader…

Really?

Not in my experience. He was always a bit in his own world. He was very methodical [pauses] but in his own way. In winter, he hardly rode his bike. I can remember the first year that I was at Lampre, he started his training in January. Then he went and finished third in the Giro. Let’s say that he did things his way. Then, by the time we rode for Saunier Duval, he had become much more of a leader, which he needed to be because we had a lot of young riders. The directeur sportif would often give his briefing in the morning and Gibo would interject with his own ideas. He started to have a big influence on the directeurs sportifs, probably as a result of having won the Giro twice and grown in confidence. He didn’t shout but he didn’t have to; when he talked, you listened.

With the media, he was very enigmatic. Sometimes it could be quite comical.

He was like that with us too. You thought he wasn’t paying attention but he noticed everything, then he’d deliver these killer one-liners. If you messed up in a race he wasn’t one to bang his fists the table and if you did something right he’d always remember it. You’d finish stages happy with the work you’d done for the team but thinking Gibo probably hadn’t even noticed certain things, yet he always did. He was always brutally frank as well – a typical mountain man. He didn’t care about public relations.

Which other riders have particularly influenced you in your career?

I learned a lot from Chris Horner.

Tell us more.

Yeah. I raced with him at Saunier Duval. He had real race craft, really good tactical sense, but all of his own, very American. I can remember in the 2005 Tour of Switzerland, he, Leonardo Piepoli and Fabian Jeker were our strongest riders on the climbs and in the transitional stages rest of us had to cover the breaks. I can remember this puzzling him. He said that all team leaders seemed to do in Europe was sit on for the whole race and see how far they could get on the summit finishes. He couldn’t understand why the leaders didn’t also pull on the flat stages, or why they weren’t covering the breaks too. So he had pretty different perspective from the rest of us. He’d been in Europe in the late 1990s, it hadn’t really worked, then he’d come over for the second time in 2005. He was 34 at the time yet, to listen to him, you’d have thought that he still had six, seven years as a pro ahead of him. I couldn’t work it out: he’d been at La Française des Jeux, broken his scaphoid or something, then won everything in America and come back over here. And here he was now sounding like a kid at the start of his career. I said to myself, blimey, never mind six or seven, the way he’s talking he’s going to ride for another ten years. He was 34 then and now I’ve just had my best season at 34 years of age… and he’s just had his best year at 39.

So it was the power of positive thinking, youth as a self-fulfilling prophesy?

That’s it. I was 29 at the time and I was thinking I didn’t have that long left. I looked at him and thought he’d have one, two years at best. But then you heard him, and five years on you can see now that it wasn’t just wishful thinking on his part. There he is at 39 winning at the Tour of the Basque Country.

In your own career, moving to T-Mobile, which soon became Highroad, was a massive turning point.

Yeah. I’d always wanted to ride in a foreign team and the culture of an American team suited me perfectly. The constant striving to improve, the innovation…it lit a fire under the passion I already had.  It’s the main reason why I’ve improved so much. The old way that still prevailed in Italian teams had its advantages but you only have to look at what this team’s for done me to see that this is the way forward. Liquigas is still a big team but Italy’s still a very traditionalist country because its cycling culture has such deep roots. For example, in this team we spend hours if not days getting our bikes properly fitted. In Italian teams, if they do it, it’s just for show, for the press. I’m not even sure they’re convinced that these things have an effect on performance. For example, at Lampre, Compex supplied us with electro-stimulators, like they do here. But there the directeurs gave us the Compex and that was it, whereas here, last year, we had a two-hour seminar on how to use it. See what I mean? There I seem to remember half of the team got a Compex at the start of the season, they took some photos, then the rest of us got ours later in the year, but no one ever told us how to use it. The same thing with nutritional supplements and equipment. You might already know the stuff that they tell you but you might not. Maybe in Italy the amateurs are more advanced in terms of what they know but then they stop learning.

Somehow it’s hard to imagine you becoming a directeur sportif when you retire, whether it’s in Italy or anywhere else.

You never know. I can’t really see myself driving a team car but you never know. At the moment I’m thinking about racing and nothing else. I’m better off being like Chris Horner and living for the moment. That’s where my focus is now.

...

The Los Angeles Lakers held the Dallas Mavericks at-bay heading into the fourth quarter, and were in position to take home the win in Game 3. With four minutes to go, the Lakers were clinging to a six-point lead, but it certainly felt as if the Mavericks had one more run in them. And, of course, they did.

The Dirk Nowitzki show rolled on in the fourth as the big forward took over, hitting tough shots and setting up his teammates. Two free throws and an impossible lay-in, with a Jason Terry three sandwiched between, put the Mavericks up two with just a minute to go. An empty possession on the other end -- Lamar Odom inexplicably ran an iso -- was followed by a terrible foul by Derek Fisher on the other end, putting Jason Terry at the line and giving the Mavs a four point lead.

And, again, the Lakers folded in crunch-time. Fisher didn't even give Lamar Odom a chance on the ensuing inbound after Terry's free throw as the ball sailed out of bounds. Dallas was able to seal it at the line to secure a 98-92 win to take a 3-0 series lead, putting the Lakers one game from elimination.

Nowitzki finished with a game-high 32 points. Jason Terry added 23 points and Peja Stojakovic joined the two in double-figures with 15 points. Jason Kidd finished with 11 points and nine assists.

Andrew Bynum scored a team-high 21 points, but disappeared down the stretch. Lamar Odom added 18 points and Kobe Bryant pitched-in 17 points. Pau Gasol and Shannon Brown were also in double-figures with 12 and 10 respectively.

Be sure to check out our Lakers vs. Mavericks hub for full series coverage. For more on the Lakers, visit Silver Screen And Roll and SB Nation Los Angeles. For more on the Mavericks, visit Mavs Moneyball and SB Nation Dallas.

COMFORT -- 7 (out of 10) - Soft fabric.  Lightweight fabric perfect for summer.  Occasional readjustments necessary. 
STYLE -- 9 (out of 10) - Sizzling.  Lots of fun colors to choose from. 
QUALITY -- 9 (out of 10) - Well made. Will last you. 
VALUE -- 8 (out of 10) - Good value.  Great for summer.

From the Milwaukee Admirals:

Houston forward Robbie Earl jammed the puck into the net at 8:45 of overtime to give the Houston Aeros a come-from-behind 3-2 win over the Milwaukee Admirals Friday in game five of the West Division Finals.

Earl was able to get to the net and slide the puck past goalie Jeremy Smith's left leg, spoiling a 50 save performance by the Milwaukee goalie. Houston outshot the Admirals 53-25.

The Aeros tied the game in the last 4:22 of regulation. Earl got Houston on the board with a shot from the right point while the Aeros were on a 5-on-3 power play at 15:38 of the third period. Then, with 1:21 to play, Jon DiSalvatore rushed on the left wing into the Admirals zone. He stopped on the halfwall and sent a pass to Chad Rau who was streaking to the net. Rau tipped the puck in to force overtime for the second straight game between the teams.

Milwaukee scored first thanks to a lucky bounce. Kelsey Wilson cleared the puck from the Admirals zone to center where it was corralled by Ryan Thang. Thang skated to the top of the right circle and put a shot on goal. Aeros netminder Matt Hackett made a blocker save and the puck popped straight into the air. Hackett was unable to locate the puck. It fell onto the goal line and Thang tapped it in at 11:28 of the second period for his fifth goal of the postseason. Wilson notched the helper.

Milwaukee made it 2-0 with just five seconds left in the second period. A Houston defenseman failed to hold the left point during an Aeros power play. Milwaukee forward Steve Begin tipped the puck to the right circle in the Aeros zone. Mike Bartlett scooped it up and drove to the net. He was unable to get the shot off but Begin followed to put a backhander into the net for his third goal of the postseason. Bartlett recorded the assist. The goal was Milwaukee's first shorthanded goal of the playoffs and was the first shorthanded goal allowed by the Aeros this postseason.

The teams will be back at the Bradley Center in Milwaukee for game six Sunday at 5pm. Sunday's game is a Private Bank Family Day, where fans get 4 tickets, 4 hot dogs, and 4 sodas for just $48! The Admirals will hold special office hours on Saturday from 10:00 am until 2:00 pm for fans to stop by and pick up their Private Bank Playoff Pack.

For those who can't make it down, tickets can be purchased by calling Ticketmaster at (800) 745-3000 or logging on tomilwaukeeadmirals.com. For more information, or to purchase group tickets, fans should call the Admirals office at (414) 227-0550. Don't forget to follow the Admirals on Twitter (@mkeadmirals) and on Facebook!

This weekend will assuredly be a pretty stressful one for the entire Predators organization!

In the age of instant news, when headlines last at most a few hours before being replaced by the next "big story," the death of Osama Bin Laden has unusual staying power. Ever since word started to leak late Sunday night -- first on Twitter, quoting a Congressional aide, then in confirmation from the White House itself -- the press corps, Washington, most of the nation and much of the world, has been riveted. The horrific nature of his crimes, the video of the planes flying into the World Trade Center, the reports of phone calls from airplane passengers to husbands and wives as they faced an awful death, the memory of loved ones wandering lower Manhattan for days searching for the lost. Not to mention the jagged face of the Pentagon and the crash scene in Shanksville, Pa. All those memories came rushing back, to give a fresh, raw quality to the news that al-Qaida's leader had not only been located, he had been shot and killed.

And the questions poured out: how long had the CIA suspected his presence there? (At least 6 months.) How had they discovered him? (Years of painstaking work, tracking down a courier based on a nickname.) If the evidence Bin Laden was in the house was "circumstantial" as White House counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan noted, why had the operation gone forward? Just how risky was this venture, compared to other operations Navy SEALS are used to carrying out? How could Bin Laden have been living in Pakistan without Pakistani officials knowing about it -- especially since it was so close to Pakistan's equivalent of West Point -- an elite military training academy? Who else was living in the compound? How many were armed when the raid took place? How much and what sort of resistance did they put up? Why didn't bin Laden try to escape, or was there no option to do so? What really went wrong with the "stealth" helicopter that U.S. officials said malfunctioned as it reached its destination? If there was only one person inside the compound using a gun - reportedly the courier - why were we first told it was a 40-minute firefight? What were President Obama and secretaries Clinton and Gates and others looking at in the White House Situation Room in that amazing photograph taken as the raid was underway?

Those were questions for the first and second days, but because it was an operation conducted in secret, and because of its success, more questions popped up by the hour: Why weren't neighbors around the compound in Abbottabad (named after a British major, James Abbott, who helped govern the area when it was part of India in the mid-19th century. See below for a poem Abbott wrote about the city.) Why weren't they more suspicious of a place with barbed wire, unusually high walls and tinted window glass? Had bin Laden ever emerged on the outside, with or without any sort of disguise? Why had the myth persisted so long that he was living in a cave or another remote, rugged location, when he was actually living comfortably in a city just 30 miles from Islamabad? What sort of material did the Navy SEALS, who pulled off the raid, take away? What has happened to bin Laden's three wives who reportedly were in the house at the same time, including the youngest, who was with him when he was found? (They're reportedly in custody of Pakistani security.) What sort of information are they providing? (One is saying bin Laden had been living in the house for at least five years.) How could bin Laden have been operationally directing the al-Qaida network if he had to rely on couriers traveling on foot to make contact with those on the outside?

Of course, the answers to many of these questions are emerging in a flood of news reports - reporters working overtime to get what details they can from their sources.

But still, new questions keep coming: How embarrassing is this episode for the Pakistani government - the fact that U.S. forces could swoop into their country and conduct such a daring operation without their knowledge? (This and the question of whether anyone in the Pakistani government knew that bin Laden was living in their midst, are under investigation, according to Pakistani officials.) How will U.S. relations with Pakistan change as a result, at a time when our country relies on Pakistan to help fight Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan? Will Congress want to reduce the now-billions of dollars in aid this country provides annually to Pakistan? And a different line of questions: Why did the U.S. government -- the Obama administration -- decide to announce that it had captured a "treasure trove" of documents, computer material, hard drives, thumb drives and other potential valuables from the compound, thus giving al-Qaida a "heads-up" that they have this knowledge, and signaling to them the need to change phone numbers, couriers, codes, plans, etc.? Why not leave them guessing about what was retrieved? In fact, why did the administration feel the need to say much of anything about the operation and what they found? Why not keep more of it secret?

And possibly the most enduring questions: What does bin Laden's death mean for al-Qaida and its affiliates? How many are mourning his passing, in private, or in the open, as hundreds of Islamist Salafists -- a group with fundamentalist beliefs -- did Friday in Cairo? Who will take bin Laden's place at the head of al-Qaida? Where is his second-in-command, Egyptian-born Ayman al-Zawahiri? For that matter, where is former Taliban leader Mullah Omar? Are reports of a split in al-Qaida accurate? Will Bin Laden's death inspire more young Muslims to join the cause, or will it discourage them from moving toward radicalism? Coinciding with the Arab Spring taking place in Muslim countries across the Middle East and North Africa -- will al-Qaida ever be able to pose the threat it once did? Its confirmation Friday morning that its own founder, Osama Bin Laden, was indeed dead was the acknowledgement many didn't expect. But it was accompanied by a warning that any happiness would soon be replaced by sadness, as it planned to retaliate.

It's these questions, and scores more still surfacing, that will keep this story alive. Osama Bin Laden in hiding has been such a giant presence in American life for such a long time that his death will continue to fascinate and puzzle us.

Will we ever know everything there is to know about him and his "evil empire," the term Ronald Reagan once used to describe the Soviet Union? Probably not, and that's the reason this story will not only outlast the usual short news cycle in American journalism, it'll keep historians occupied for some time to come.

In the meantime, there is some irony in the lines of the simple poem British Major James Abbott wrote about Abbotabad in 1853, when he left it to return to England:

"Abbotabad"

I remember the day when I first came here
And smelt the sweet Abbottabad air

The trees and ground covered with snow
Gave us indeed a brilliant show

To me the place seemed like a dream
And far ran a lonesome stream

The wind hissed as if welcoming us
The pine swayed creating a lot of fuss

And the tiny cuckoo sang it away
A song very melodious and gay

I adored the place from the first sight
And was happy that my coming here was right

And eight good years here passed very soon
And we leave you perhaps on a sunny noon

Oh Abbottabad we are leaving you now
To your natural beauty do I bow

Perhaps your winds sound will never reach my ear
My gift for you is a few sad tears

I bid you farewell with a heavy heart
Never from my mind will your memories thwart

Via New York Review of Books/Wikipedia

As we all bask in the glow of the big 4-2 victory yesterday in Game 4, the Canucks return home to try and close out the pesky Predators tomorrow night.  What a fantastic feeling it is to be a Canucks fan right now, as this team just seems to have grown so much this season, and even a bit moreso since dispatching the Blackhawks in Round 1.  One of the coolest things about watching this Canucks team from Winnipeg is seeing how important some of the ex-Moose have become.  

Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows, Kevin Bieksa and Alex Edler are all major pieces of the Canucks core, and all of them spent time down here in Winnipeg with the antlers on their jerseys.  Arguments could be made that Jannik Hansen, Mason Raymond and even Cory Schneider belong in that group, and current role players like Cody Hodgson, Alex Bolduc, Rick Rypien, Victor Oreskovich and a number of others have spent time on both rosters.  It is very encouraging to know that our farm system is churning out quality hockey players, and that the Manitoba Moose play an integral part to the process.

Speaking of the Moose, Game 5 goes tonight (8:30 ET/5:30 PT) between the Manitoba Moose and the Hamilton Bulldogs at the MTS Center in a series that is currently tied at two apiece.  After losing the first two games in Hamilton quite handily, the Moose have stormed back and taken last two games and now look to head back to Hamilton with the series lead.  Listen to the game live on CJOB here.

 

What makes these two wins even more impressive is the fact that the Hamilton Bulldogs had absolutely owned the Moose this season.  After taking the first two of the 8-game regular season match-ups in October, the Moose dropped the final 6 encounters, including the final two home games of the regular season that cost them valuable points and home-ice advantage.  And after dropping Game 1 (4-1) and Game 2 (4-2) in Hamilton to start this series, an 8-game losing streak against the Bulldogs was staring them right in the face.  

The Moose, however, have proven resilient during these playoffs.  After already storming back from a 3-1 series deficit to defeat the Lake Erie Monsters in Round 1, the Moose came home and held serve in both Game 3 (5-4 win) and Game 4 (2-1 in double OT) to show Hamilton that they won't be an easy out.  So now we have an all-important Game 5 that goes tonight at the MTS Center, and it should be a beauty as they are opening up the upper deck to fill the barn.

• The double-overtime winner in Game 4 was a beauty, as Jordan Schroeder laid out a nifty saucer pass to Mario Bliznak, who roofed the one-timer past Drew MacIntyre at the 11:54 mark of the fifth period.  The goal can be viewed here on Moose TV - you will need to select the video from the collection on the right.  It appears that Schroeder has woken up, as he scored his first goal of the series in Game 3 and then set up the winner in Game 4.
• Eddie Lack stopped 43 of 44 shots in game 4, and Mario Bliznak had a goal and assist to lead the Moose to victory.  Guillaume Desbiens added the other goal.
• While Game 4 was a low-scoring affair, Game 3 was the exact opposite with 9 goals scored.  It also featured the turning point of the series, as the Moose trailed 2-1 with less then a minute to go in the 2nd.  However, the aforementioned Jordan Schroeder scored at the 19:25 mark to tie it up, and then something amazing happened.  Hamilton forward Ryan White took an interference penalty at the 19:59 mark, and with 1.9 seconds left on the clock the Moose scored on a bang-bang play.  Marco Rosa won the draw and Sergei Shirokov hammered it home before the buzzer.  The teams traded 4 goals in the third period, but the Moose took the 5-4 victory.
• The top line of Sergei Shirokov, Marco Rosa and Jason Jaffray each scored a goal, and the trio combined for 7 points in Game 3.  Mark Flood added two helpers, while Alex Bolduc opened the scoring for the second time in the series.
• Game 2 started off well as Kevin Clark scored 2:43 into the game, but Hamilton responded with 4 straight to put the game out of reach.  Chris Tanev managed to score one in garbage time, but the Moose lost 4-2.  Tanev assisted on Clark's goal to finish with 2 points in the loss, and Lack stopped 27 of 30 shots.
• Game 1 also started off well as Alex Bolduc scored 5:10 into the game, but it was the only goal the Moose could muster as once again the Bulldogs reeled off 4 straight goals to win 4-1.  Travis Ramsey and Mark Flood assisted on the Bolduc goal, while Lack stopped 33 of 37 shots in the loss.
• Marco Rosa is tied for second in AHL Playoff scoring with 15 points (5 goals and 10 assists) in 11 games, while Sergei Shirokov is tied for 12th with 9 points (6 goals and 3 assists).

Ever since "The Decision," the Miami Heat have been pretty much universally disliked outside of Florida. They've been seen as an anti-competitive dream team, arrogant, and generally receiving way too much attention for a group that hadn't actually proven much at all. America likes winners, but they don't like to crown people before they've accomplished anything.

But it's the playoffs now, and the Heat look pretty damn good. With a potential finals berth only weeks away, they're starting to get some bandwagon fans. LeBron James, for one, is very confused. From Kevin Arnovitz for the Heat Index:

"We understand that, as we win games, people will try to crown us," Heat forward LeBron James said. "That's bizarre. We just have to go out there and continue to play our game."

Public sentiment for the Heat has been volatile since James joined forces with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh.

But the Heat's pair of convincing wins over the Boston Celtics in the first two games of their Eastern Conference semifinals series has quieted naysayers and has some observers proclaiming Miami title favorites.

"The bandwagon will sway so flagrantly to each side after each game that it's hard to keep track of everything," Heat coach Erik Spoelstra said. "Three days of everyone singing your accolades -- if you let it, it will make you soft."

Yeah, it's totally crazy that anyone would crown a team before it's won a championship. What kind of insane person would act like that?

No matter how oblivious they may be, James and Spoelstra are right. The Heat look roughly similar to how they have the whole year -- when James and Wade play well, they can win games against good teams without looking especially cohesive. The point being that they've always had the potential to win the championship, even when they looked their worst. This is the same team that everyone hated in November, except they're winning more games now.

Still, playoff success breeds bandwagon fans, and this outcome was always to be expected if Miami played well in the postseason. America loves a winner. If the Heat win the whole shebang, they won't look so arrogant anymore.

The single most important consequence of Thursday's voting is the sheer bloodiness of the bloody nose delivered to the Liberal Democrats

So many of the most potent themes of British politics came together for a few hours in Thursday's elections that the contests, and the simultaneous AV referendum, seemed as important as a mini-general election. Except that a general election has only one overridingly large story to tell – the new government. This week's Super Thursday, by contrast, produced such a bulging goody-bag of resonant local and national stories – the defeat of electoral reform, the nationalist triumph in Scotland, the nationalist setback in Wales, excellent news for the Conservatives, grim news for the Liberal Democrats, something in between for Labour – that it is hard to know where to start.

On any other day, the triumph of the Scottish National Party in winning an outright majority in the Holyrood parliament – the very outcome that the devolved electoral system was expressly designed to prevent – would take the palm. While the United Kingdom survives, however, the single most important consequence of Thursday's voting is the sheer bloodiness of the bloody nose delivered to the Liberal Democrats. The damage is truly shocking. One in three Lib Dem voters from 2010 abandoned the party. At least 550 councillors were lost and the party was bundled from power in cities like Newcastle and Sheffield. The Lib Dem presence at Holyrood was decimated and in the Welsh assembly is now vestigial. The writing is on the wall for many of the party's biggest names in the House of Commons. And the AV referendum, so central to the party's hopes of having something distinctive to show for the coalition, was swept away by two-to-one.

There is something for the Lib Dems to cling on to all the same: the 15% share of the poll is grim not catastrophic; council victories in Burnley, Eastbourne, Watford and elsewhere serve notice that this was not an all-out rout, while in Eastleigh (the seat of Chris Huhne) there was even some Lib Dem advance. Yet Nick Clegg now presides over the rubble of his party's 20-year incremental forward march through British politics. This defeat is the all but inescapable price to be paid for an all but inescapable decision to enter government a year ago. Much the same may happen next year too. The bottom-line is that a large swathe of liberal Britain, more than this party can afford to lose, feels abandoned by Lib Dem membership of a coalition which is overwhelmingly defined by the slashing of public services, the overturning of the health service and the about-face on tuition fees. Mr Clegg and his party must confront this or face a decade of marginalisation.

The contrast with the fate of the Conservatives makes this all the more dismaying. If liberal Britain feels abandoned, conservative Britain feels vindicated. The Tory vote held up. There were even some council gains. And AV was crushed. True, there were Scottish and Welsh setbacks yet again. But the party of David Cameron, George Osborne, Andrew Lansley and Michael Gove – the real architects of the coalition's core policies – went not merely unpunished but has been majorly rewarded. In some ways, the Conservatives have more to cheer than Labour, who should have done better, not just in Scotland, but everywhere outside its traditional heartlands. For Labour, feeling good about winning well in Wales and about attracting back voters who should never have been lost in the first place are the easy bits – Labour's eight-point boost since 2010 and its nearly 700 new councillors are in one sense the Gordon Brown departure dividend. The larger point is that Labour's electoral counter-attack against the Tories is still almost non-existent. Yet without a credible strategy for turning some Tory votes into Labour ones, Labour's hopes of governing again may remain stillborn.

Both Scotland and electoral reform also remain crucial to any future centre-left advance of any kind. Yet Alex Salmond's stunning SNP win – amazing under a proportional system as well as the biggest personal electoral triumph for any party leader since Tony Blair's 1997 Labour landslide – poses a double challenge to Labour aspirations: it threatens Labour's future Westminster election chances and if – big if – the SNP win their way on independence, it may mean the end of any Scottish MPs at Westminster at all. In the wake of the abject failure of AV to win public backing, meanwhile, many will conclude that electoral reform is off the agenda for a generation. Yet if British voters go on producing general election outcomes with which the two-party Westminster system cannot cope, electoral reform may get back on the agenda sooner than now seems likely.

The most interesting position in England's batting order is up for grabs and it must be filled by a larger than life player in step with its riotous possibilities

This week the England cricket hierarchy solved in a single stroke what looked to be its most ticklish immediate problems. Gorgeous, pouting, poster-ready Alastair Cook, who previously couldn't get in the squad, will be England's 50-over captain. And pouting, gorgeous, sponsor-catnip Stuart Broad, who refused the chance to play Twenty20 in the IPL because it wasn't a career priority, is now England's Twenty20 captain.

Probably this will all work out just fine. Andy Flower has a good record with these kind of hard-nosed judgments, as should a man who appears literally to have a hard nose, not to mention a head chiselled out of reclaimed Victorian oak. There is another problem, though, that has yet to be solved, and which seems to me more fundamental. The ongoing audition for the vacant slot in England's batting order – billed as the Battle To Fill The Number Six Slot – reached a thick-sweatered fever pitch this week as various hopefuls pressed their suit in county cricket. It is exciting to see the No6 spot attracting such giddy attention, albeit for me there is a sense that this slightly disrespects the No6 spot, which frankly deserves a little better than being bandied about as a clearing house for the nearlies, a side‑saddle, L-plate kind of role.

In fact, No6 is the most interesting spot in any England batting order, particularly at home where the game can nibble and fret and hoop forwards at an alarming rate and No6 is suddenly the keystone for all possibilities. Being a No6 is the direct ideological opposite of being an opener, a position where a mechanical type of player will flourish, just as Cook has, trundling forward irresistibly like a Soviet-era combine harvester ploughing its lone furrow from horizon to horizon. Openers are essentially perfectionists, militant virgins who will throw their hands up and wander off the set at the first crimp in their pristine morning. Behind them three, four and five are often described as "the engine room", but engine rooms are staffed by hoary-handed grease monkeys, whereas the middle order are the prom kings and queens of batsmanship, a cabal of head prefects and silver-spoon merchants.

It is only the No6, slouching unshaven at the mid-innings tipping point, who carries a sense of libidinous top-order romance. For the No6 decisions must be made even as the world collapses around you. It is a jumping-off point, an improv role, a mix‑another-cocktail‑in‑the-kitchen-at‑2am kind of job. It is also the most heroic of all positions. If Batman played cricket, or Indiana Jones, or the Beat poets of the 1950s, they would all bat at No6 (possibly also in a white helmet and carrying a bat with unusual stickers).

For England the current approach appears to be to identify Some Dude Who's Good At Batting – a Warhol collage of Bopara-Taylor-Morgan-Stokes-Hildreth – and then simply slot him in at six. This is probably very sensible, but it is also depressingly pragmatic. From a romantic's point of view you want the right kind of chops for No6. It has a weird kind of power. It can intimidate as it did in the 1990s when various priestly top-order types – not to mention flavour‑of-the-month bumcrack-and-highlights county favourites – found themselves out of step with its riotous possibilities. No6 can inspire too, as it did on occasion for Graeme Hick, or late‑era Alec Stewart, in that period where he batted with the time‑worn recklessness of a silk‑shirted divorcee in a provincial disco hip‑thrusting through the YMCA. Even Ian Bell has seemed transformed by its seesaw pressures, all beefy crunching forearms and that lazy pull-shot reminiscent of a man heaving his derelict ironing board on to the municipal tip.

Best of all, though, is the specialist No6 batsman, who has aspirations for nothing more and is totally embroiled in the No6 lifestyle. It is impossible not to think of Ian Botham, who stayed concreted in at No6 even as his career congealed. Botham had a lot of what I would ideally want from my No6 batsman. I want him not to wear too much padding, to look like a man who has rushed out to bat from the track, or a night spent at the Grand Hotel in Cannes: helmetless is the dream, but provocatively bared forearms will do. A No6 should more often than not casually hit his first ball for four. He must not be too mannered – not too much bat-twiddling – but instead carry a slouching air of menace. A No6 must hold his bat with coiled purpose, like a power tool or a murder weapon.

Of the current thrusters, Ravi Bopara has an appealingly overblown swagger. Eoin Morgan has the right air of lip-curling self-possession. And Kevin Pietersen could be a great six if he could just give up pretending to be head boy and finally embrace his all-conquering, skunk-haired inner dickhead.

There is plenty of natural six‑iness out there – but it is still necessary to respect the six. Choose your six and let him be simply a six: a reserve of un-homogenised charisma teetering at the not-quite midpoint.

twitter.com/@barneyronay

MIT SENSEable City Lab: Borderline

The Data Dimension at FutureEverything 2011 (Manchester, UK) features an eclectic mix of design and art projects which gesture towards a data-driven culture. The first microscope was designed by Galileo Galilei (1564–1642). The microscope, like the telescope, revealed entirely new worlds, at scales impossible for humans to perceive. Today, like their predecessor, scientists, artists, academics and amateurs, re-purpose, extend, and invent new technologies to observe and comprehend the things no one has seen or understood before. This not only reveals a previously unimagined realm, more than this it constructs a new reality, giving shape and life to a new dimension. The artworks featured in The Data Dimension are an example of the type of experiments taking place. They are spyglasses to study the microscopic, immaterial and infinitely complex. This is about illuminating a future, and creating a new perspective, on a world that is only beginning to emerge. The Data Dimension presents a selection of these Digital Microscopes; artworks that nurture new insights into the invisible infrastructures that make up our world. Here designers and artists visualise the invisible layer of complex data that surrounds our daily lives, making data come alive.
Nicholas Felton

Before we can do anything with data, we first need to gather the information. The devices and applications we daily use automatically capture data on the electronic interactions in our everyday lives. Some people voluntarily record everyday data, in some cases as a performative act, recording their daily routines and habits. One such data obsessive is Nicholas Felton, whose Annual Reports transform the minutiae of his daily interactions into graphic design. Seemingly mundane happenings such as his conversations with friends accumulate over time to reveal startling new dimensions on the everyday. Felton has released an app, Daytum, which enables all of us to similarly become hoarders of the everyday and to discover new dimensions on our own lives. New social realities emerge through capturing and making sense of everyday data. How do we come to know, or see, or experience something which has no physical form? To make sense of it we need to turn it into something we can understand. One way to do this is through visualisation. To visualise is to give form to something not yet known as a visual image; to turn it into something we can make sense of with sight. A commissioned artwork, FlavourCollider by Marcos Lutyens, gives visual form to the sense of taste. Located in a bar within the art space, users drink cocktails while wearing a EEG headset and their brain activity is translated into a real-time visualisation. The work explores the neurological condition of synesthesia, and the connection between taste and shape.
reMap from Bestario

Complexity is the consequence of our increased capacity to measure more accurately the world around us. The more we discover, the more complex the world becomes. reMap from Bestario, is a meta-visualisation; a visualisation of visualisations and, as such, serves as an excellent introduction to this domain. Curated by Manual Lima, this is a comprehensive review of visualisation projects that relate to complex systems. Bestiario pushes forward the technical display of world class data visualizations and allows audiences to instinctively search a huge database of visualizations using tags and keywords, allowing navigation using a semantic approach and depicting relations among them. This brings to life the way it is possible to search and navigate the new data domains. A regular collaborator in FutureEverything, Aaron Koblin, now heads the Google Data Arts department. Search is also an issue for the media industries and the BBC. Bill Thompson is part of a team working on the BBC Archive and building a Digital Public Space. Increasingly, we need more innovative ways with which to navigate this data terrain. BBC Data Art for example offer a glimpse of the future of television. We are still in search era, in which we are all just looking for things. A trio of projects, Political Atmospherics, NewsTraces and TV Related Content: News 24 suggest that in the future, we will have more systems that will do more for us, in ways that we can't yet comprehend. Berg, with Timo Arnall and Dentsu London, document real-time material representations that grow from an originating data source in Making Future Magic. This is a video sketch of an inventive technique for creating three-dimensional forms in light by moving an iPad through space. It is one of a series of experiments in giving tangible form to 'Immaterials' (Matt Jones), formless dimensions in our daily environments such as data and wifi clouds. The data dimension is immaterial, it affects everything, and yet we cannot reach out and touch it. Its physical reality is in the server farms, vast rooms full of computers hosting the data and applications. We make sense of it through metaphors such as the cloud, the domain of remote services and applications we access from any point in space. By transposing it from the confines of the screen and into the physical world, focus is drawn to the materiality of the data itself.
Nathalie Miebach

There is potential for us to do more than simply paint space with data. Art works include Form Follows Data, a data sculpture project in which Iohanna Pani presents her quantified self and her domestic encounters in the form of everyday objects, such as a cup which physically reflects the volume consumed each day, making tangible the language of personal statistical data. Capturing obscure weather data using very simple data-collecting devices and transforming it into abstract sculptures, Nathalie Miebach creates intricate wall pieces that function both as musical scores and weather almanacs. In Food of Art, Nadeem Haidary conducts data analytics on still life paintings, analysing twelve masterpieces for their nutritional content, breaking down food values from Frans Snyders' 39,851 calorie feast to Vincent Van Gogh's four meager onions. Presenting a witty analogue take on digital metrics in physical space, Hit Counter by Zach Gage is an interactive piece which narcissistically counts its own visitors and proudly presents this number as the art work itself.
Kevin MacDonald

New forms of narrative and personalisation are also possible. Chris Milk and Aaron Koblin's groundbreaking music video experiment for Arcade Fire, The Wilderness Downtown, shows a user her childhood streets after submitting postcode data. Search and mass participation strike a deeply cinematic note in a preview of 'The YouTube movie', a Kevin MacDonald directed feature film Life In A Day, edited together using thousands of YouTube clips uploaded in a single day, July 24, 2011. From intimate moments of personal experience, to vast themes of birth and death, an epic self-portrait emerges via mass participation, as editor Joe Walker creates a kaleidoscopic compilation from 4,500 hours of footage in 80,000 submissions from 140 nations. Upon viewing Borderline, from MIT SENSEable City Labs, we realise that lines on a map are in fact meaningful connections — a multitude of human interactions, unfolding before you in real time. Borderline redraws the map of Great Britain based on the complexity of billions of human connections, and asks if regional boundaries defined by governments respect the more natural ways that people interact across space. It reveals for instance that the effects of a possible secession of Wales from Great Britain would be twice as disruptive for the human network as that of Scotland.
Iohanna Pani

The Data Dimension also imagines a future beyond the computer screen. In the Media Surfaces video sketch, Berg present data in physical context. Travellers in a train station are able to interact with a panoply of screens and smart surfaces reflect our data back to us. Here, we imagine the built environment as interface, in what could be described as a form of data signage. A useful analogy to help explain this idea is to think of the world as a computer, with these signs playing the same role icons or menus do on a computer desktop, indicating objects and their operations; a graphical user interface for interaction with the world. Combine this characteristic with innovation in touch-screen display, which includes 'shape-memory' layers that when activated lend the displayed image physical texture. It is possible to imagine a future where data really is without boundaries and it shapes the physical world around us. Dr. Drew Hemment is an artist, curator and writer based in Manchester England. He is Founder and Director of FutureEverything (formerly Futuresonic, est. 1995), and is Associate Director of ImaginationLancaster at Lancaster University. Winner of the Lever Prize 2010, Shortlisted for the Big Chip International Award for Innovation 2010 and the Arts & Business Award 2010, Runner Up Lever Prize 2009, Honorary Mention for Director at Prix Ars Electronica 2008. His work has been covered prominently by New York Times, BBC and NBC, and he has served on many prominent international Art Juries including UNESCO DigiArts. In 1999, awarded a PhD at Lancaster University, in 2009 elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of the Arts (UK), and in 2010 an Eyebeam resident (USA).

Kevin Smith is an academic at HighWire, Lancaster University. His research focuses on the concept of Adaptive Signs- an entity that signifies the change in state of another entity by adapting accordingly. His research sits at the intersection of Information Design, Data Visualisation, Context Aware Computing and Organic User Interfaces.

Mike Elk, a third-generation union organizer who writes for the Campaign for America's Future has a post up at Alternet, which should be of considerable interest to both the labor movement and the Democratic Party. Elk's post, "Major Union Victory for Rite Aid Workers Offers Roadmap for Labor Movement," is important to the Democratic Party because labor unions function as a pivotal source of funding and volunteers for Democratic candidates. When unions grow, the Party's resources will expand.

Elk's insights about the highly successful campaign of the International Longshoremen Workers Union to organize Rite Aid workers at the company's southwest distribution center should prove instructive for future campaigns. First, a little history:

The victory is a testament to the resolve of the workers and organizers -- it's a success five years in the making. It reveals how tough the environment for rehabilitating the labor movement is, but also how it is still possible to win through creative, direct action.

"We're excited about winning this victory, even if it took longer than it should have" said Carlos "Chico" Rubio, a 10-year warehouse worker who was on the union bargaining committee. Unlike many unions that do win a good contract, the union was quick not to praise the boss for agreeing to a contract, but to point out instead that the process was a long and costly one. Workers decided to first start organizing a union in March of 2006 and hoped to have a new contract within several months, not five years.

Rite Aid management responded with the typical toolbox of anti-union tactics. They hired a team of expensive union busters to hold anti-union intimidation sessions and captive audience meetings. They threatened to fire workers if they supported the union and even fired two workers for wanting to a join a union. They asked a delay of over 18 months from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on scheduling a vote so that they could have more time to run intimidation sessions to make workers wary of joining a union. Finally after two years of organizing and despite massive anti-union attacks, workers voted to join a union 283 to 261 in an NLRB supervised election in June of 2008.

Elk reports that Rite Aid stalled with bad faith or "surface bargaining" for a full year after the vote. Then the union and workers got creative:

...Workers started by attending yearly stockholder meetings and opening lines of communications with stockholders and board members. They released detailed reports about how much money the union busting efforts of Rite Aid was costing the company. Workers were able to persuade some stockholders to put pressure on Rite Aid to negotiate a fair and equitable contract.

Likewise, they used their leverage against Rite Aid by expanding the fight across various unions and the country. They formed a coalition of nationwide Rite Aid workers from various unions including UFCW, SEIU, and Teamsters who coordinated their strategy. Workers reached out to powerful community allies with groups like United Students against Sweatshops and Jobs with Justice. They held protests in nearly 50 cities across the country against Rite Aid and promised to apply more heat if Rite Aid didn't settle the contract dispute in California.

After creative coalition-building comes economic withdrawal, a.k.a. 'hardball':

Most importantly, the workers union had a strong presence within the distribution center in Lancaster, California. Workers even engaged in "work to rule," where they purposely slowed down movement in the distribution center in order to put pressure on the company to settle a contract. Even last year, 75 workers walked off the job for a day in Lancaster, California to protest Rite Aid's lack of good faith bargaining.

Finally, when negotiations seemed to be breaking down at the last second, they launched a "pinpoint" boycott campaign at two Rite Aid workers at two Rite Aid Stores in San Pedro, California on April 1, 2011. They persuaded hundreds of seniors to switch their prescriptions to other pharmacies. The threat of a larger boycott spreading forced Rite Aid to finally settle the contract a month later.

To put the Rite Aid campaign's success in perspective, Elk points out that "fewer than 1 in 6 organizing drives ever results in a union contract for workers in the workplace."

It looks like the ILWU and Rite Aid workers have developed a promising organizing template for the 21st century union movement. It's an especially welcome development, coming soon after the Wisconsin protests and the awakening of many workers to the unexpected consequences of voting Republican.

An invigorated labor movement is also critically-important for insuring the integrity of the Democratic party. As Joan Walsh notes in her Salon.com post today, data provided to her by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka indicates,

...Democrats have become almost as reliant as Republicans on corporate money (Republicans get 79 percent of campaign contributions from business; Democrats get 72 percent, and the share from unions has dropped in half in just the last decade.)

Restoring a larger share of contributions from unions to Democratic candidates will help make the Party less beholden to their corporate contributors -- and more responsive to the priorities of working families. But the challenge is made more difficult, as Walsh reports, by the AFL-CIO's recent decision to invest more of current resources in shoring up the Federation's structure and programs, and less on federal candidates for office. In her interview with Trumka, he explains how the allocation of the Federation's resources will be different going forward:

...We're going to do a full-time, around the calendar political program that's going to be mobilizing and educating people 12 months a year, 24 months a cycle, as opposed to doing it till Election Day and dismantling it. We're going to keep people in place, and actually make people pay a price [if they don't keep promises]. We'll start running some of our own, in state races.

Democrats face a tough challenge in the short run in raising funds for candidates to make up for the expected shortfall resulting from the AFL-CIO's new priorities. If they can raise the needed funds through other means, a stronger union movement could result in a more mutually beneficial relationship down the road. In the longer run, what it comes down to is that Democrats must do a better job of supporting unions and their priorities, so unions can grow and return the favor.

As I played through Darkspore, my opinion of the game kept changing. It's a dungeon crawler in the vein of Diablo or Torchlight, but in a futuristic setting. While many games in this genre essentially end up being Diablo with a pretty coat of paint, Darkspore introduces a number of fresh ideas and concepts that make it a whole lot more than a clone.

With unique concepts, however, come unique problems. None are great enough to ruin the game, but noticeable flaws certainly exist. People who are willing to invest some time with Darkspore, though, will find an enjoyable, though not perfect, experience.

Darkspore (PC) 
Developer: Maxis Software
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Released: April 26, 2011
MSRP: $49.99

Darkspore's most remarkable trait is the number of different heroes and the three-person squads you adventure with. Rather than build up a single character -- like most games in the genre -- there are 25 base heroes you can unlock. Each hero has four different "variants," -- alpha, beta, gamma, and delta, which cause some slight variations in appearance and base stats, and have a skill that no other variant of that specific hero has. The variants don't dramatically change the playstyle of an individual hero, but do allow for some stat customization.

Heroes can be one of three different "classes": sentinels, ravagers, and tempests. Generally speaking, sentinels are your high-health tanks, ravagers are your more DPS-oriented attackers, and tempests tend to be ranged attackers. It's difficult to lump all the characters into one single category, though, because the uniqueness of the heroes means that no one quite fits into a perfect mold -- the types are really just a guideline. Some ravagers have long range attacks; there are a few sentinels who do a lot of fighting through high-damage pets. Some characters across classes can heal, some specialize in area of effect attacks. No matter what your playstyle is, you can probably find at least one hero that you like.

There are also five genetic types -- bio, necro, quantum, plasma, and cyber. Genetic type primarily influences two things: the type of items that can be equipped -- Items are either available to all characters, or characters of a specific genetic type. Class does not matter. -- and the damage they take. All the monsters you encounter also have a genetic type, and any monster that is typed the same as your current hero will deal double damage to you (the reverse is not true -- you don't do double damage to them).

Darkspore is played with squads that are made up of three heroes each. From the main menu, you can alter the equipment of your squad at any time and swap heroes in and out of squads on the fly. Once you've set up the squad you want to use, you enter a level, where you can swap out the hero you're currently controlling for any other in your squad. While you might be able to get through the first few levels without having to swap, it quickly becomes a necessity.

There are six kinds of enemies in each level, and in the starting levels, they only consist of two genetic types. Their types aren't revealed to you until right before you launch into the level, but assuming you've built a balanced squad, you'll always have at least one hero that doesn't match any of the enemy types. As you progress, however, the number of types you face in a level increases up to four, and enemies start gaining resistances and immunities to specific genetic types. At this point, you'll have to be swapping your heroes in and out, or the double damage you'll take will destroy you.

As is typical of the genre, you'll find stat-boosting items to equip as you kill enemies and progress though the game. Unlike most other games, though, your heroes' abilities and stats are determined solely by the items they equip. There's no stat placement, no skill picking -- nothing other than equipping items. All heroes have one basic attack and three skills each, and these skills don't change for the entirety of the game. A hero's "level" is determined by the average level of the items they've equipped, and the levels really only serve as a rough guide to how powerful your hero is. A low "level" hero who has carefully selected and equipped gear will probably be better than a higher level hero who has randomly thrown on the highest level equipment he can find without regards to the stat bonuses.

Darkspore's stats aren't particularly complex, however. There's the standard health and power, which determine your hit points and "mana." Strength, dexterity, and mind are the "primary" stats, and each carries its own small benefit. Their main function is to increase the power of your heroes' skills -- sentinels get a damage boost from increased strength, ravagers get a boost from dexterity, and tempests get boosts from mind. Finally, there are three ancillary skills -- dodge rating, resist rating, and critical rating. As I said before, these stats are entirely determined by your equipment (aside from the base stats each character starts with, which are all reasonably similar), so your characters only get stronger as you find better equipment.

All this explanation leads into the main problems I have with the game: you are completely at the mercy of the random number generator as to which of your heroes grow and which ones stagnate. You may end up with a hero that's a clear favorite, but if you're not lucky enough to get equipment that he can use, or that's a good fit for his build, you may have to set him to the side for a while. While careful play counts for a lot, strategy can only take you so far if you're underleveled thanks to the limited number of skills each hero can learn. You're encouraged to try out a whole bunch of different heroes, but it can get rather frustrating to end up with a team you don't particularly like for a while, simply because the item drops you got best fit them.

You can, of course, grind for more gear. One aspect of Darkspore I really like is its chain system: at the end of each level, you get a rare item. You can either take the item right away, or risk it by going straight into the next level. If you succeed, you get one additional item, and the item level of both items increases. At the start of the game, you can only chain two levels, but the limit increases as you progress through the game: three, then four, and finally unlimited chains. If you're willing to sit down and plow through an entire difficulty from start to finish without stopping, you'll get some awesome rewards.

On the flip side, grinding, as in most games, can get tiresome. Every level is unique the first time you play it, and when you go back to replay a level you will randomly be assigned any of the previous maps you've already completed, with enemies that have been scaled up to an appropriate level. This helps break up monotony some, but you quickly learn the layouts of every level, and they can really start to feel repetitive. Some random generation in the actual level structure would have gone a long way in keeping things fresh.

Another issue is a result of there being so many different heroes to choose from. While I would argue that the wide hero choice is probably the strongest aspect of the game, and definitely what sets it apart, it also brings with it a significant negative: As you unlock more and more heroes, equipping them and managing your inventory becomes really tedious.

While you can see all the items you've collected in your inventory, you can't equip them from there. You must instead enter the character editor, which only shows one hero at a time, and you can only see the items that the currently selected hero can equip. This essentially means that every time you finish a long chain and have an inventory full of new items, you need to go through all of your characters one by one to distribute equipment. 

While you probably won't have to go through 100 characters, as you'll identify which variant of each of the 25 major characters you want to focus on pretty quickly, equipping 25 separate heroes, in a separate screen each time (and more if you do decide to build up variants of the same hero separately), becomes time-consuming and frustrating. I often found myself taken ten to fifteen minutes in the character editor after every completed chain, sorting through all the equipment I've found and equipping all of my heroes. It gets tiresome.The character editor uses a modified version of the Spore character creator, which means that each time you equip a new item, you actually get to physically place it on your hero's body. I would gladly trade that for an easy way to quickly equip all of my heroes from the main inventory screen.

As I played through the game, I would alternate between having a ton of fun, and becoming frustrated at the repetitive levels and time I was spending in the character editor. The catch-22 here is that the higher you get in difficulty, the more strategic the game becomes and the more fun it gets, but progressing further also means that the levels feel more repetitive and the editor and interface start bugging you more and more.

However, despite its flaws, I really do find Darkspore to be a worthwhile game, and I plan to continue playing it for some time to come. I don't think there's anything fundamentally broken or boring about Darkspore's gameplay itself -- most of the issues I have with it are really design decisions and interface issues. I've also ended up with a happy compromise that I think maximizes the fun of the game while minimizing the tedium -- I find I have the most fun when I run one or two big chains a night after work, and then call it quits.

Once you get past the beginning, easier levels, sitting down for a five hour session of Darkspore can be daunting -- after a weekend of playing Darkspore almost non-stop, I thought there was no way I'd want to keep going after the review was finished. I planned on exploring a few more levels, wrapping up the review, and moving on. And it was when I started playing less of the game that I really started seeing the appeal of it. Just an hour or two a night though, enough to progress, get some new equipment, and spend one long session in the character editor, felt like the perfect amount of time. I've gone from not thinking I would ever play the game again to actually looking forward to a few levels of Darkspore every night when I get home from work, even though I've finished the review.

Darkspore isn't perfect, but it's solid, and I'm really happy to see a game in this genre that takes some risks and introduces some new mechanics. I would love to see randomized maps, a less clunky inventory management system, and a way to progress through the game that isn't quite so entirely luck based. But even with these issues Darkspore manages to be entertaining. I expect to see a people playing Darkspore for a long time, as long as they pace their gameplay and don't burn themselves out with marathon sessions too early.

Score: 7 -- Good (7s are solid games that definitely have an audience. Might lack replay value, could be too short or there are some hard-to-ignore faults, but the experience is fun.)

It is a beautiful Saturday afternoon in Vermont.  I ran my long run today.  Brilliant sunshine, cool breeze, and rolling hills.  Truly idyllic.  Past the cows that I actually talk to as I go by, as they walk along the fence as though escorting me down the yard.  Their expression is one of incredulity – it is as though they are asking me:  “Why are you doing this?”  I think I am projecting…. I really don’t like to run….just putting it out there.  I run.  And I run often.  I run at least three times during the week.  And I have even gotten to the point of running a long run (for me) on the weekends of at least six miles or so.  But, I don’t like running.  I like the idea of running.  I like thinking of myself as a runner.  I like the way I feel after a run.  I like the cool clothes I have to run in.  I like that I can rationalize that I ran off enough calories to drink my one Saturday night beer guilt-free. But I don’t like to run.  But I run.  Running was always an ancillary activity for me.  I ran to get in shape for whatever else it was that I was doing.   But, now running is an end in and of itself; a validation.  After my run today I sat down in the grass, turned my music up really loud, and cried.  It was a moment, and I don’t allow myself many.  It goes back to one of the reasons I don’t like to run.  It gives me time to think! Saturday afternoon a year ago, I was just out of surgery, in ICU, intubated, with a multitude of tubes, and an external pacemaker literally coming out of my chest.  I had a new aortic valve, one to replace the one that had ruptured on just such an uneventful run days before.  I was living in Moscow, Russia (that is a story for another day!) and was at the gym running on the treadmill.  Running outdoors in Moscow is a little sketchy.  I always run with a heart rate monitor and that day was no different.  I felt great and ran hard. I didn’t pay much attention to the ever so slight cramping in my chest.  I ran through it, more annoyed with my heart rate monitor that didn’t seem to be working properly, as I couldn’t get a consistent reading.  I changed out the belt – twice - finally gave up, and kept running.  The cramping didn’t go away, and was shortly joined by a wicked headache and being physically ill. I went to the Emergency Room of the European Medical Center in Moscow, the first of two visits over the next couple of days, where I was given an EKG, and put on intravenous medication to bring down my blood pressure, which had skyrocketed, and to relieve the accompanying headache.  After a couple of hours, I was pronounced fine, assured that it wasn’t my heart, but encouraged to see the cardiologist to “address my heart murmur.”   What heart murmur?  I made another visit to the ER on the intervening days because of that nagging cramp, was again given a clean EKG and sent home, this time with an antacid.  I almost didn’t go to the cardiologist.  I was feeling fine, but for the cramping.  I had convinced myself that the doctor was right, that the cramping was nothing more than indigestion or some such, and that I would get my ‘heart murmur’ checked out when I was back in the States at the end of June.  But that plan didn’t sit well with my husband, so off I went. At the cardiologist I was given a third EKG which, again, was normal.  It wasn’t until I was given an echocardiagram, and the cardiologist switched from speaking slowly to me in English to speaking very rapidly in Russian to the swell of doctors who had appeared, that I started to worry.  She told me that I had a problem with my valve.  I was prepped for a trans-[esophegal ] echocardiagram.  It didn’t go well.  The building tension in the room was contagious and I began to panic.  I started choking and vomiting.  The words went from the somewhat vague, “you have problem with your valve,”  to “you have to have surgery right away.”   My response was not vague at all – I said ‘No.”  The cardiologist was the kindest person.  She laughed a nervous laugh, addressed me by name, took my hand in hers and explained that my aortic value had ruptured, and that I wouldn’t survive if I did not have surgery.  She was very plain and matter of fact, describing massive aortic insufficiency and how my heart could not keep up.   It was the single most surreal moment of my life.  It was as if she were talking to me, but not about me.  The next few hours are a blur.  They couldn’t, or wouldn’t, do the surgery in Moscow; the survival rate was below 20%.   So arrangements were made to transport me to Berlin.  My insurance company declined the authorization to transport me – I was too unstable and might not survive the flight. Again, enter my husband.   There wasn’t much of a choice or a discussion.  I wouldn’t be staying in Moscow.  He contacted American Express, who agreed to cover the cost of my transport and we were on our way to Berlin.  (There is a ton of drama in between, like having to talk to each of my children thinking that it could be the last time, but that you can imagine.) I arrived in Berlin, was met by a trauma team at the airport and transported to the Berlin Heart Institute.  There were brief discussions and decisions to be made on the nature of the valve (biological or mechanical) and what I should expect from the surgery.  I then I was out.  I was in surgery for over six hours and at the Heart Institute for 23 days.  I was given a bye. From that moment forward (I started walking laps around the hospital ward the day I was released from ICU), and for the last year, I have walked, run, lifted, biked, and swam, working desperately to get my confidence back.  I had a fabulous team of doctors, and they quite literally saved my life.  They fixed me, physically, and I am good to go.  But, as we all know, it is what goes on in our heads that matters.  And my head has been a scary place this last year. Being athletic has defined me to a certain extent – I was a tomboy when I was a child and a jock in high school and college.  I thought of myself as one of the guys when I started my career on Wall Street – I could talk the talk and had a better jump shot than most.  And, as I had my children, I reveled in teaching them to throw and shoot and catch. But here I was, being told that a part of my body had failed me, and not because of anything I did, or could have done.  It just did.   I had an undiagnosed congenital heart defect – a bicuspid aortic valve – and it chose that moment to fail. At that point, my head and my body parted company, so to speak. Because I was in decent shape and had generally treated my body well over the years, I weathered the surgery and the immediate recovery pretty well.  My body was traumatized, but it was recovering. As well as I was doing physically, I was insecure and frightened, and not a little insane.  I wouldn’t swim unless someone watched me and I wouldn’t run alone.  I was angry.  I felt a tremendous sense of ‘unfairness’.  I ordered a new “Road Id” so that all of the vital info about my valve and other details would be immediately available should I have an issue when I was alone.  I wore my heart rate monitor 24/7 and took my blood pressure a thousand times a day.  I was convinced that chocolate milk and my friend Anne’s home-made granola were the key to my recovery, and I drank and ate them every day. But I didn’t stop running, or swimming, or lifting, or biking.  I met with an exercise physiologist who assured me that I wouldn’t implode if I ran.  I worked with a personal trainer, something I had never done before, who helped me gradually build my strength.  A message therapist and a stretching specialist helped my body heal and allowed me to dispel the feeling that my chest was going to cave in on me.  I am not, and probably never will be, the person I was a year and a day ago.  It may sound canned, or hokey, but my life’s path has been altered.  And for that I am grateful.  I have come to know myself and my body.  I am more aware of my limitations, and more realistic about my abilities.  I have learned to include and rely on others for my physical and emotional well being.  I am still insecure and frightened and a little angry – but I am no longer irrational.  I have regained control and confidence.  I survived because I was physically fit, and I need to stay fit so that, when the time comes to replace the valve (15-17 years), I will be ready.  But one thing hasn’t changed – I was and I am, a triathlete.   I am going to do the Danskin at Disney for Mother’s Day…my gift to myself and to all who have helped me on this incredible life journey.  I won’t be ‘racing’ or ‘competing’ – I will be validating!  I am viewing it as my one-year check up!  I will let you know how it goes.  http://www.womentalksports.com/images/image15262.jpg Margie

After Maryland fans said goodbye to Gary Williams and cheered the coach off into the sunset, Athletic Director Kevin Anderson said he had spoken to the Terrapins’ incoming recruits and that they would wait to see who is hired as the team’s next coach.

What that means, however, is unclear.

The travel-team coach for New Jersey point guard Sterling Gibbs said Thursday that Gibbs will ask for and expect a release from his scholarship so that he can pursue other options while waiting to see who the Terps hire. Gibbs said that Baltimore forward Nick Faust also will ask for a release.

Read full article >>

Oprah Winfrey's OWN has a new CEO.  Get the deets on the employment shakeups on the struggling network inside.....

It was recently announced that OWN's CEO Christina Norman will soon depart the network after 2 years on the job, and will be replaced by Discovery Communications COO Peter Liguori.  Also interesting to note, The OWN channel is who replaced the Discovery Health channel in the first place. 

The employment shakeup comes as sources report that OWN continues to struggle with its ratings and is burning through piles of money.  

In a statement, OWN described Peter's appointment as "a transition from a launch phase to a more long-term focus on business and creative strategy, development and execution." The statement went on to point out that Christina did lead a "successful launch of the multi-platform joint venture."

Oprah released a statement about the move saying:

"I want to thank Christina for her important accomplishments, incredible passion and many sacrifices in helping to launch the network.  With the final taping of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" only a few weeks away, I will soon be able to devote my full energies to OWN.

This is a natural point of transition, and I am confident that Peter, as an integral part of the launch of OWN, will be a terrific partner for me going forward. He is one of the smartest, most creative executives in media, and I look forward to his leadership as we build our development slate and work toward the launch of 'Oprah's Next Chapter.' Over the remainder of the year, Peter and I will work together to recruit a permanent CEO for OWN's next phase of growth."

 

Christina, who spent 17 years as the President of MTV Networks before moving to the OWN Network, had this to say:

"Joining OWN was a great opportunity, and launching it successfully and drawing more than 67 million viewers is one of my proudest achievements.

My thanks to Oprah and David for entrusting me with this brand and giving me the opportunity to launch OWN. As I move on to my next challenge, I am confident the strong foundation we have built will position the network to achieve great things.

OWN will soon add talk show host Rosie O'Donnell to the lineup hoping this will stir up some interest.  Do you have a favorite show on the channel yet?  I'm personally loving the "Season 25: Behind The Scenes" episodes.  I've learned that Lady O is just as much of a lush as me.  Love that!

Would you rather have a 7" or 10" BlackBerry PlayBook?online survey

Since the BlackBerry PlayBook was first announced we have been adament that it wouldn't be too long before RIM would follow up with a 10" version of the device. Afterall, when it comes to their smartphones they have always provided plenty of form factor choice to consumers and this past philosophy on phones should transfer over tablets as well. We've been hearing about a 10" PlayBook being in the works for a while now (oh yeah, and a 7" WHITE PlayBook is on the way too), and the 10" rumors are starting to really picking up now. This week BGR put word on their site about the 10" PlayBook being in the works and having confirmed it with their sources, and we even received an email on May 2nd of a 10" airplane PlayBook sighting that I personally believe to be true (I've spotted a lot of unreleased BB's on flights to and from Toronto over the years). Here's the word from Mike:

Today, On a flight from Dallas to Toronto I sat across the aisle from someone who had BOTH a 7" Blackberry playbook and what looked like a 10" Blackberry playbook as well. The 10" unit looked identical to the 7" unit and had the telltale vertical slotted speaker slits on the right and left side, forward facing camera (top middle) and some type of round sensor to the left of the camera sensor.

The larger unit had visibly better screen image quality than the 7"unit, significantly better contrast, brightness and viewing angle. I had a Xoom with me and it looked about the same size. I was able to see the menus/screens and it looked very similar to to the 7" screens. Additionally, the person who had this larger playbook was playing Need For Speed.

So with a 10" PlayBook in the works (I personally don't think it's a rumor at this point... it's happening), the question really becomes which size of PlayBook would you personally want to buy? I know in our BlackBerry PlayBook Review I was a little critical of the 7" form factor, feeling that it sacrificed the user experience for certain activities such as web browsing, but now that I've owned the PlayBook for a few weeks I have to say I've really fallen in love with the more portable 7" form factor and am more than happy with taking a few screen size tradeoffs in favor of a device I use way more often. I take my PlayBook with me everywhere!!

I know for some of our CrackBerry readers and myself the answer to this question is I'd buy BOTH... but really.. if you had to choose between 7" or 10", which would you go for? Cast your vote above and be sure to sound off in the comments with your reasoning. 

CrackBerry.com's feed sponsored by ShopCrackBerry.com. CrackBerry Poll: Would you rather have a 7" BlackBerry PlayBook or 10" BlackBerry PlayBook?

By: Rich Hansen, MMATorch Columnist

On Friday May 6, former WEC fighter Dan Downes, currently under UFC contract, will be fighting outside of the UFC under the NAFC banner. Last week Downes took time out of his training schedule to talk to MMA Torch's Rich Hansen about his mindset going into this fight, the mentality of a fighter, Ben Askren and Anthony Pettis, and much more.

MMA TORCH: Last time I talked to you was before your fight against Zhang Tie Quan. The first round of that fight didn't go exactly how you wanted it to go. When you were sitting on the stool in between rounds, were you able to block out everything else and just focus on what you had to do in the next two rounds, or was your mind going all over the place thinking about the UFC contract that was on the line and other factors like that?

DAN DOWNES: During the Zhang fight, the first round I knew I was terrible. But I finished that first round feeling good, which sounds kind of weird but I remember that I survived. But near the end I got a small reversal and once I got that and I was on top of him briefly, I felt good. And then also when we got up and I could look at him, I could see in his eyes that he blew his load. I knew he was done for.

Obviously if I got up and he was calm and cool and everything I would have felt different, like, "Ah shoot, that didn't go well." And like I told people, if you go 0-2 to start [with Zuffa] you don't have to worry about going 0-3 because you don't really have that chance. So I saw him and I got that spring of hope and I felt pretty good, which seems pretty weird considering how bad that first round went.

I even watched [the fight] today and I swore I was going to lose, but then I was like, "Oh wait, I know how this ends." But yeah, I felt really good about it, and I thought I got [the rest of the fight]. And then the second and third rounds went smoother. But when I fight, I just concentrate on that one moment. You have to do that, focus on that once thing, or else you're going to get punched in the face.

MMA TORCH: As a result of that victory you're now under UFC contract, and you're going to be fighting for Duke Roufus' NAFC promotion on May 6 here in Milwaukee. It's pretty rare for the UFC to allow their fighters that are under contract to fight outside of the UFC, even for smaller organizations like the NAFC that aren't in direct competition with them. Were you given the chance to take a UFC fight in the aftermath of the Zhang fight, or were you told by them that they didn't have a fight for you and you should look outside the UFC for a fight? Essentially, was this their idea or your idea?

DOWNES: It was hard, because the lightweight division is so deep. Obviously if I wanted to sit around and things like that I could have. But I know I have a lot of improving to do so I'm really appreciative that they're giving me an opportunity to do this. It's a calculated risk. But it's a risk every time you get into a cage to fight another grown man. But yeah, it's real deep and I didn't want to stay on the shelf that long.

MMA TORCH: Originally Michael Johnson was scheduled to fight in the main event of this card. When did you find out that you were going to be on the card instead of Johnson?

DOWNES: I found out maybe a week or two ago. And I was in really good shape. I felt like if anything came up on short notice I would be ready to take it. So I'm in really good shape, not just not-fat shape. I was actually in shape for this since we weren't really sure when I would go. We were thinking maybe end of summer and I was like oh my gosh, I have to keep up my pace for three more months, it would be terrible. The timing was right the way things worked out.

MMA TORCH: When you take a fight against an opponent you don't know a whole lot about, how do you prepare for that? Do you try to figure out as much as you can about him and tailor your game to his skill set, or do you just work on what you do and whatever happens happens?

DOWNES: Whenever you first start out, you don't have a lot of information. You can try to... YouTube only goes so far. Watching a fight he had two years ago won't do me much good. At the end of the day, a fight's a fight, so I have to get out there and do what I do. A lot of these guys, you know, are pretty good at some things but not at other things. So you kind of have to do it by feel. Even the same thing happens in a fight. You know, I could have game planned and watch hours of film on this guy, but I go there and what I game plan for might not work. And then I've got to adjust. You have to have a broad skill set. If you're only good at one thing and they shut down the one thing you're in trouble.

MMA TORCH: Are there any similarities comparing this fight with the Horodecki fight (which Downes also took on short notice), or are they two totally separate things?

DOWNES: They're two totally separate events. Obviously other than the short notice thing, I mean. Other than that I'm in a lot better shape, I'm a lot stronger, and a better fighter. I mean if anything the one big thing would be my mindset. Going into Horodecki I was the underdog. I had everything to gain and he had everything to lose. But now the roles are kind of reversed. I have everything to lose; I'm the headliner now, I'm the favorite, so the pressure is more on me.

MMA TORCH: Are you feeling any pressure?

DOWNES: Just the normal pressure of every other fight. I'm actually kind of surprised how calm I've been, considering. But it's like, even Pat Barry says the same thing; "It's like man, I always want to fight until I find out I have a fight. Then oh man, I'm not ready…" That's the thing. Even before I was like, "I want to fight right now. I'm in such good shape. I want to show everyone what I've got." And then they're like, "So do you want to fight that guy," and I'm like, "Uh, yeah. I guess..." So there's always the normal nervousness of anything in the fight. But by the time you get your hands wrapped and all ready to go, that will all go out the window.

MMA TORCH: I want to change course a little bit and get into the mindset of being a fighter. Georges St. Pierre talks consistently about how he feels fear. Of course he's talking more about fear of losing than just primal fear, but what about yourself? Like you said, your job is to go into a cage to fight a grown man. Do you ever just feel fear.

DOWNES: Oh yeah. Definitely.

MMA TORCH: How do you get around it?

DOWNES: Um, I guess you know it's just a basic adrenaline, fight or flight. So you've got to pick one or the other and once you're locked in the cage that kind of eliminates [flight].

MMA TORCH: Fear of pain; fear of losing; fear of looking bad?? What is it you're feeling?

DOWNES: Yeah. There're all those things. Part of it is... this is a very ego-driven sport. That's what I tell people. Losing a fight is different than, say, losing a basketball game. If we go out there and we play a basketball game and lose, it's like oh well, big deal. Even in the NBA, you can say it's your livelihood and all that…

MMA TORCH: Unless you're Andrew Bogut, you're going to walk away in one piece.

DOWNES: Yeah. And at the end of the evening you have your teammates and everything else. If I go out there and have a bad basketball game and didn't shoot well or something, I have 81 more games in a regular season to go do it right. But with this, if I lose, not only did I get beat up, physically beat up in front of my friends and family, I might not be able to fight for another four months. So there's a blessing and a curse. If I look awesome, everyone loves me for four months. You're only as good as your last fight. And if you do bad, nobody will give you any credit. So there's that fear.

And then there's the physical. I guess you worry about the guy hitting you and stuff. But I don't have that fear of... I don't think I'm going to get hurt. That's why with sparring and stuff you get used to it. I don't want to get cut or my nose broken or my face bashed in or anything. But that's just vanity; that's not really a fear.

My last fight, you could say my career was on the line. And now with this [fight], you could say that it's the same kind of thing. So it's a lot of pressure. Try to think of another sport, there's never really one [where an athlete] gets [released] based on one bad game or anything like that, so that's always out there [in fighting].

MMA TORCH: One other mindset question here that I want to touch upon. Have you ever walked into the cage against someone you really didn't like and really wanted to beat them up for personal reasons, or have you not experienced real distaste for an opponent yet?

DOWNES: I've never had like a personal reason... The one thing I have noticed is that the more I have been fighting..... I remember my first few fights it was like, hatred. And a lot of that, it's good in some sense because you have to have some mindset. But it's bad because it's that aggression that is not focused... Unfocused aggression isn't any good in a fight. I'’s good when you're 0-0 or 1-0 or something. But as you get better, you can't just go mindlessly out there swinging. So as I've gotten better that aggression and dislike is still there... It's kind of how Nick Diaz does it. I'm just trying to hate you right now. But he respects a lot of the guys, but he fights the same fight every time. So sure you have to get in that mindset; you can't treat it like a sparring session.


MMA TORCH: If you were to fight someone that had an active dislike for that, would fight him differently than you would fight someone you had no feelings about?

DOWNES: I think that would be a hard fight because you'd want to... Obviously you always want to win, but you'd want to hurt them. But then you'd end up doing dumb things.

MMA TORCH: It would change your proper mindset.

DOWNES: Yeah, exactly. You know sometimes you get guys who come to spar and they don't know whatever etiquette or something. And they're kind of a jerk, or ignorant people who come in here visiting, thankfully not the regular guys. You try so hard to beat them up. And even like, you get some guy coming in trying to cock off, and I'll [want to] knock him down, but it doesn't work too well because it'll go worse than you want in the first place. So you've got to find that proper balance. I think it would be really hard to fight someone that I actually, like, personally dislike.

MMA TORCH: Which is why you're the nicest guy in the sport.

DOWNES: (laughs) Yeah.

MMA TORCH: Going back to the fear thing for a second here... What's scarier, sparring with Anthony Pettis, or actually fighting?

DOWNES: (long pause) Well, it's like (when sparring with Pettis), it's like, "What in the hell is he going to do now?" That's the thing. It's like fear of the unknown. After going with him, I can see it in his eyes. I don't get caught off guard as often as his [real] opponents because when you spar with someone enough you can learn their tendencies. But I can see it. I can see the way he'll just do something with his eyes or move his shoulders, and I'm like, "Ah shit! He's about to do something, and then he spins three times, backflip, and kick me in the head." And then I'll be like, "Damn it! I knew it (was coming), but I didn't know what to do!"

MMA TORCH: So he's Jaden Smith?

DOWNES: (laughs) Yeah, that's it. But that's the thing. When we go out there (to spar), he's just a cold blooded killer. But not me. You get the knots in your stomach and your heart elevates. The thing is, you've just got to harness it. You can let it take you over. Or you can try to harness that energy and kind of use it to your advantage. I guess it's like the ultimate adrenaline rush. Some people jump out of planes. Or maybe do coke. Whatever. Like this is just that feeling of, everything is heightened, you know. Everything just kind of slows down, and you're full aware of everything. It's a strange kind of, I don't know, physical response.

MMA TORCH: Since your last fight in December, Ben Askren has moved back up here and joined your team full time. Have you been able to roll with him yet? And if so, what has he brought to the team and to your individual game?

DOWNES: He's been busy setting up his new wrestling academy (in Hartland, WI), so I'll be training with him more soon. But it is the most frustrating thing I've ever done. Because he'll take me down and then he'll be twenty different places. You'll try to move and then he'll be all over you. To see that level of wrestling, it's kind of scary. If I could even get a tenth of what he's got, it will definitely open up things even more for me. And the same thing [for Askren] when he gets his striking up.

The nice thing about being well-rounded is that it lets you be more aggressive. If you get put on your back and you're dead on arrival, then you can't strike as aggressively, you can't open up. That's why Anthony [Pettis] can do so many creative things, because even if you get him on his back he'll submit you. I'm just trying to get to that point where no matter where I'm at, I can be more aggressive with my jiu-jitsu and stuff. I'm definitely looking forward to working more with Ben.

MMA TORCH: Where do you see yourself in your career two years from now? Five years from now? Or don't you have those kinds of goals yet?

DOWNES: I don't. The best laid plans go to waste. There's not a whole lot of security in this. Whether it be your own performance, you get cut, injuries, you know? Thankfully Alan Belcher (who is recovering from a near career-ending eye injury) is able to come back from his thing. But you never know what can happen. I hope that doesn't happen but who knows. I could take a fight and something really bad happens like I tear my Achilles [tendon] or something and you just never know. Look, I wouldn't be doing this, and I know Duke wouldn't let me be doing this if he didn't think I had a shot. This isn't like some pipe-dream or anything. It's still weird for me too. I'm just going to try to enjoy the ride as long as I can.

Efforts to ban halal slaughter are underway in most Western countries. The fact that unmarked halal meat has come to dominate the market in some Western European countries has provoked outrage among animal-rights activists who object to the treatment of animals slaughtered under halal rules. The result has been a “strange bedfellows” scenario, with anti-jihad activists and animal-rights people taking the same side of the issue.

Since halal slaughter and kosher slaughter bear some resemblance to each other — especially in the minds of Western Christians and secular people — most moves to ban halal would also place the same restrictions on kosher products. From a practical political standpoint, obtaining a ban on halal would be very difficult without also banning kosher.

Brian of London tackles this thorny topic in an article posted today at Israellycool. He looks at the issue of a halal food in the larger context of the Islamic push for domination in Western countries.


Halal: It’s Just Not Kosher
by Brian of London

Over the coming months we will see attempts to ban halal slaughter in Europe. But they won’t be worded in such a way to target only halal, they’ll probably go after something nebulous like “ritual slaughter” or “religious slaughter without stunning”. If that happens (as is ongoing in New Zealand) it will more likely than not deprive European Jews of kosher meat and make very little difference to the lives of farm animals.

This essay will be general but will draw specific examples from the UK.

As much as Muslims like to talk about halal, it is not a religious requirement in the same way as kosher has been to Jews for thousands of years. There is conclusive historical and archeological evidence across Israel and anywhere else Jews lived, that the rules of “Shechita” have been followed in an unaltered form for millennia. The mere fact that kosher food is perfectly acceptable to Muslims while halal is not acceptable to Jews shows the Muslim requirement has a certain inherent flexibility born of political expediency. The Jewish laws do not yield for convenience or to achieve other goals. Halal has also been flexible enough to include “light stunning” which has been enough to sidestep a ban in New Zealand. A very large proportion of the lamb consumed in the middle east is actually New Zealand lamb and in the UK this halal lamb is nearly always sold unmarked in big supermarkets.

The global counter Jihad movement is going to face a tough choice over this issue. On the one side is the long respected freedom to practice religion where that freedom doesn’t harm others. On the other will be those who feel the rights of animals need to be elevated to the level or even above the level of humans.

Here are some points to remember:

• Modern farming methods relating to animals, especially when one is considering mass produced meat at cheaper prices, are not pleasant. It is firmly in the interests of very big agro-businesses to obfuscate and conceal exactly what goes on to produce the mass produced chicken that can be sold at the very cheap prices we currently enjoy.
  
• In order to treat animals as if they were pets, prior to their slaughter for consumption, requires an investment in those animals that is only worthwhile if consumers will pay a hefty extra price for their meat. Some consumers will and people do choose free range or organic meat trusting that the various certification schemes do keep the farmers honest. In the end, however, unless you know the farmer or have some connection to the food production yourself, you’re trusting someone else to vouch that your meat is produced in a way you can accept.
  
• That is a similar act of trust that Jews place in the Kashrut Authorities who certify their kosher food has been produced in accordance with Jewish principles of animal welfare and cleanliness.
  
• There are a multitude of groups and movements working for better treatment of animals at many points of the spectrum from mildly reproachful to physical dangerous. Just because, on the issue of halal, you may agree with them, does not necessarily mean a movement to educate people about Islam needs to take up their causes.
  
• There have been real acts of terrorism, violence and even murder committed in the name of animal rights.

This is the big question: if the global counter Jihad movement wants to oppose the spread of Islam and Sharia into the lives of non Muslims, is it necessary to get involved in the details of animal treatment or is it enough to realise the drive for halal food and its encroachment into public life is the real problem?

Jewish respect for animals

I would put forward that Judaism, as a religion, has done more for the good treatment of animals than any before or since. The militant atheists will argue that all religion is evil but, without being particularly observant myself, I know enough about Jewish philosophy to know they are wrong. I know Islam too and that is where the problem comes in. For example, Judaism has always prohibited hunting for fun which is certainly not something Islam copied. Indeed, the only sports acceptable to the most observant or extreme Muslims all derive from hunting: archery and horsemanship are specifically mandated for good Muslims in the stories about Muhammad! By contrast, Judaism specifically prohibits cruelty (causing pain for pleasure) and it’s clear from many things done in the name of Islam, this is not observed in Islam.

Why do kosher and halal rules appear similar?

What Muhammad stole from the Jews who resided in the Arabian peninsula in the 7th century (aside from their wives, daughters, property and lives) were scattered snatches of their stories and oral law. These were mangled and mis-represented to form the Koran. That Muhammad (and don’t get me started on whether he was a single real person or an amalgamated construct) knew to place the Arabs as illegitimate descendants of the slave girl in the Hebrew bible story of Abraham was a stroke of pure genius. In all probability, the Jews had already worked this out as a separation of the Semitic people into Jews and others (who would always be more numerous).

Almost every aspect of Islam has its roots in Judaism but every time you study the detail, superficial surface similarities hide a complete inversion of right and wrong, and a complete perversion of the reasons for the activity in question. Halal represents an attempt to take over and dominate the food of the infidel. By contrast, kosher is an introverted wish by Jews to honour their creator by following His laws (and some other internal philosophical reasons more observant Jews than myself can explain to you).

If we do not discriminate and recognise that Islam as a belief system has a dark, supremacist element that is unique to it, we are liable to destroy important parts of the foundations that have made our civilisation the greatest and kindest that has ever been. No civilisation has ever considered the rights of animals to the extent that we do now and this is not an accident. Islam has rarely been kind to people, let alone animals.

What is the purpose of Halal in the Non-Muslim world?

There is another issue here about the real purpose of halal outside of Muslim countries. As a general rule Jews and other groups with special dietary rules have not asked for their food to be served in public places outside their home countries. Jews outside of Israel adapt themselves to the food available in public institutions such as hospitals and schools often by eating vegetarian options. Even in neighbourhoods where Jews form a very high proportion of the population, there are hardly any demands to change the catering in public institutions.

By contrast, halal has made serious inroads into institutional mass catering in the UK. There are now numerous examples where non-Muslims looking for meat are given no other choice but to eat halal food in public institutions such as schools and hospitals. This has never happened with kosher food and nobody has ever seriously forced, for example, a vegan option on an un-willing population.

It’s all about control

There is a significant point of view that says halal food is all about a bid to take over and control the food supply. Animals must have an Arabic prayer said as they are killed and this must be performed by a Muslim. In effect halal mandates that Muslims perform most of the tasks involved in the production of the food.

What would strict labelling mean?

One of the ways that people are calling for some introduction of control on the spread of halal meat is by calling for strict labelling of meat that is not stunned before slaughter. There is a particular issue with halal today because there is a large amount of halal meat in the normal food chain that is not labeled as such. This is not such an issue with kosher meat except in one respect. Fully kosher meat is always much more expensive than non kosher and this reflects the small nature of its market and the care with which it has to be produced. Halal is generally cheaper than non halal. Some parts of kosher slaughtered animals do end up in the non-kosher meat supply, however, because this does help keep kosher meat affordable.

So strict labelling would be a problem for Jews if it meant that producers of meat pies and sausages were reluctant to accept some meat because it would force them to label their end product as containing some parts from non-stunned animals.

When was the last time a major nation banned kosher slaughter in Europe?

Today there are some bans on kosher slaughter already in Europe, especially in Scandinavian countries. The last major European nation to completely ban kosher slaughter was, of course, Nazi Germany. The following passage from Melanie Phillips’ excellent book The World Turned Upside Down develops this even further into what some may find a surprising reverence for animal life among Nazis.

Such ecological fixations were further developed in German Nazism. According to Ernst Lehmann, a leading Nazi biologist, “separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations.”^[i] The Nazis thus fixated on organic food, personal health and animal welfare. Heinrich Himmler was a certified animal rights activist and an aggressive promoter of “natural healing”; Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s deputy, championed homeopathy and herbal remedies; Hitler wanted to turn the entire nation vegetarian as a response to the unhealthiness promoted by capitalism.^[ii]

There was top-level Nazi support for ecological ideas at both ministerial and administrative levels. Alwin Seifert, for example, was a motorway architect who specialized in “embedding motorways organically into the landscape.” Following Rudolf Steiner, he argued against land reclamation and drainage; said that “classical scientific farming” was a nineteenth-century practice unsuited to the new era and that artificial fertilizers, fodder and insecticides were poisonous; and called for an agricultural revolution towards “a more peasant-like, natural, simple” method of farming “independent of capital.” Himmler established experimental organic farms including one at Dachau that grew herbs for SS medicines; a complete list of homeopathic doctors in Germany was compiled for him; and antivivisection laws were passed on his insistence. As Anna Bramwell observes, “SS training included a respect for animal life of near Buddhist proportions.”^[iii]

They did not show such respect, of course, for the human race. Neither does the ecological movement, for which, echoing Malthus, the planet’s biggest problem is the people living on it. Even though our contemporary era has been forged in a determination that fascism must never rise again, certain völkish ideas that were central to fascism—about the organic harmony of the earth, the elevation of animal “rights” and the denigration of humans as enemies of nature—are today presented as the acme of progressive thinking.

[i]		Staudenmaier, “Fascist Ecology.”
[ii]		Goldberg, Liberal Fascism, pp, 385—87.
[iii]		Bramwell, Ecology in the 20th Century, p. 204.

What does this mean for the Counter Jihad?

We need to decide if fighting a battle for what some believe is better treatment of animals has any place in resisting the spread of Islam and Sharia. Just as with the issue of immigration we ask is the counter Jihad about immigration in general or only about Islamic immigration with a goal of eventual domination?

It’s my belief that people interested in taking up the cause of animal rights should do this distinctly from the cause of resisting Islam and Sharia. However, for the counter Jihad, halal slaughter is not an issue of animal treatment. It is an issue of an attempt to take over and dominate the food of infidels and impose on them, against their will, submission to the laws of Islam. That is unacceptable and should be resisted without infringing the legitimate rights of real religious practice.

In the first post in this series (http://blogs.technet.com/b/speschka/archive/2011/05/05/federated-saml-authentication-with-sharepoint-2010-and-azure-access-control-service-part-1.aspx) I described how to configure SharePoint to establish a trust directly with the Azure Access Control (ACS) service and use it to federate authentication between ADFS, Yahoo, Google and Windows Live for you and then use that to get into SharePoint.  In part 2 I’m going to take a similar scenario, but one which is really implemented almost backwards to part 1 – we’re going to set up a typical trust between SharePoint and ADFS, but we’re going to configure ACS as an identity provider in ADFS and then use that to get redirected to login, and then come back in again to SharePoint.  This type of trust, at least between SharePoint and ADFS, is one that I think more SharePoint folks are familiar with and I think for today plugs nicely into a more common scenario that many companies are using.

As I did in part 1, I’m not going to describe the nuts and bolts of setting up and configuring ACS – I’ll leave that to the teams that are responsible for it.   So, for part 2, here are the steps to get connected:

1.       Set up your SharePoint web application and site collection, configured with ADFS.

1.  
   1. First and foremost you should create your SPTrustedIdentityTokenIssuer, a relying party in ADFS, and a SharePoint web application and site collection.  Make sure you can log into the site using your ADFS credentials.  Extreme details on how this can be done is described in one of my previous postings at http://blogs.technet.com/b/speschka/archive/2010/07/30/configuring-sharepoint-2010-and-adfs-v2-end-to-end.aspx.

2.       Open the Access Control Management Page

1.  
   1. Log into your Windows Azure management portal.  Click on the Service Bus, Access Control and Caching menu in the left pane.  Click on Access Control at the top of the left pane (under AppFabric), click on your namespace in the right pane, and click on the Access Control Service button in the Manage portion of the ribbon.  That will bring up the Access Control Management page.

3.       Create a Trust Between ADFS and ACS

1.  
   1. This step is where we will configure ACS as an identity provider in ADFS.  To begin, go to your ADFS server and open up the AD FS 2.0 Management console
   2. Go into the AD FS 2.0…Trust Relationships…Claims Provider Trusts node and click on the Add Claims Provider Trust… link in the right pane
   3. Click the Start button to begin the wizard
   4. Use the default option to import data about the relying party published online.  The Url you need to use is in the ACS management portal.  Go back to your browser that has the portal open, and click on the Application Integration link under the Trust relationships menu in the left pane
   5. Copy the Url it shows for the WS-Federation Metadata, and paste that into the Federation metadata address (host name or URL):  edit box in the ADFS wizard, then click the Next button
   6. Type in a Display name and optionally some Notes then click the Next button
   7. Leave the default option of permitting all users to access the identity provider and click the Next button.
   8. Click the Next button so it creates the identity provider, and leave the box checked to open up the rules editor dialog.  The rest of this section is going to be very similar to what I described in this post http://blogs.technet.com/b/speschka/archive/2010/11/24/configuring-adfs-trusts-for-multiple-identity-providers-with-sharepoint-2010.aspx about setting up a trust between two ADFS servers:

You need to create rules to pass through all of the claims that you get from the IP ADFS server.  So in the rules dialog, for each claim you want to send to SharePoint you're going to do the following:

1. Click on Add Rule.
2. Select the Pass Through or Filter an Incoming Claim in the Claim Rule Template drop down and click the Next button.
3. Give it a Claim Name - probably including the name of the claim being passed through would be useful.  For the Incoming Claim Type drop down, select the claim type you want to pass through, for example E-Mail Address. I usually leave the default option for Pass through all claim values selected, but if you have different business rules then select whatever's appropriate and click the Finish button.  Note that if you choose to pass through all claim values ADFS will give you a warning dialog.

Once you've added pass through claims for each claim you need in SharePoint you can close the rules dialog.  Now, for the last part of the ADFS configuration, you need to find the SharePoint relying party.  Click on the Edit Claim Rules dialog, and for each Pass Through claim rule you made in the previous step, you ALSO need to add a Pass Through claim rule for the SharePoint relying party.  That will allow the claims to flow from ACS, to ADFS through the trusted claim provider, and out to SharePoint through the trusted relying party.

Your ADFS configuration is now complete.

4.       Add ADFS as a Relying Party in ACS

1.  
   1. Go back to your browser that has the portal open, and click on the Relying party applications link under the Trust relationships menu in the left pane
   2. Click on the Add link
   3. Fill out the Relying Party Application Settings section
      1.  Enter a display name, like “ADFS to ACS”
      2. Use the default Mode of Enter settings manually
      3. In the Realm edit box you need to enter the realm that ADFS will be sending with the request.  As it turns out, ADFS has a specific list of realms that it sends when redirecting to another identity provider, so you DO NOT use the realm that was used when creating the SPTrustedIdentityTokenIssuer in SharePoint.  Instead, I recommend you use http://yourFullyQualifiedAdfsServerName/adfs/services/trust.
      4. For the return Url use https:// yourFullyQualifiedAdfsServerName /adfs/ls/.
      5. The Token format drop down can be SAML 2.0 or 1.1.  Since the token is getting sent to ADFS and not SharePoint, and ADFS supports SAML 2.0 tokens, you don’t need to drop down to SAML 1.1 like you would if connecting directly to SharePoint
      6. You can set the Token lifetime (secs) to whatever you want.  It’s 10 minutes by default; I set mine to 3600 which means 1 hour.
   4. Fill out the Authentication Settings section
      1. For the identity providers you can select them all, except and unless you have added your same ADFS server previously as an identity provider (as you would have if you followed the steps in the first posting in this series).  If you did do that, then you can check everything except for the identity provider that points back to your same ADFS server that you are now setting up as the relying party.
      2. Under Rule groups, in the interest of time, I’m going to suggest you either follow the guidance for rule groups that I explained in part 1, or if you completed part 1 then just select that rule group from the list.
   5. In the Token Signing Settings you can leave the default option selected, which is Use service namespace certificate (standard).

Click the Save button to save your changes and create the relying party. 

You should be able to login into your SharePoint site now using ADFS or ACS.  One thing to remember though is that ADFS will write a cookie to remember what identity provider you last used.  From that point forward it won’t prompt you for the identity provider unless you use something like an InPrivate browsing window in IE (I highlight this in extra big font because it is so commonly forgotten and a source of confusion).  For example, here’s what it looks like the first time you are redirected to the ADFS server or if you are using an InPrivate browser session:

The rest of it works just as described in part 1 of this series (including the caveat about using an email address for Windows Live ID), so I won’t both posting screenshots again since they look almost identical.  With this series complete now you should be able to successfully integrate ADFS, ACS, and all of the identity providers ACS supports into your SharePoint 2010 environment. 

Good to see an American presence deeper into a clay tournament, but it had to end at some point: Li Na beat Bethanie Mattek-Sands 6-4, 3-6, 6-4 in the quarterfinals of this week’s Mutua Madrid Open. (Video: See how Li has been training on the dirt) Going forward: Li’s semifinal opponent will be either Kvitova [...]

The sight of Kentucky freshman Brandon Knight sitting alone at a podium Friday morning announcing he's NBA-bound undoubtedly raised an obvious question in the mind of every Wildcats fan doubling as an amateur detective.

Does the fact that Terrence Jones and DeAndre Liggins weren't alongside Knight suggest they're both leaning toward returning to school?

Many programs would hold a joint news conference if multiple prospects were ready to announce they were remaining in the draft, so at the very least this suggests that Knight and Liggins truly are still undecided. Jones confirmed as much Thursday night when he addressed via Twitter whether he will pull out of the draft by Sunday's deadline, telling Kentucky fans he's "still 50/50 at this point."

The prospect of Jones and Liggins potentially returning next season must have Big Blue Nation salivating at the possibilities. If the high-scoring forward and defensive-minded wing join returners Doron Lamb and Darius Miller and the nation's No. 1 recruiting class, Kentucky could easily challenge or even overtake North Carolina for the top spot in the preseason polls.

It's no surprise that Knight won't be joining his teammates in Lexington again, especially after coach John Calipari said after the Kentucky combine earlier this week that his point guard received the confirmation he was looking for from NBA executives. Knight will likely become the latest Calipari point guard to become a lottery pick after his freshman year, an opportunity he couldn't pass up.

"My main goal was to be a top-10 pick. Nothing's for sure in the draft, but I wanted to hear something like that," Knight told reporters in Lexington on Friday. "A lot of feedback was in that area. Coach Cal basically said whatever my decision was, he'd have a lot of confidence in me and he told me to test the waters, and the feedback was great."

Jones is also regarded as a potential lottery pick, so it certainly wouldn't be a surprise if he followed Knight out the door. Liggins likely won't be selected until the second round, but it would be understandable if he left since he might be fearful that he won't get the chance to showcase his abilities with all the younger talent set to arrive in Lexington next season.

The fact that Jones is "50/50" so close to Sunday's deadline is a bit frightening considering his track record making big decisions like this. The McDonald's All-American famously donned a Washington cap at his news conference to announce his college choice last spring before experiencing second thoughts and signing with Kentucky a few weeks later.

Hopefully Jones will be more secure in whatever decision he makes this time. Either way, we should know for sure in the next 48 hours.

Being Being a professional photographer isn’t easy. 

Living with one is far more difficult. 

As Mother’s Day approaches I think it’s important to take a look at the people behind the scenes- The wives and mothers that put up with professional photographers.  Namely, my wife.

Even though I began my photography journey almost twenty years ago when I got my degree in the subject, it wasn’t until about five years ago that I finally decided to ‘go for it’ and put my whole self into becoming successful at what was previously more of a hobby.  When I made this decision, I don’t think my wife anticipated where that road was heading.

In the beginning it was an occassional hike on the weekends.   I would wake long before the rest of the family and drive out to my location.  There would be a small hike and some photos taken, and then I would be back at home early enough that in most cases my wife was still asleep.   During this period I was relearning what brought me to photography in the first place.   I had rediscovered why I fell in love with photography.   I felt the need and desire to be creative that I had had during college before life and severe laziness caught up with me.

My trips out went from once a week to two sometimes three in a week.  Still never gone more than a couple hours, I was driven to learn and to continue to perfect my craft, making up for those down years where the camera set on a shelf for all but a few times a year.

My wife put up with hikes, and the little times away. To her, it was a good hobby (at this point), and a healthy way for me to get out and exercise.  This process usually allowed the kids to come as well…so it was also considered family time. 

Then I needed a new camera.   When I set out to be good at something, I don’t quit.  It wasn’t long before my knowledge and aspirations outgrew the entry level DSLR I had purchased just six months before.  I needed a bigger more professional model camera that was capable of taking my photography to the level I envisioned in my head.     This required a good chunk of financial money.  My wife handled it beautifully, and with minimal grumbles we spent the money and I bought my new camera set up....and all the subsequent gear that I found I "needed" after the new camera.

With the new camera came an even bigger drive to learn and grow as a photographer.  The morning and evening trips became full day events that saw me leave from before the sun rose, and return well after it had gone down.    This eventually led to a full on road trip taking off for 10 days through the southwest.   The goal of this trip was to continue to push my comfort zone, as well as add new images to my growing portfolio.  My wife "got it" and let me take the time away to photograph.

While away I pushed myself to become better, learn more, and get better in every aspect of my craft.   The trip was a success for numerous reasons.   I came away with several new images for my portfolio.  I pushed myself mentally and physically to become better at what I did.  I saw beautiful areas of the country I hadn’t even considered visiting before.  It was a great experience all around, but what really set this trip apart was a being in the right place at the right time. 

Through this trip I ended up meeting Stephen Oachs.   Stephen, like me was getting into landscape and wildlife photography pretty seriously.  Through a chance run in at Horseshoe Bend in Page, Arizona we started exchanging emails and going out to shoot together.   This of course, required more time away from my wife and family.    What my wife didn’t know at the time is that the chance meeting with Stephen and the shoots that followed all laid the ground work for what has now become The Aperture Academy.

Stephen and I began by teaching a few workshops a year.  There was a demand, and it made sense to teach some of what I’d learned throughout my then fifteen years of photography.  We taught four or five workshops that first year.  The workshops required me being out of town for two or three days at a time.   When I’m away all the parenting falls on my wife.  She’s in charge of getting the kids fed and taken care of.   With our boys this means sports practices or games (sometimes 2 a day), birthday parties, family functions, errands, or just a trip to the lake to get out of the house. It’s a hard enough gig to tackle as a team, but alone it can get overwhelming very quickly.  Add to it that our boys are three years apart in age, and both the same size and you can't imagine the squabbling and fighting that occurs.

The workshop schedule expanded some the second year.  We went from four or five to nine.   This was in addition to the various other side trips I made for personal shooting.  Building a business isn’t easy, and often times the days I am home I’m spent at the computer processing images, writing articles, or setting to the various social networking aspect of my business.   When I’m home, I’m not technically home.

In 2009 The Aperture Academy was opened and business increased dramatically.  The nine workshops we were doing each year multiplied and between the workshops and other events at the gallery I spent at least fifteen different weekends away.    This was also the time I got the wild idea of going to Iceland for an entire summer. 

“How does your wife put up with you?”  I get asked that question ALL of the time.  The honest answer is I have no idea.   I’m probably not the easiest person on the planet to live with when I am home.  I work in public education Monday-Friday.  Then I leave for a weekend or two each month to work more.  Then in the summer, which is normally a time reserved for family I get the genius idea to spend it all in a foreign country- Which my wife allowed me to do.    This took a herculean effort on her part to keep the house and kids in check for that time.  We also have three dogs…that adds three more children to the mix.  While in Iceland my wife made a lifesized photo-cut out me and drug it to family dinners, sporting events, and even our anniversary.  I know nobody else who could handle this with a sense of humor.  Cardboard me was probably less of a pain in the ass in some regards. 

This year the Aperture Academy has grown by leaps and bounds.  Stephen’s wife has coined the phrase “photography widow” to describe the situation she and my wife face.  There are months where I am gone every single weekend to help teach and grow the business.   Then I still need time to shoot personal projects in order to continue my own creative growth.   I figure this year I’ll miss 30 weekends teaching.   When you’re business is growing and you feel personal responsibility to see it succeed there is always something that can be done, always another day you can work.  I'm a work-a-holic when it comes to my photography.

There are times when I’m able to bring the family on a workshop, and treat them to a bit of a vacation from their normal life at home.  Those times aren’t as often as I’d like at this point and there’s never a really good way to tell them how much I appreciate the hard work and effort they put into being related to me.  Riding side-saddle with me on a photo shoot is probably nobodies idea of fun.  I took them to Florida on a cruise ship for 5 days.  The family time and relaxation was really the first break any of us had in almost two years.  It was amazing, yet I still managed to throw in some photography as well.  They endured the evening drives all ove the Florida Keys as part of "vacation".  It’s really incredible that they put up with me given that I’m working two full time jobs right now.    I’m honestly always a little surprised their home when I return from being away.

“Wow…they’re still here.”

It’s hard enough to build a portfolio and work to improve one’s craft given the competiveness and conditions that exist in photography today.  It’s even harder when you have a family.    Everything I am in photography is because of my family.  If it weren’t for them I would have no reason to push to be great.  If it weren’t for my wife’s unwavering love, support, and patience I wouldn’t be able to do what I do and continue to move forward.   It’s definitely a team effort in the Rueb house.  

I guess what I’m trying to say is that when you see the pretty images in magazines, and on the websites, and you take the class or workshop from the professional.  You should know that behind every good photographer is an even better woman...and a couple kids throwing rocks in your foreground.

Happy Mother’s Day to my wife and the other photography widows of the world.

The successful U.S. SEAL strike against Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, just blocks from the Pakistan's West Point, raises questions about whether the Pakistani military and intelligence are part of the solution or part of the problem of international terrorism.  Not only does the U.S. need to learn what the Pakistani military high command and ISI knew and when they knew it, but the U.S. also has to ask a series of questions about bin Laden's heavily fortified compound, such as:

• How long was Osama bin Laden there?
• Who knew and protected him?
• Who owned the land, how was it acquired, and from whom? Who designed the compound?
• Who installed the security systems? Are they commercially available or specialized?
• Given the multitude of military checkpoints in this military town, who did they stop and who did they allow to continue on their way into the compound?

To answer these questions and others, Pakistan's government needs to convene a special independent civilian parliamentary public inquiry, like the Watergate hearings or the 9/11 Commission. The commission's representation should reflect the parliament's party makeup, including both opposition and government parties, and ideally be chaired by a member of the opposition. It should have subpoena powers for the appearance of military and civilian government officials, and well as all bin Laden-related government documents from the military and ISI. Its findings should be made public. This is the only way to enable greater civilian authority over the country's counterterrorism efforts, drive more effective and transparent programs, and keep spoilers from undermining the cause.[[BREAK]]

The United States also needs to demand accountability from Pakistan's military. Pakistani action against national and international terrorist groups is vital to U.S. and Pakistan security, but it also is clear that the Pakistani military has seen action or inaction against those groups through an anti-India lens rather than through a counterterrorism commitment.

Contrast that with Pakistan's civilian government, which, despite getting little credit, has been making some progress. For example, after the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the civilian government investigated, issued indictments and made several arrests which, had the military had its way, wouldn't have happened at all. Putting more eggs into the civilian law enforcement and civilian police intelligence basket, as called for under the Kerry-Lugar-Berman law, is even more important now.

Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari has also fought to extend constitutional rights to the citizens of Pakistan's tribal areas, and provide them both the full rights and civilian law enforcement protection of the Pakistani Constitution. The military has stymied these efforts, but the civilian government has countered by establishing a joint commission with all the political parties to find a way to move forward in the country's most dangerous region. The parliament also adopted the novel idea of having oversight accountability committees chaired by the opposition so that investigations into Administration conduct are free of conflict of interest.

Even though the civilian government has been criticized, the truth is, it has stumbled when the military has stood it its way. The U.S. should build upon the Pakistani government's successes by strengthening its civilian institutions. It should offer a more significant assistance package to strengthen law enforcement, policy, civil services, and the judiciary's capabilities. It should also form a more collaborative partnership with civilian leaders at the provincial and district levels to help target U.S. economic assistance.

This strengthening starts with conditioning military support on demonstrable steps to combat violent extremists and ending its longstanding policy of support and sanctuary to such elements, Pakistan or foreign. The U.S. should continue to require, but also provide additional oversight of, on the State Department certification of Pakistani cooperation on a variety of security issues.

The U.S. should also continue to insist that the "security agencies of Pakistan are not materially or substantively subverting the political and judicial processes of Pakistan" and provide stronger support for civilian law enforcement agencies in combating jihadi groups, including prosecuting the small percentage of madrassas that engage in jihadi terrorist training.

The answers to the myriad questions about the Abbottabad compound will eventually emerge. But regardless of what we learn about the Pakistan military's role in the operation -- from incompetence to complicity -- the details surrounding Osama bin Laden's death further illustrate the need to hold that military accountable and to work with and empower Pakistan's civilian government.

Mark Schneider is Senior Vice President at the International Crisis Group.

The death of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Baitullah Mehsud in a U.S. drone strike in August of 2009 touched off a heated debate about the future of the militant outfit and its succession. Many believed Mehsud's death was a fatal blow to the TTP, and they have proven correct partially, if not fully. Soon after Mehsud's death, cracks emerged in the TTP's leadership, weakening the group's umbrella organization, which was once seen a mounting wave likely to engulf major parts of Pakistan.

Now that the United States has gotten rid of its Enemy No. 1 and founder of al-Qaeda after almost 10 years, a similar debate is raging about the future of the group that has spread its tentacles to different parts of the world and influenced countless individuals with its jihadist propaganda.

Osama bin Laden's death, in an audacious and stunning commando raid by U.S. SEALs in Pakistan's Abbottabad cantonment, is no doubt a hard blow to al-Qaeda. But it also carries adverse consequences for its TTP affiliate. The TTP's leadership is already underground, partly because of major military actions by Pakistani security forces in areas like Swat, Mohmand, and Waziristan, and partly because of the increasing number of drone strikes in the tribal areas over the past year. In a situation where the TTP was already in disarray, the killing of bin Laden, the hero of all militant groups and particularly their footsoldiers and new recruits, will prove disastrous for their morale.[[BREAK]]

Operations in Swat and South Waziristan have almost dismantled the organizational structure of the TTP, which has continuously attacked the Pakistani state, and whose leaders include Maulana Fazlullah and Hakimullah Mehsud. Both of them were, on one hand, a source of inspiration and courage for their fighters, but served as a symbol of dread for those opposed to their agendas.

The Taliban in Bajaur under the leadership of Maulvi Faqir Muhammad have already adopted a notable silence over the past year, keeping a distance from the TTP and other groups, while those fighters in neighboring Mohmand are already in hiding in the remote areas bordering eastern Afghanistan.

The Khyber-based Lashkar-e-Islam (LI) of Mangal Bagh, one of the feared militant outfits that operated just a few kilometers from Peshawar less than two years ago, has also retreated into the remote and mountainous Tirah Valley and engaged in a war with its staunch opponent, Ansar-ul Islam. Reports over recent weeks suggest that the locals from Zakhakhel tribe, once the host of LI, are now up in arms against the group and both sides are taking casualties on daily basis.

In spite of this chaos across the tribal areas, in the short run the TTP can unleash a campaign of attacks on soft targets to take their revenge for bin Laden's death, as well as to try to tell the world that they remain a serious threat. A similar bombing campaign from local Taliban fighters occurred in Peshawar and other parts of Pakistan following Pakistani military operations in Swat and South Waziristan in 2009.

In the longer run, however, Taliban footsoldiers are likely to loose faith in the group's power and come to believe that no place is safe for a terrorist, whatever his stature and position. The continuous failure of U.S. forces to locate and capture people like Osama bin Laden had been a source of courage and inspiration for those eager to join the ranks of the Taliban, and now that he's gone, some may be discouraged from joining the jihad.

Recently, the killing of Taliban godfather Colonel Imam by Hakimullah Mehsud's fighters, and continuous violations of the Kurram peace accord, which was negotiated by the Haqqani network, shows further divisions among the militant groups that operated under the umbrella of the TTP. The death of Colonel Imam, who was kidnapped and then held in captivity for months, highlighted growing divisions between Hakimullah Mehsud and the Haqqani network. By the same token, the Kurram peace accord was signed with the covert support of the Haqqani network to get the goodwill of the Shia Muslims living in upper Kurram close the Afghan border. However, local Taliban fighters have continued attacking the Shia, proving that they are not on the same page with the Haqqanis and even with their TTP leadership, which is drawing money from the Haqqanis and providing them local support.

The only groups under the Pakistani Taliban heading that are holding strong are those led by Hafiz Gul Bahadar and Maulvi Nazir in Waziristan, where Pakistani security forces are hesitating to launch an operation against them despite pressure from the U.S. Although these groups have suffered losses as a result of the drone strikes, their leadership structures are intact and their chiefs remain in close contact with the Haqqani network and al-Qaeda members.

However, the discovery of bin Laden so far inside Pakistan will further increase pressure from the U.S. on the Pakistani government to launch a serious military operation in North Waziristan, believed to be the hideout of Haqqani network. As the U.S. plans its Afghan withdrawal and NATO countries seem to be in a hurry to conclude the war, their pressure on Pakistan, particularly after bin Laden was killed so close to the Pakistani capital of Islamabad, is quite understandable. Therefore, any Taliban sympathizers in the Pakistani Army and security agencies will find themselves on slippery grounds in continuing to refuse to take decisive action against the three groups that have traditionally been considered ‘good' Taliban -- the Haqqani network, Hafiz Gul Bahadar, and Maulvi Nazir.

The talks about talks with the Afghan Taliban are also a source of concern for the TTP's leadership. Most of the Pakistani Taliban fighters consider their Afghan counterpart as a source of motivation and their fugitive chief Mullah Muhammad Omar as their leader. However, if the Afghan Taliban are actually considering talks with the Afghan government, the Pakistani Taliban will be left without an inspirational leader. 

Pakistan's religious parties, who used to avoid condemning Taliban violence in Pakistan, have also adopted a meaningful silence over bin Laden's death. No one is coming forward to criticize al-Qaeda, even for political point scoring, although several have organized protests against the U.S. raid in Abbottabad.

After years of not condemning Taliban attacks in Pakistan, the leadership of the Islamist parties may be rethinking their stances. Attacks on civilians and the leadership of those parties have provided enough food for thought for those parties to think that they are playing with fire, as demonstrated by two attacks on the pro-Taliban leader of the JUI-F, Maulana Fazlur Rehman. A Jamaat-e-Islami party rally was also attacked in Peshawar and several of its workers were killed and injured.

The JUI-F and JI's silence may be pragmatic. When I recently asked one JI leader why they don't oppose the Taliban and their violence in Pakistan, he told me, "We have no option but to stay silent. We are running schools, welfare organizations, and having our public meetings. Do you think we can continue all this if we come out in open against the Taliban?"

The JI's strident anti-Americanism is another issue, but this comment suggests Pakistan's Islamist politicians are making a covert compromise with the Taliban groups. Their leaders privately disagree with the agenda of the Pakistani Taliban, although they support the Afghan Taliban. The disenchantment of Pakistan's religious political parties with bin Laden and with the Pakistani Taliban is yet another blow to the TTP's morale.

Although the TTP and its allies are not likely to collapse immediately following the death of bin Laden, the Pakistani public and politicians' growing disenchantment with the TTP and its agenda, the organizational struggles of the various Taliban groups in the tribal areas, and increased pressure on Pakistan's security forces to go after militants in Waziristan suggests that the 'Talibanization' of Pakistan may, at last, be receding.

Daud Khattak is a Pashtun journalist currently working for the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Pashto-language station Radio Mashaal.

Osama bin Laden's death prompted celebrations in the US but elsewhere the response has been more sceptical

Expert commentators Colonel Tim Collins, former Royal Irish Regiment commander and counterinsurgency expert, AC Grayling, professor of philosophy at Birkbeck College, University of London, Mona Siddiqui, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Glasgow, and Giles Fraser, Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral give their views on the killing of Osama bin Laden.

1 Do you have any concerns over how the operation was handled?

AG I have concerns over the fact that it seems Osama bin Laden was shot out of hand rather than arrested and put on trial. The US and its Nato allies are meant to stand for due process in law and proper legal procedures. For no doubt very justifiable, pragmatic reasons, it was just an assassination.

TC No. It's achieved its aims so it was a successful mission.

MS Difficult to know because the story keeps changing.

GF It looks more and more like an assassination. So yes, it concerns me. They didn't want to see the rule of law being followed and Bin Laden put on trial.

2 Was Bin Laden a legitimate target for execution?

AG He was certainly a legitimate target for arrest and trial and I have no doubt that the pragmatists everywhere will say that if he had been put on trial it would have been a focus for terrorism and martyrdom and arrests. From the practical point of view you can understand the motivation but it's very hard to excuse it.

TC You have the most dangerous man in the world and the expectation that he is unlikely to want to be taken alive. You've a duty of care towards the people you send. They should be in no doubt — and if in doubt — they should take him on, so I think they did the right thing.

MS He was definitely a legitimate target for capture.

GF I don't support the death penalty. I'm against it.

3 Was it legitimate to send US forces into Pakistan without telling its government?

AG Given the fact that the Pakistani authorities have been very ambiguous in the war against terror, it's pretty obvious that part of their army and certainly part of their intelligence services have been supporting the Taliban and al-Qaida. It makes it very difficult and if the Americans had told the Pakistanis that they were going to go in, they probably would have alerted Bin Laden and he might have got away. From a practical point of view you can understand what happened, but from the international law point of view, of course they should have consulted the Pakistani authorities.

TC I'm not sure that [no consultation] happened, despite what the Pakistani and US governments say.

MS I'm sure the US have carried out other operations in Pakistan before without telling the government and the Pakistan government will allow them because they receive such large US funding.

GF Let's put that under the umbrella of realpolitik.

4 If he was unarmed, as has been reported, was it wrong for him to have been killed?

AG Yes, absolutely. In the idea, if we are going to live by our principles, we should do the tough thing — the harder thing — which is to arrest and put on trial. You don't just shoot down an unarmed person — that's what terrorists do and you don't want to emulate them.

TC I don't think he was killed for the sake of killing, in the same way that [the IRA's] Danny McCann in Gibraltar was shot. With someone who has taken as many innocent lives as Bin Laden and McCann, why wouldn't they take your life when confronted? Caution must be the watchword and unless he had made absolutely clear he was unarmed and did not wish to resist, then the safe thing to do would be to neutralise a target like that and kill him.

MS For a lot of people revenge would mean death, no matter how. Bin Laden had become de-humanised; yet he had also become more than human – and the US wanted to get rid of that symbol.

GF If he posed some threat to the people who were trying to arrest him, then I could understand that. If he did not, then it was wrong to shoot him.

5 Is it acceptable that other people were killed and wounded in the operation?

AG Only if they were putting up armed resistance and it was a case of self-defence. But it looks like there were women and children involved as well. This is the use of force in response to completely unbridled atrocities by al-Qaida. It just shows you Thucydides's point, which he made over 2,000 years ago, about how our whole moral outlook and behaviour is corrupted if we fight fire with fire and respond in the way that they respond.

TC There was a 40-minute gunfight with somebody. I think they'll find they can never win. On one hand, they're coming forward with the facts as they find them out and there's criticism that they keep changing the story: well that's what happens in life. On the other hand, if they were to rock back and refuse to discuss anything whilst they fully investigate everything and then come along six months later and say, "Here's what happened", with a definite debrief from everyone, then people will say there's a cover-up, so they can't win.

MS It's not legitimate that the deaths of innocents should have been caused.

GF I don't know the full circumstances. [Maybe] if you are going to arrest someone and people fire back and you are in the middle of a war…

6 Should greater efforts have been made to take him alive?

AC Efforts should have been made to take him alive in order for a due process of law to be engaged in.

TC If the world's been looking for the geezer for nine years and 265 days and they find him, parting his hair to the left isn't an option. What you've got to be able to do is hope that you actually encounter him and be prepared when you encounter him — him being the most dangerous man in the world — to protect yourself. And I think that's the best you can hope for. Why didn't they wing him like they do in the Hollywood movies? Because that's fantasy.

MS We should have taken him alive and put him on trial. The desire to kill him is being seen as synonymous with the end of a problem. It's not; it's just another death.

GF It doesn't look like they made any effort to take him alive. They should have.

7 Would it have been preferable to capture him and put him on trial?

AG It would have been preferable to do that — not because it would have been easier and not because it would have saved other lives in future — but because in the ideal, if we were to live up to the principles of our civilisation (or the ones we claim, anyway) it would have been the right thing to do. But practicality makes very, very different demands.

TC I don't think that was a consideration. Had he been captured, I think we would have had a whole series of issues about jurisdiction and where he would have been tried and by whom. It would have been very complicated. Now that he's dead, it's much less complicated. But ultimately, there was intelligence which could have been gleaned from that. The fact of the matter is it's probably neater that he wasn't captured but the right thing probably would have been to capture him.

MS It would have been difficult to give him a fair trial. I'm not saying he wouldn't have been guilty. But two of the pillars on which the west stands are freedom and justice – this action diminishes that status.

GF He was a war criminal and should have been put on trial. People are dying in that part of the world to establish the rule of law and human rights. Going in and shooting him undermines the whole of that purpose. A lot of people are using 'justice' as a euphemism for 'revenge'. It's absolutely wrong.

I've been wanting to add Jarvis Street to our visual histories series for a while. As much as every street in the city has changed over the years, the measure of difference on Jarvis is something to behold, particularly because there remain just a few hints at what it all used to look like. Prior to the 1940s, Jarvis Street was probably the most beautiful in all of Toronto, lined with the mansions of some of Toronto's wealthiest families.

And then, in 1947, the street was forever changed when many of its trees were ripped out to widen it for increased automobile traffic. Take a look at the before and after photos below to see what I mean. While the project might have been necessary to accommodate a growing city, it's sad to think of what was lost in the process.

From that point forward, the transformation on Jarvis continued until the street became five lanes wide and marked by a mostly soulless-looking a mix of commercial and high-rise residential properties. Nevertheless, traces of its former glory can still be spotted in the form of Euclid Hall (now the Keg Mansion) and the Gooderham residence (now a restaurant). Contemporary additions like the National Ballet have brought noteworthy architecture back to the street, but, as a whole, it still leaves much to be desired.

1890s

St. Lawrence Market

Old (old) City Hall

Jarvis south from Carlton

Horticultural Gardens (between Jarvis and Sherbourne)

1900s

Jarvis in 1903

The first Jarvis Collegiate

1910s

Jarvis Street Baptist Church (via the McCord Museum)

Allan Gardens Palm House

1920s

Juvenile Court Building at 311 Jarvis

The (then) new Jarvis Collegiate in 1924

1930s

Jarvis and Maitland

Jarvis and Carlton (northwest corner) 1931

1940s

Jarvis and Carlton pre-street widening 1947

Jarvis north of Carlton post-street widening 1947

1950s

Jarvis north of Lombard Street

1960s

Jarvis south of Bloor

Jarvis and Queen (looking south)

Jarvis and Queen (looking north)

The birth of the Gardiner 1963

Contemporary

Euclid Hall (the Keg Mansion via the Wikimedia Commons)

Jarvis looking south (via the Wikimedia Commons)

Former Gooderham House (via the Wikimedia Commons)

From above (Photo by Jennifer Tse)

Other posts in the series:

• A visual history of Yonge and Dundas
• A visual history of Yonge and Bloor
• A visual history of Queen, King and Roncesvalles
• A visual history of Yonge and Queen

Photos from the Toronto Archives unless otherwise noted.

Early last evening, we learned that the Royals called up the best first base prospect in baseball-Eric Hosmer, and demoted Kila Ka'aihue to AAA. Hosmer will play first base everyday and many Fake Teams readers, and prospect experts like Kevin Goldstein and Keith Law think he will hit right away at the big league level. As Kenny stated in his fanpost, the one he posted minutes before my Hosmer story last night, Hosmer should be picked up in all leagues. Royals Review questions the promotion, as I did, so head on over and check out what Royals fans think about the decision to promote Hosmer.

Astros closer Brandon Lyon was diagnosed with a partially torn rotator cuff that will not require surgery at this time, so fantasy owners should go out and add Mark Melancon if they need a closer. Melancon has pitched 15+ innings this year in relief with a 1.72 ERA, 2.57 FIP and 3.02 xFIP. He was a solid strikeout pitcher in the minors and last year when he had a K/9 of 9.28, but this year has seen it slip to 6.89. He also walks 3.45 batters per nine innings.

Astros outfielder Jason Bourgeois went 1-2 with a run scored, RBI, 2 walks and 2 SBs and is now hitting .391-.429-.500 with 11 SBs in just 46 at bats this season. Bourgeois has attempted 13 SBs and has been on base a total of 21 times, 3 via the walk, and 18 hits. Yet 4 of his hits have gone for extra bases (3 doubles and a triple), so he has been on first base 17 times and attempted 13 SBs. Gotta love the SBO%. Of course, this all assumes, he has not attempted to steal 3B. Even still, a very nice SBO%.

Reds outfielder Jay Bruce went 3-4 with a HR and 3 runs scored. Bruce has started the season hitting. 257-.328-.459 with 6 HRs, 15 RBIs, 19 runs scored and 4 SBs. Does he reach the 30 HR level in 2011?

More Roto Roundup after the jump:

Reds catcher Ryan Hanigan went 3-4 with a run scored and 3 RBIs on Thursday. Hanigan is hitting .246-.313-.393 with 2 HRs, 11 RBIs and an excellent 4-6 K/BB rate. 

Red starter Homer Bailey came off the DL to pitch a gem on Thursday, holding the Astros to one run on 4 hits, a walk and 7 strikeouts in 6 IP. Bailey was once the Reds top prospect but has yet to reach his potential due to sub-par performance and injury. Is 2011 the year he puts it all together?

Tigers starter Rick Porcello is another former top prospect who has struggled in the big leagues. Yet Porcello held the Yankees to two runs in 7 IP on Thursday, giving up 10 base runners while striking out 3. Porcello is now 2-2 with a 3.93 ERA and 1.45 WHIP. After starting the season giving up 10 runs in his first 2 starts, he has given up just 6 runs in his last 4 starts covering 26+ IP.

Giants stater Jonathan Sanchez put up all kinds of crooked numbers on Thursday, giving up 5 runs on 5 hits, 6 walks and 6 strikeouts. He threw 93 pitches, only 48 for strikes, of which 10 were first pitch strikes to the 24 batters he faced. For the season, Sanchez is 2-2 with a 3.55 ERA, 1.45 WHIP and a 46-26 K/BB rate. Not the Sanchez from 2010.

Rays starter David Price gave up just one unearned run and striking out 10 in 8 2/3rd innings on Thursday and was the Fake Teams Fantasy Player of the Day.

Red Sox starter John Lackey got knocked around by the Angels on Thursday, giving up 8 runs on 10 hits, 3 walks and just 1 strikeout in 4 IP. Lackey has been "lacking" this year, and last, as he is now 2-4 on the season, with a 7.16 ERA, 1.74 WHIP and a .317 BAA. Lackey has had 3 solid starts and 3 horrific starts this season, and you may want to bench Lackey till he can become a more consistent starter.

Angels shortstop Erick Aybar went 4-6 with 2 runs scored, an RBI and 2 SBs on Thursday. He is hitting .342-.364-.425 with 7 SBs this season.

Angels first baseman Mark Trumbo went 1-3 with a HR, 2 walks and 2 RBIs on Thursday and is now hitting .255-.288-.500 with 6 HRs and 17 RBIs on the season. He has homered in 3 of his last 4 games with 10 RBIs. With Kendrys Morales not close to returning, Trumbo should get more playing time going forward. He needs to learn to take a walk to become an everyday regular.

Trumbo's teammate Peter Bourjos went 3-4 with 4 runs scored vs the Red Sox and is now hitting .307-.350-.482 with 2 HRs, 9 RBIs and just 3 SBs this season. Where are the SBs? His 35-7 K/BB rate in 114 at bats needs to improve for sure.

Lance Berkman went 1-2 with a HR and 4 RBIs yesterday, and I still can't believe how well he is hitting this season. He is now hitting .392-.462-.775 with 10 HRs and 32 RBIs. I think the phrase "you can't stop Lance Berkman, you only hope to contain him" is certainly appropriate at this point. He will probably win owners many championships this season as he was probably a late round pick in most drafts this season.

It appears Tony LaRussa agrees with me, as he again went to Eduardo Sanchez in the 9th inning yesterday. Sanchez got the ball in the 9th inning, a day after giving up a game winning HR to Marlins outfielder Mike Stanton on Wednesday. Sanchez earned his 3rd save of the season, but he did walk 2 and induced Mike Stanton to hit into a double play after walking the leadoff batter. As I mentioned to another fantasy owner yesterday, it says alot for TLR to go back to Sanchez after he gave up the HR on Wednesday.

Phillies second baseman Chase Utley is going to get some game action in the next few days as he was assigned to the Phillies extended spring training. He will then rehab with one of the Phillies minor league affiliates. Utley is probably a few weeks away, but this is music to fantasy owners.

Royals outfielder Melky Cabrera went 3-4 with a HR, 3 runs scored and 4 RBIs on Thursday and is now hitting .293-.317-.466 with 3 HRs, 20 runs scored, 20 RBIs and 3 SBs. Cabrera is having a solid start to the season after a sub-par season last year.

Poll

Will Eric Hosmer hit better than .280 with the Royals this season?

• Yes
• No

  51 votes | Results

FRINGE: Jeff Pinkner and J.H. Wyman Tease ‘The Day We Died’

May 6, 2011 by Marisa Roffman

FRINGE fans were thrown for a loop last week when upon Peter’s entry into the doomsday machine, he ended up 15 years in the future. Not quite the universe destruction that had been hinted at, but the future Peter woke up in wasn’t so pretty.

Dying to know what happens next? I chatted with FRINGE executive producers Jeff Pinkner and J.H. Wyman about the show’s trip to the future, what it means for season four, why they jumped forward and more…

I think it’s safe to say that the end of “The Last Sam Weiss” — when Peter is transported 15 years into the future — is one of those moments in a show that is actually game-changing.
Jeff Pinkner: If you could allow us to tease for a second, it’s both game-changing watching it and it’s more game-changing when it’s over.

Wow. My friend pointed out to me after last week’s episode that the hour could have very easily have worked as a great season finale, so if you guys had that up your sleeve for the penultimate episode, what the heck do you have planned for us for the finale?
J.H. Wyman: [Laughs] That’s a good position to be in. That’s great.

What can you tease about “The Day We Died”?

JW: Well, we definitely — look, we knew where we were going from the beginning of the season and we had an end in mind that maintained to be our end. Like always, Jeff and I try and recontextualize the end of the season to make it mean something new and make the fans look at the show a different way going into next season. And we feel that’s what we’ve accomplished this year, as well.

JP: I think by way of tease, the notion of jumping forward to the future — I think sometimes, as we’ve always said, our show is a lot about choices and sometimes it’s only by looking back at things from the future can you really tell the consequences certain actions had. And as we said earlier, the point of the episode is to recontextualize everything that’s happened this year. And there are certain events we just wanted to jump past because what’s more interesting is the consequence of those events than the events themselves.

When a science fiction show jumps into the future, the question becomes whether that is the set future or if anything can be done to prevent events from happening. Will that be dealt with in the finale?
JP: That’s absolutely — I think you’re asking the exact right question and that will sort of be the question of the episode: whether or not our characters are successful, that’s the point.

You mentioned jumping forward in time to explore the consequences of events, and it seems like we’ve missed a lot of important things in the meantime — Peter is an agent, Broyles has a freaky weird eye, etc. Will we be getting backstory on some of the more major changes?

JW: There are stories and those things are there for a reason. You know, we know how Broyles got there, we know how Peter got there, we know what they’re referring to in conversations that are kind of vague to the viewer, but specific between themselves. We wanted to use these type of logical and sometimes illogical progressions of characters in the future to expand our audiences’ imagination and allow them to fill in some blanks, you know? “I wonder how that transpired? How did that come about? That’s really interesting.” We always pose questions and we always plant the seed and I think, by now, we try and answer most of them. Maybe someday you’ll understand more.

Well, we have all of season four to find these things out! Will this jump forward in the future alter the way stories are told, much like the flashforward device was introduced in the season three finale of LOST?

JW: I don’t think we’re necessarily introducing a new paradigm.

JP: We’ve told stories out of our timeline before — we’ve gone to the past a couple of times — but as Joel just said, I don’t think we’re introducing literally a new paradigm that we’re going to do frequently. But there are some events in the episode that will dramatically shift the paradigm of the show.

And with the jump forward, I don’t think I spotted Nina or Lincoln in the promos. Are they there in the final hour of the season?

JW: Hm.

JP: Some of them are, some of them aren’t.

JW: Yep.

Some of the people I just mentioned in my question or just in general?

JP: It’s both. In the context of the storytelling, you’ll understand — or at least you’ll have the strong ability to surmise — why the characters that are or are not in the episode…why that is.

It almost seems like we’re going back to the beginning in many ways with Walter, locked up and bearded — yet Walternate is still there. Are fans supposed to be confused at this point how they could both be existing in one universe?

JW: I think you will definitely have the answer to that when you watch the show. You will understand conceptually what has happened — why you’re seeing what you’re seeing.

What about Peter and Olivia? In the present they seemed to doing well, with her declaring her love and him embracing his inner Han Solo and didn’t exactly say the words back. But how are they doing in the future?

JP: I don’t think he said the words out loud, but our intent…he was equaling her statement with his eyes and actions in that moment. I know some people read it that [it wasn't reciprocated], but it wasn’t intended that way.

And the future Peter and Olivia?

JP: [Pause] I think, Marisa, [that answer] falls under the category of spoiling one of the cool moments. And not a wildly significant one, but in the context of the episode, you’ll find that out real quickly.

Is Peter aware of Fauxlivia’s kid in the future? You have teased he would find out before the end of the season…

JP: Um…whether or not he’s aware, it probably won’t play a big role in the episode.

Are we going to be spending the bulk of the hour in the future?

JW: Hm.

JP: Yeah, I think it’s safe to say the majority of the storytelling takes place in the future.

Before I let you go, is there anything else you want to tease for the fans before they watch “The Day We Died”?

JW: We feel it’s set up to — if anyone feels a fraction what you said at the beginning of the call, Marisa, we’ll be happy. If they’re saying, “How could they outdo ['The Last Sam Weiss']?” we’re thrilled with that. We feel anything we give [to spoil] would take away from that experience. [The finale] will definitely change the way you look at the program going forward.


This is it guys…the final episode of season three. Are you ready to have your mind blown?

And if you need a further incentive to watch the episode live tonight, not only do you get the chance to win props if you check into GetGlue, but Pinkner and Wyman will be live tweeting the finale! Make sure to follow @JPFRINGE and @JWFRINGE to see what they have to say about “The Day We Died”!

Source:givememyremote.com

Christina Norman is out as CEO of OWN (NSDQ: DISCA), the Oprah Winfrey Network, the victim of dissatisfaction over poor ratings for one of the most hyped launches in cable history. Peter Liguori, the COO of joint venture partner Discovery Networks, is taking the helm on an interim basis. The network, which launched Jan. 1, is a joint venture of Discovery Communications and Winfrey’s Harpo Productions. Discovery has at least $215 million in investment riding on the new channel, with plans to invest more. [Release below.]

The move is being spun as a switch from launch to execution, with an effort not to make it look like the highly regarded Norman is being replaced by Liguori. Norman was recommended by Tom Freston, her former boss at Viacom (NYSE: VIA), who has been an adviser on the new network. She came on
in early 2009, joining a project that already had seen some turnover and that encounter more. Last month, distribution head Alan Singer left to head programming for Charter (NSDQ: CHTR) Communications.

Former Fox exec Liguori came in late in the process, joining Discovery at the end of 2009, nearly a year after Norman. His involvement with OWN was expected, particularly given his strengths in growing new channels with FX as the prime example. The company says his immediate takeover of the network reflects a “more long-term focus on business and creative strategy, development and execution.”

Does it also reflect a power shift? Winfrey remains chairman but where Norman reported to her and the OWN board, Liguori keeps his day job as COO of Discovery Networks.

More to come.
————————————————

PETER LIGUORI NAMED INTERIM CEO OF OWN: OPRAH WINFREY NETWORK

Discovery Communications’ Chief Operating Officer adds OWN Leadership Responsibilities Following Departure of Christina Norman

Los Angeles, CA and Silver Spring, MD – Peter Liguori has been named Interim Chief Executive Officer of OWN: Oprah Winfrey Network, it was announced today by Oprah Winfrey, Chairman of OWN, and David Zaslav, President and CEO of Discovery Communications.  The appointment reflects a transition from a launch phase to a more long-term focus on business and creative strategy, development and execution following the network’s debut on January 1, 2011.

Effective immediately, Liguori steps into the role held by Christina Norman, who led the successful launch of the multi-platform joint venture.  In addition to his Chief Operating Officer (COO) responsibilities for Discovery Communications, Liguori will oversee the network as it continues building a slate of new and original content, including the October debut of Rosie O’Donnell’s new talk show ROSIE and the launch of OPRAH’S NEXT CHAPTER in early 2012.

“I want to thank Christina for her important accomplishments, incredible passion and many sacrifices in helping to launch the network,” said Winfrey.  “With the final taping of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” only a few weeks away, I will soon be able to devote my full energies to OWN.  This is a natural point of transition, and I am confident that Peter, as an integral part of the launch of OWN, will be a terrific partner for me going forward.  He is one of the smartest, most creative executives in media, and I look forward to his leadership as we build our development slate and work toward the launch of OPRAH’S NEXT CHAPTER.  Over the remainder of the year, Peter and I will work together to recruit a permanent CEO for OWN’s next phase of growth.”

“Joining OWN was a great opportunity, and launching it successfully and drawing more than 67 million viewers is one of my proudest achievements,” said Norman.  “My thanks to Oprah and David for entrusting me with this brand and giving me the opportunity to launch OWN.  As I move on to my next challenge, I am confident the strong foundation we have built will position the network to achieve great things.”

“Peter is Discovery’s creative leader, and highly qualified to assume the leadership at OWN for the next phase of growth,” said Zaslav.  “Christina did a great job launching OWN with long-term support from both advertising and affiliate partners.  Peter will now ensure that OWN reaches its full creative potential with great programming that delivers on Oprah’s vision, mission and brand.”

OWN debuted on January 1, 2011, and delivered double digit primetime increases across all key demos vs. Discovery Health a year ago for 1Q.  Strong performing series include SEASON 25: OPRAH BEHIND THE SCENES, OUR AMERICA WITH LISA LING and THE JUDDS.  Key upcoming series debuts include WHY NOT? WITH SHANIA TWAIN and FINDING SARAH, with the Duchess of York Sarah Ferguson.
Among his primary responsibilities as Discovery’s COO, Liguori oversees Discovery’s interests in its joint venture channels, The Hub, 3net and OWN, as well as providing leadership for the company’s operational organizations, including Marketing, Discovery Studios, Corporate Communications and Corporate Affairs, Business Affairs, Research, Digital Media and Commerce, and Media Technology, Production and Operations.  In addition to his operational role, he also oversees Discovery’s cross-company global Creative Council with a focus on maximizing the value of the company’s content, marketing resources and overall corporate assets.

Before joining Discovery in 2009, Liguori most recently served as president of entertainment for Fox Broadcasting Company, where he was responsible for all Fox program development and marketing.  Prior to assuming that position in 2005, Liguori was president and CEO of News Corp.‘s FX Networks since 1998, overseeing business and programming operations for FX and Fox Movie Channel.  Under his leadership, over a five-year period, FX grew from an emerging network reaching 39 million homes to a top-five basic cable network reaching more than 84 million homes and recording all-time highs in ratings and revenue.

Liguori joined Fox/Liberty Networks in 1996 as Senior Vice President, Marketing for a new joint venture, which now includes Fox Sports Net, FX, Fox Sports World, SPEED and National Geographic Channel.  Prior to joining Fox, Liguori was Vice President, Consumer Marketing at HBO.  He also held several positions in HBO’s Home Video Division, including Vice President, Marketing and Senior Vice President, Marketing, where his duties included the creation and implementation of marketing programs for all HBO Home Video product expansion and the development of its programming line-up.

Liguori also has experience as a producer of the widely acclaimed independent feature film, “Big Night.” Prior to HBO, he worked in advertising at Ogilvy & Mather and Saatchi & Saatchi.

Related

• SEC Watch: Discovery Boosts Funding For Oprah Winfrey Network
• Industry Moves: Former MTV Exec Christina Norman Joins Oprah-Discovery JV OWN As CEO
• Oprah OWNs Prime Flipboard Real Estate In First-Of-A-Kind Deal For iPad Mag
• Redesigned CNN.com: More Opinion, Entertainment, Integrated iReport And Oprah
• SEC Watch: New Discovery COO Liguori Gets $200,000 Signing Bonus
• Ex-Fox Entertainment Head Ligouri Joins Discovery As COO

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Indianapolis, Indiana

10:36 A.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY:  I just want to mention a couple of things before I get started here.  First, as you all know, we had an employment report today that showed private sector payrolls increasing by 268,000 in April, which makes 14 consecutive months of private sector employment growth.  During that period, the economy added 2.1 million private sector jobs, including more than 800,000 jobs since the beginning of the year.

This is obviously good news.  The February number was revised upwards to 261,000 private sector jobs created, and the March number was estimated upward to 231,000 -- very, very solid; an average of approximately a quarter of a million private sector jobs created each month for three straight months. 

We're pleased about that.  We obviously have a lot more work to do.  The recession cost the American labor force 8 million jobs and we're still digging ourselves out of that hole. 

Next I'd like to just remind you about where we're going today.  The President will first visit Allison Transmission, which is a leader in hybrid technology and the world’s largest manufacturer of fully automatic transmissions for medium and heavy-duty commercial vehicles, tactical military vehicles, and hybrid compulsion systems.  This visit is meant to highlight the President’s commitment to diversifying our energy requirements, to reduce our dependence on imported oil, and to ensure that we are leaders in clean energy technology in the 21st century.

Finally, I just wanted to note that when we go to Fort Campbell today, the President and Vice President will be visiting with members of the 101st Airborne Division, which, if you don't know, has such a remarkable history, beginning in World War II, where they were the first allied forces to set foot on occupied France territory; fought valiantly through World War II; were a vital division during the Cold War, Vietnam, Operation Desert Storm and then obviously in the Iraq war, and most recently in Afghanistan.  Extraordinary service, extraordinary sacrifice.

What is less known is that it was elements of the 101st Airborne Division who were sent by President Eisenhower to Little Rock to ensure that the “Little Rock Nine” attended Little Rock Central High School.  It was also elements of the 101st that were sent to help make sure that James Meredith was able to attend as the first African American at the University of Mississippi.  So it is a noble, noble history.  And both the President and Vice President look forward to that visit.

With that I will take your questions.

Q    Jay, the President has said he doesn't want to spike the ball.  But he’s speaking to troops.  Doesn't he expect a celebratory mood there in the wake of bin Laden’s death?  And does that kind of go against that mood that he’s trying to -- a non-gloating mood?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don't expect you’ll hear the President spiking the ball or gloating when he speaks to troops returning from Afghanistan today.  The point he will make is that while the successful mission against Osama bin Laden was an historic and singular event, it does not by any means mean that we are finished with the war against al Qaeda.  The fight goes on.

And one of the reasons why the President refocused our resources and attention on the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, increased our commitment there in terms of troops -- which these troops represent -- is because he believed very strongly that al Qaeda central was the number one target -- should be the number one target of that effort.

He’s going to speak to these troops to thank them for their service.  They have fought valiantly and incurred significant casualties in that effort.  So there’s nothing -- there’s no intent to gloat at all in that regard.

Q    Is he meeting with members of the teams that carried out the operation to get Osama bin Laden?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can say is that he is meeting with special operators -- some special operators who were involved in that, but that is all I can say.

Q    On the bin Laden operation, Al Arabia is reporting that al Qaeda is now -- may not come as a shock -- threatening to attack the U.S. in retaliation for killing bin Laden.  Is the President aware of that?  And what’s his thinking on that?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we are aware of it, seen the reports.  What it does do, obviously, is acknowledge the obvious, which is that Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday night by U.S. forces.

Q    Is there any more concern now that there’s been --

MR. CARNEY:  We're being extremely vigilant.  You can ask questions of the Department of Homeland Security as well, but the -- we’re quite aware of the potential for activity and are highly vigilant on that matter for that reason. 

One of the things we saw I think last night was the notice that DHS put out with regard to the information collected about the consideration at least of a terrorist plot against American railways back in February of 2010.  The fact that the world’s most wanted terrorist might have been considering further terror plots against the United States is not a surprise, but it reminds us, of course, that we need to remain ever vigilant.    

Q    Jay, can you at least tell us whether this group of special operators that you referred to will include Navy SEALs or helicopter pilots --

MR. CARNEY:  I’m not going to say anything more about that.  It is extremely important that I say nothing more.

Q    If we’re done with the bin Laden questions, or are you not?  On another matter, the Republican congressional leaders appear to be backing away from attempting to pass their Medicare plan prior to the 2012 election it’s widely reported today.  What does the President think about that?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would say simply that the talks that the Vice President led yesterday, the initial meeting of the members of Congress and team from the administration, was productive.  And we certainly think that it’s a good thing if those who are participating in those negotiations understand that in order to achieve compromise, we need to find common ground. 

We obviously have -- the President has laid out his plan, and there are elements of stark contrast with the House Republican’s budget that passed.  What we’re looking for now is where we can find some common ground to achieve a goal that Republicans and Democrats share, which is reducing the debt significantly, getting our fiscal house in order and, as the President sees it, while making sure that we protect the investments we need to protect in order to continue to grow the economy, continue to create jobs and educate our children.

Q    Does the President have any reaction to the report today that CEO pay is up 25 percent over last year  --

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t heard him react to that, no.

Q    Jay, can you tell us anything about the President’s immigration speech next week and any other events from the week ahead?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can say is that the speech will reflect the President’s continued commitment to find a bipartisan way to create a bipartisan -- rather comprehensive immigration reform.  As I think I said earlier this week, the fact that we were not able to achieve that in the first two years only means that we need to refocus our efforts and try to find that compromise.  In the past, obviously there has been Republican support for the kind of comprehensive immigration reform that is necessary and we hope that there will be again in the future.  

Q    -- rest of the week ahead?

MR. CARNEY:  I do have that, if you’re ready for it.

Q    Can you field more questions after?

MR. CARNEY:  Do you want to ask those questions first, and then I’ll do --

Q    In April of 2008, President Obama -- or then candidate Obama appeared at a gas station in Indiana -- gas was at $3.60 a gallon -- said we need to vote for change, a new set of policies. He’s returning to Indiana now with gas well over $4.00 a gallon. What does it say about the success he has had over the last three years in dealing with the fuel issue, the gas issue?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think you’ve heard the President speak quite a lot lately about the impact of high gas prices on Americans’ pocketbooks and wallets.  We’re very concerned about it.  We do note the steep drop in oil prices in the last couple of days.  And I would also note that one of the things the Attorney General task force will be looking at is coordinating with state attorneys general to make sure that we don’t have a what I’ve heard described as a “rockets-and-parachutes phenomenon,” where prices at the pump rocket up when oil prices rocket up, and yet they come down in a parachute fashion when oil prices go down.  So we want to make sure that a drop in oil prices is appropriately reflected in a drop in gas prices at the pump.

Q    Does the President believe gas prices will drop in the coming months?  The futures market seem to be indicating they will.

MR. CARNEY:  We don’t predict markets here, obviously.  And we have seen a drop.  We have -- but they go up and down.  The President, as you know, has said many times that there are no silver bullet solutions here, no short-term solutions, and that’s why he is committed to -- while we are doing the things in the short term that we hope can provide some relief, the big challenge is the long-term solution that weans us off our dependence on foreign oil, that diversifies our energy supply, that allows us to build clean energy industries in the United States that both enhance our national security and provide quality jobs in this country. 

So that’s been his commitment; you’ve heard him speak about that many times.  You’ll hear him speak about it again today in Indiana.

Q    What does the President think about all the Monday morning quarterbacking on the Osama bin Laden operation?  Does he think it’s helpful -- all the criticism and the questioning about how it went down?  Does it --

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t heard much criticism about how it went down.  What I’ve heard is a pretty universal acclamation of the fact that a remarkable team of U.S. personnel conducted one of the most -- one of the riskiest operations imaginable flawlessly, and limited collateral damage and civilian casualties, achieved their goal of bringing Osama bin Laden to justice, and returned safely every single American.

So I think that is what most people have focused on, appropriately, because it was a remarkable achievement that was the product of years of intelligence work, years of training in the case of the personnel involved in the actual mission, and some very bold decision-making by the President and others to bring this about.

Q    Jay, how did he feel about yesterday’s events in New York?

MR. CARNEY:  He felt very good about it.  I think he -- the meetings with firefighters, with the police, with families and loved ones of victims were powerful events.  And I think he understands that this is a bittersweet moment, especially for those who lost loved ones in 9/11, both in New York, in Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon.  And he was very glad he made the trip.

Q    Jay, the President won Indiana by less than 30,000 votes in ’08.  Does he think that it’s as tough or even tougher political environment right now for him to get support for his agenda or even win reelection?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think that it’s a long time before next year’s election, and he’s focused on the things that a President needs to be focused on -- our national security -- his focus on that I think has been quite evident in the last several days; and the economy, which is what he’ll be focusing on today in Indiana.

I think that the President firmly believes that making the right policy decisions tends to be beneficial come political season, but for him, at least, political season is a long way off.

Q    -- we’re flying into another swing state.

MR. CARNEY:  The fact is that this -- Allison Transmission is, as I just read to you, a major manufacturer of the kind of the technology that the President believes is going to help us win the future in the 21st century.  So I think we go where the action is, and in this case, this company is where the action is.

Q    Did the President watch the Fox News Republican debate last night?

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t asked him.  I don't know.  I think there was some basketball on last night -- maybe there wasn’t, maybe that's tonight -- so I don't know.  I think the Bulls are playing tonight, is that right?  Well, come on, guys. 

Yes.  Okay, I can do the week ahead if you don't have any more questions.

On Monday, the President will meet with heads of the Chinese Strategic Economic Dialogue delegation at the White House. 

On Tuesday, the President will travel, as you know, to the El Paso, Texas area to deliver a speech on comprehensive immigration reform.  He will then travel to Austin, Texas, before returning to Washington, D.C.

On Wednesday, the President will participate in a CBS Town Hall at the Newseum.  In the evening, the President and the First Lady will host a celebration of American poetry and prose by welcoming accomplished poets, musicians and artists, as well as students, from across the country to the White House.

On Thursday, the President will deliver remarks at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast. 

And on Friday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

Q    The town hall is Wednesday, not Thursday?  Initially it was --

MR. CARNEY:  That’s correct, it’s Wednesday. 

All right, thanks, guys.

END
10:52 A.M. EDT

Looks like the stars aligned for Joel Edgerton. The man who earned new fans though Animal Kingdom after years in the trenches was a possible lead for both The Bourne Legacy and Snow White and the Huntsman. But Bourne slipped his grasp and now he has passed on Snow White and the Huntsman. Instead he'll be a key part of the film being called Kill Bin Laden, which is the Kathryn Bigelow picture that focuses on a raid intending to take out the Al Qaeda leader. The LA Times [1] says that the Australian actor will play a special operative in the movie, and will be part of an ensemble cast portraying the commando/SEAL unit that targeted Bin Laden. He was mentioned as a possibility for the film earlier this week [2], and it's great to see indication that things are moving forward. So what else do we know about the film? Not a lot at this point. It's the movie that was said to be a 'black ops thriller' when first discussed. Not long ago rumor surfaced that Bin Laden was an integral part of the film, but emails from writer and producer Mark Boal (who also fulfilled those roles on The Hurt Locker) seemed to kill that report. But when Osama Bin Laden was reported killed this past Sunday, suddenly talk of this project intensified, and the Bin Laden angle was confirmed. More to the point, the original conception revealed for the movie was to follow an unsuccessful bid to take out the terror leader. Real life intervened, and we could well see a film with a 'happier' ending. We'll likely see a picture that includes a long sequence replicating the firefight in Pakistan that took out Bin Laden, but earlier this week it seemed like research and conversations were still ongoing. All I can say at this point is that, given that the killing of Osama Bin Laden is likely to be filmed soon by someone, I'd rather this be the team that does the work. And this is great casting, and almost an ironic break for Joel Edgerton. He lost Bourne to Jeremy Renner, who probably wouldn't have his current career without The Hurt Locker. If things go well with Kill Bin Laden, Joel Edgerton could find himself in high(er) demand soon. [1] http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/05/joel-edgerton-signs-on-for-kathryn-bigelows-bin-laden-movie.html [2] http://www.slashfilm.com/inevitable-death-bin-laden-film-gritty-indie-big-studio-effort/

Accurately predicting a draft project's growth is tricky business, though oddly enough we should feel relatively comfortable at Ernie Grunfeld's ability to do so, given his track record with the Wizards.  Of course, he's never drafted that way in the mid-to high-lottery, but that's your 2011 rookie class.  Opinions have varied almost as widely as the number of available choices, so let's have a quick and dirty recap.

The Kyrie Irving crowd will point to the possibility of Nick Young leaving and needing the back court help.  But even if he stays; a backcourt of John Wall, Jordan Crawford, Kyrie Irving, and Young Sushi?  Good NIGHT!  And no less than THREE on rookie contracts for at least THREE more years??  Maybe Brandon Knight fans run the same argument.  But then you run into the Portland Trail Blazers problem: an intriguing rotation, but can you find minutes for all of them?

More below the jump.

And of course, the Wizards still have a few piddling issues elsewhere.  The Derrick Williams crowd says he can play the 3 or the 4, it's Trevor Booker with three-point range!  It's Danny Granger on rollerskates!  Another tweener, the others groan.  Not quick enough to defend the 3 or big enough to defend the 4.  Nonsense, they reply!  His frenetic offense will take away their defensive legs and how many true 4s are left in the NBA anyway?

The Enes Kanter crowd screams low post scoring that doesn't involve putbacks or twisting fadeaway layups that get blocked by opposing point guards!  Maybe he'll rebound, too!   Uh huh, the others say.  Based on the mountain of available evidence and the domination of Josh McRoberts in braces?  AND he's a Euro.  [Editor's note: I might be willing to do it just to stick it to Josh McRoberts.]  Not like any you've seen, they reply.  If the Ottoman Empire had him back in World War I, we'd all be speaking Turkish.

The Harrison Barnes crowd wonders why the hell he skipped the draft.

Terrence Jones fans agree he's no first option, but also argue we don't need him to be.  If there's any team that will develop him and find the time to build his confidence back up on the floor, it's Washington.  While you hope for a feature player drafting this high in the lottery, sometimes you just have to hold your breath, and hope for a Gilbert Arenas-like work ethic.

Chad Ford believes the Wizards should take Jan Vesely because he's pogostick AND he STARTED in the Euroleague.  Let's hope Ernie is listening ... so what if he can't shoot?  Hey, the Wiz need someone who can run with John Wall and jump!  I guess Chad Ford forgot we already drafted a quicksilver forward with leaping ability who can't shoot ... except Trevor Booker plays defense AND has a super kewl nickname.

The Bismack Biyombo crowd says they did that weird bone test to figure out his age and he could be as young as sixteen!  He has ferocious energy and a lunch pail work ethic!  I'm sure a mentor that hosts Lap Dance Tuesday will be a solid influence on a teenager.  Yay for his first words in English: "Champagne Room!"

No more than one volume shooting combo guard, Kemba Walker fans.

Jonas Valanciunas fans may post below, so Rook may ban you.

Poll

Regardless of draft position, which player do you feel best projects to fill the needs of a burgeoning Washington contender? If you want a different option, post it below and I'll throw it up here.

• Kyrie Irving/Brandon Knight
• Derrick Williams
• Enes Kanter
• Terrence Jones
• Jan Vesely
• Bismack Biyombo
• Kemba Walker
• Jonas Valanciunas

  94 votes | Results

As Mike Wells points out, the Houston Rockets are also interviewing Coach Frank Vogel for their open head coaching position.  Not only will the Pacers interim head coach get an interview, but Kelvin Sampson (former IU coach), Laurence Frank (former IU team manager), and Mike Woodson (Broad Ripple high school star, IU player) have interviewed as well.  It's good to be a Hoosier if you are interested in the Rockets position!

Not too much else going on in the world of links, but check out the links of interest after the jump...

• Vogel interviews with the Rockets | Pacers Insider blog | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com

• Pacers interim coach Vogel interviews for Rockets job | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com
  Frank Vogel might want to be coach of the Indiana Pacers, but he's not waiting for an interview. Vogel interviewed for the Houston Rockets' coaching position Thursday, according to multiple people with knowledge of the situation. 

• As pairing of Hoosiers Conley, Randolph thrives, the Grizzlies become a force | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com Jeff Rabjohn reports on Michael Conley and Zach Randolph getting it done for Memphis.
• Revenue Sharing and the NBA - Blazer's Edge Dave lays out a nice discussion of revenue sharing as integral to the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations in the NBA.
• The Point Forward " Posts Some curious last-second plays in Game 2s "
• Ron Artest suspended one game for flagrant foul on J.J. Barea - NBA - SI.com Ronnie went Ronnie when things went south for the Lakers in Game 2.
• Houston Rockets Interview Frank Vogel - Houston Fox 26
• Dolan told Walsh that Knicks won't rehire Thomas: source - NYPOST.com
• Jeff Teague Continues To Impress In Hawks' Series Against Bulls - SBNation.com

Jeff Teague played a few more minutes per night as a second-year man during the 2010-11 regular season than he did as a rookie the year before. He scored more points per 36 minutes, improved his field goal and 3-point shooting percentages, showed an improved touch out to about 15 feet, and rebounded a little more often. He assisted on a slightly lower percentage of his Atlanta Hawks teammates' baskets, but he also turned the ball over a bit less.

On balance, then, the numbers say that Teague got better this year; this is to be expected as a player moves from Year 1 as a professional to Year 2. But whether you like your measuring sticks advanced — a regular-season Player Efficiency Rating of 14.6 put him below the league average of 15 — or, um, unadvanced, I guess ("Larry Drew must have seen something he didn't like to only give the kid 14 minutes a night!"), you were hard-pressed to argue that Teague is really a key piece for the Hawks right now.

Sure, he'd had a couple of nice late-season games — 24 points, five steals, three assists and three blocks against the Portland Trail Blazers in March, for example, or 21 points on 10 shots in just 21 minutes against the Indiana Pacers just before the start of the playoffs. But the consensus opinion seemed to be that, whether he deserved a crack or not, he wouldn't really be a player to be reckoned with this postseason.

Then, starting point guard Kirk Hinrich hurt his leg as the Hawks closed out their first-round Eastern Conference playoff series against the Orlando Magic. The severe right hamstring strain would render him a spectator for at least the start of Atlanta's second-round matchup with the top-seeded Chicago Bulls, and there were no other legitimate options for Drew at the one, so Teague was pushed into the starting lineup for just the 11th time in 150 career NBA games.

The smart money (and dumb money like mine, too) pegged Teague's insertion as unfavorable for Atlanta. The thinking was that Derrick Rose, Chicago's MVP trigger-man, would eat the still-ripening Wake Forest product for breakfast (no LeBron), pacing the Bulls to a blitzkrieg of the Hawks en route to the Eastern Conference Finals.

But a funny thing happened on the way to a too-easy blowout: Jeff Teague has played like a man bent on making a reputation for himself. And he's actually doing it.

In Atlanta's stunning Game 1 upset, Teague hustled for nearly 45 of the game's 48 minutes, using his quickness and athleticism (and, as Zach Lowe noted at The Point Forward, quite a bit of help from Josh Smith and Al Horford) to hound Rose into some early misses. Combine the defensive effort with his not-eye-popping-but-steady-enough contributions on the offensive end — 10 points on 5-for-11 shooting, five assists and, most importantly, just one turnover — and the series' most glaring mismatch turned into a much more even affair than most expected, helping the Hawks wrest home-court advantage from Tom Thibodeau's team.

The Bulls evened the series Wednesday night with an ugly Game 2 victory, but Teague turned in another strong performance. As Bret LaGree wrote at Hawks blog Hoopinion, he again "did as good a job on Derrick Rose as can reasonably be expected" defensively, and stepped up his offensive game, making 50 percent of his field-goal attempts and going 6-for-7 from the foul line to score 21 points, and posting three assists, three rebounds, two blocked shots and no turnovers in just under 40 minutes of run.

At times on Wednesday, Teague looked like the steadiest, most collected player on the court for Atlanta. Admittedly, that's not saying a ton when you consider how scattered the Hawks played. But it's damn sure not nothing, especially for a second-year bit-parter making just his second playoff start against the league's newly minted "it" boy.

The showing impressed CBSSports.com's Royce Young:

Teague's effort in the first two games of this series is probably the second best thing the Hawks are taking back with them to Atlanta (a win being the first). [...] In Game 2, he outplayed the guy that was just handed the MVP trophy by David Stern before the game.

That, along with the snatching of homecourt in Game 1, means the Hawks have a chance.

It also drew the comedic ire of Matt McHale at Bulls blog By the Horns:

Oh, and could somebody, anybody, do something about Jeff Teague (21 points, 7-for-14, 6-for-7 from the line, zero turnovers)? Teague is playing so well that the Bulls are praying for Kirk Hinrich to miraculously heal overnight.

While Hinrich works on getting back on the court, the staunch defender, cerebral player and former Bull is doing what he can to prepare Teague for what he'll see on the court, according to Ken Sugiura of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Drew's decision to bring Kirk Hinrich to Chicago despite not having hopes of playing him because of his hamstring injury proved fruitful. Hinrich, a former Bull, offered Jeff Teague and others insight on the Chicago roster.

"He's always in my ear, every timeout, telling me things I can do, how I can guard Derrick Rose on a certain play or what he sees on offense, plays to call, things like that," Teague said.

To be fair, this reservoir of goodwill and positive impressions could dry up in the space of 12 hours. It's possible that Teague has difficulty sustaining his sound, careful offensive play and turns in a less-than-stellar performance, as inexperienced point guards often do in the postseason. That wouldn't be shocking at all; in fact, it's what many of us probably expect to happen sooner or later (and more likely sooner).

More to the point, it's very possible that Rose, after some rest and a couple of days of treatment on his ailing ankle, comes out tonight and plays like the MVP we watched for the last six months. If he's that aggressive, that sharp, that quick and that adept at finishing, there's very little that Teague (or anyone else, for that matter) can do to stop him, no matter what advice Hinrich gives or how much help the Hawks' bigs can offer. If that happens, Chicago will probably win Game 3, re-take home court advantage, and once again be viewed as the team in the driver's seat.

But irrespective of how tonight's game turns out, it's immutable fact that Jeff Teague has made an awful lot of people stand up and take notice of his talents over these last two games. Where many non-Hawks fans once looked in his direction and saw a slightly below-average first-round pick who has yet to bear fruit, a national audience is now seeing what more ardent Atlanta backers like the guys at Peachtree Hoops have long argued was really there:

Sure, Jeff Teague is inconsistent offensively and probably would be for a while in an offense where he'd be the 4th option at best, but the ability to hold his counterpart to a minimal carnage vs. the Hawks has been long undervalued.  Of the 9 games he's started as a Hawk, I recall at least 3 that he was the BEST HAWK on the floor.  [...] Teague has proven that he belongs on the court with the best players in the league in all situations (starting, closing, clutch, defensive stops, etc).

If the coming-out party came in a series that wasn't widely considered to be one of the uglier second-round matchups in recent memory, maybe more people would've shown up and taken note of just how impressive Teague's been. Oh, well. More punch and pie for the rest of us.

Due to popular demand this Judo Chop is dedicated to the slam-happy Canadian prospect Rory MacDonald. Dominating most of the fight, MacDonald really shone against Nate Diaz in the third and final round by attempting to launch the Stockton native back into the 209 area code with a series of Belly-to-Back slams.

A lot of people called them German Suplexes but I'm going to be boring and pedantic and claim they weren't suplexes / suplays due to a lack of a back arch and bridge. For a breakdown of a true German Suplex you can always revisit the Kazuyuki Miyata and the Double Rainbow Suplex Judo Chop.

MacDonald's slams were none the less impressive and for many a highlight of the night. As with a German Suplex though the key to success laid all in the hips. MacDonald's belly-to-back slams to me looked like a cross between a less explosive Randleplex and a form of turning Ura Nage from Judo (which simply means "Rear Throw").

Bloody Elbow's resident Judo Nerd Dan Pederson gave some insight into the Ura Nage and how it can typically be used to counter one of Nate Diaz's popular forms of attack:

Nate always lets his back get taken standing and then goes for the Harai Goshi/Standing Kimura combo. It used to work well, but it's pretty flashy and people started taking notice. You guys did a Judo Chop way back in the day where Joe Stevenson used his own wrestling techniques to counter that Harai, but here, MacDonald doesn't even let him start to wrap the arm. He never lets his posture be broken, he just slams those hips into Diaz and trucks him. It's Nate's fault at this point that his standing grappling game has become so predictable.

After the jump I break down the slams illustrated with animated gifs.

Big Mac Slam - As both fighters look to stand up Nate can be seen trying to isolate an arm likely trying to setup the 'Kimura' / Harai Goshi he's known for. Because Nate's legs are more or less straight MacDonald easily pops his hips forwards after securing a waist-lock and launches Diaz over, turning on the ball of his left foot in the process. This is why in Wrestling a 'Stand Up' doesn't actually mean standing straight up but keeping your hips low and your stance wide, lowering your center of mass so you're far less likely to be thrown in a similar manner.MacDonald doesn't arch possibly because of inflexibility, fear of landing on his own head or knowing the close proximity to the fence. As a result Diaz's right arm and shoulder and his legs take the brunt of the impact but MacDonald is still in a good control position going to an over-under lasso grip.

 

 

From another angle - Better illustrated, you can see Diaz's legs take most of the impact. Painful and possibly damaging but Diaz was more likely to feel a little head rush rather than have any wind knocked out of him. Potentially the most dangerous part of this sequence was when Diaz went to post his right arm. He wisely bent his arm so the force could disperse across his forearm as if he had  had his arm locked out it very well may have broken in a similar fashion to Mauricio Rua when he faced Mark Coleman in Pride and broke his arm when trying to brace against a driving double leg take-down.

 

Big Mac & Cheese Slams  - These to me seemed very Kevin Randlman-esque and similar to the turning Ura Nage I mentioned. You can really see MacDonald drive his hips forward and extend his legs while keeping his back straight and his head up and back. This is the key to generating power from the back in a mechanically efficient manner, as well as gripping right at the middle around the waist so the opponent's weight is evenly distributed. Once Diaz is in the air MacDonald partly releases his grip and pivots with a little follow through on the slam with his left arm. Diaz posts again but lets his arm bend again and the brunt of the impact is now on his side. Had MacDonald maintained his grip and pivoted and allowed the momentum to take his feet off the floor we'd have seen a full blown Randleplex causing Diaz to land on his neck and shoulders. What is good though is MacDonald follows up with punches on the ground not giving Diaz a moment's breath to recover. Diaz is tough though and MacDonald couldn't get a finish, but did get 10-8 on a couple of scorecards for that round.

 

Thoughts on the Jobs Report Thoughts on the Jobs Report

On the surface, this was the third consecutive solid jobs report, not as measured by the typical recovery, but the best back-to-back reports we have seen for years. The Payroll Survey Establishment Data showed employment up by 244,000.

At that pace of hiring, the unemployment number would ordinarily drop, but not fast.

Instead, the unemployment rate ticked up. The reason is beneath the surface, employment fell by 190,000 according to the Household Survey.

According to the Household Survey, the number of unemployed rose by 205,000. Another 131,000 dropped out of the labor force or the unemployment rate would have been even higher.

Which survey to believe?

It is hard to say on one month's data. However, during a recovery the household survey is supposed to lead. Moreover, the household survey is more consistent with three recent reports.

1. Weekly Unemployment Claims Soar to 474,000; Bogus Excuses Offered
   
2. Oil Consumption Demand Destruction vs. Speculative Futures Positions
   
3. Non-Manufacturing ISM Plunges Below Prediction of All 73 Economists, New Orders Collapse, Prices Firm; Did Rosenberg Capitulate at the Top?

Unless the Household Survey is an outlier, the implications are not good

Last month I said "It is very questionable if this pace of jobs keeps up."

Well, it kept up if the Payroll Survey is correct, it sure didn't if the Household Survey is to be believed.

Recall that the unemployment rate varies in accordance with the Household Survey not the reported headline jobs number, and not in accordance with the weekly claims data.

Digging deeper into the Household Survey, we see some more interesting data. In the last year, the civilian population rose by 1,817,000. Yet the labor force dropped by 1,099,000. Those not in the labor force rose by 2,916,000.

In January alone, a whopping 319,000 people dropped out of the workforce. In February another 87,000 people dropped out of the labor force. In March 11,000 people dropped out of the labor force. In April, 131,000 dropped out of the labor force. The 4-month total for 2011 is 548,000 people dropped out of the labor force.

Many of those millions who dropped out of the workforce would start looking if they thought jobs were available. Indeed, in a 2-year old recovery, the labor force should be rising sharply as those who stopped looking for jobs, once again started looking. Instead, an additional 548,000 people dropped out of the labor force in the first four months of the year.

Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 11%.

As I said, the report looks good on the surface, it does not look good if you poke around in the details.

April 2011 Jobs Report

Please consider the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) April 2011 Employment Report.

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 244,000 in April, and the unemployment rate edged up to 9.0 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in several service providing industries, manufacturing, and mining.

Unemployment Rate - Seasonally Adjusted

Nonfarm Employment - Payroll Survey - Monthly Look - Seasonally Adjusted

click on chart for sharper image

Nonfarm Employment - Payroll Survey - Annual Look - Seasonally Adjusted

Notice that employment is lower than it was 10 years ago.

Nonfarm Employment - Payroll Survey - This Month - Seasonally Adjusted



Employment in the private sector rose by 268,000 in April. Since reaching a low point in employment in February 2010, the private sector has added 2.1 million jobs—an average of 149,000 per month.

Statistically, 127,000 jobs a month is enough to keep the unemployment rate flat.

Index of Aggregate Weekly Hours



In April, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 34.3 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisoryemployees on private nonfarm payrolls was also unchanged at 33.6 hours.

The index of aggregate weekly hours for all employees rose by 0.3 percent over the month. Since reaching a low point in October 2009, the index has increased by 3.3 percent.

Average Hourly Earnings vs. CPI



Average hourly earnings of all employees in the private sector increased by 3 cents in April to $22.95. Hourly earnings are up 1.9 percent over the year.

Between March 2010 and March 2011, the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) increased by 2.7 percent.

Not only are wages rising slower than the CPI, there is also a concern as to how those wage gains are distributed.

BLS Birth-Death Model Black Box

The big news in the BLS Birth/Death Model is the BLS has moved to quarterly rather than annual adjustments.

Effective with the release of January 2011 data on February 4, 2011, the establishment survey will begin estimating net business birth/death adjustment factors on a quarterly basis, replacing the current practice of estimating the factors annually. This will allow the establishment survey to incorporate information from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages into the birth/death adjustment factors as soon as it becomes available and thereby improve the factors.

For more details please see Introduction of Quarterly Birth/Death Model Updates in the Establishment Survey

In recent years Birth/Death methodology has been so screwed up and there have been so many revisions that it has been painful to watch.

It is possible that the BLS model is now back in sync with the real world. Moreover, quarterly rather than annual adjustments can only help the process.

The Birth-Death numbers are not seasonally adjusted while the reported headline number is. In the black box the BLS combines the two coming out with a total.

The Birth Death number influences the overall totals, but the math is not as simple as it appears. Moreover, the effect is nowhere near as big as it might logically appear at first glance.

Do not add or subtract the Birth-Death numbers from the reported headline totals. It does not work that way.

Birth/Death assumptions are supposedly made according to estimates of where the BLS thinks we are in the economic cycle. Theory is one thing. Practice is clearly another as noted by numerous recent revisions.

Birth-Death Number Revisions

Inquiring minds note enormous backward revisions in Birth-Death reporting.

Birth Death Model (as reported in January)



Birth Death Model Revisions 2010 (as reported February)



Is this new model going to reflect reality going forward?

That's hard to say, but things were so screwed up before that it is unlikely to be any worse. One encouraging sign is several negative numbers in the recent chart. January would have been negative too, had they shown it. Historically there were only 2 negative number every year, January and July. That anomaly broke November of 2010.

Birth Death Model April 2011

Do NOT subtract 175,000 from the headline number. That is statistically invalid.

Household Data

In the last year, the civilian population rose by 1,817,000. Yet the labor force dropped by 1,099,000. Those not in the labor force rose by 2,916,000.

Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 11%.

Table A-8 Part Time Status



click on chart for sharper image

There are now 8,600,000 workers whose hours may rise before those companies start hiring more workers.

Note the number rose by 167,000 in the last month

Table A-15

Table A-15 is where one can find a better approximation of what the unemployment rate really is.



click on chart for sharper image

Distorted Statistics

Given the total distortions of reality with respect to not counting people who allegedly dropped out of the work force, it is hard to discuss the numbers.

The official unemployment rate is 9.9%. However, if you start counting all the people that want a job but gave up, all the people with part-time jobs that want a full-time job, all the people who dropped off the unemployment rolls because their unemployment benefits ran out, etc., you get a closer picture of what the unemployment rate is. That number is in the last row labeled U-6.

While the "official" unemployment rate is an unacceptable 9.0%, U-6 is much higher at 159%.

Things are much worse than the reported numbers would have you believe, and this month's report was exceptionally weak beneath the surface.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

http://www.deadline.com/2011/05/len-blavatniks-access-buys-warner-music/ ---Quote--- Warner Music Group Corp. (NYSE: WMG) and Access Industries, the U.S.-based industrial group, today announced the execution of a definitive merger agreement under which Access Industries will acquire WMG in an all-cash transaction valued at $3.3 billion. The purchase includes WMG’s entire recorded music and music publishing businesses. The purchase price of $8.25 per share represents a 34.4% premium over the volume-weighted average share price of $6.14 over the previous six months. Under the terms of the merger agreement, WMG’s stockholders will receive $8.25 per share in cash at the closing of the transaction. WMG’s Board of Directors approved the transaction and recommended that WMG’s stockholders approve the transaction. In addition to stockholder approval, the transaction is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals. It is anticipated that the transaction will be completed in the third calendar quarter of this year. WMG’s Chairman and CEO, Edgar Bronfman, Jr., said, “We believe this transaction is an exceptional value-maximizing opportunity that serves the best interests of stockholders as well as the best interests of music fans, our recording artists and songwriters, and the wonderful people of this company. We are delighted that Access will be the new steward of this outstanding business. They are supportive of the company’s vision, growth strategy and artists, while bringing a fresh entrepreneurial perspective and expertise in technology and media. Most importantly, Access supports Warner Music’s commitment to our recording artists and songwriters who are the foundation of our current and future success.” Len Blavatnik, Chairman and founder of Access Industries, said, “I am excited to extend my longstanding involvement with Warner Music. It is a great company with a strong heritage and home to many exceptional artists. I look forward to working closely with the many talented people within the company.” Jorg Mohaupt, Head of Media at Access Industries, added, “The music industry is at an inflection point where digital adoption is rapidly gaining momentum. Warner Music, as one of the most progressive forces in the music business, is well positioned to capture this opportunity for music creation and distribution.” Scott Sperling, Presiding Director of WMG, said, “It has been our great pleasure working with the extraordinary team at Warner Music over these past seven years. The company has managed to significantly increase market share and profitability during our ownership period and consistently outperformed even during a challenging period for the industry. Len Blavatnik and Access are likewise deeply committed to the music business and we know that we will be leaving the company in good hands.” Following the closing of the transaction, WMG will become a privately held company and its stock will no longer be traded on the New York Stock Exchange. The company will retain the Warner Music Group name and will continue to operate out of its current facilities. ---End Quote---

So there's this article in Time titled "Masculinity, a Delicate Flower," which is all about how men are obliged to establish, assert, and constantly maintain their masculinity throughout their lives. It's a very basic article, so superficial in its examination of the concepts of gender construction and performance, and so imprecise in drawing any distinction between socialized gender expectations and gender essentialism, that it would hardly be worth mentioning to this crowd were it not for its concluding paragraph:

The authors said this research also begins to illuminate the negative effects of gender on men — depression, anxiety, low self-esteem and violence. And, at the very least, it may persuade ladies to cut their guys a little slack. "When I was younger I felt annoyed by my male friends who would refuse to hold a pocketbook or say whether they thought another man was attractive. I thought it was a personal shortcoming that they were so anxious about their manhood. Now I feel much more sympathy for men," [psychologist and researcher Jennifer K. Bosson] said in a statement.

*insert the sound of record scratching here*

Whoa whoa whoa there, partner. First of all, "depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and violence" are not "the negative effects of gender." They are the negative effects of the Patriarchy, and conformity thereto. That's not a matter of semantics; that's the whole fucking point.

It isn't being male, nor being a man, that is a problem, but believing that to be male, or to be a man, is to have to project a very specific and rigid definition of masculinity—which defines itself in contradistinction to the feminine, thus forcing men to conceal and deny any part of themselves that anyone could call feminine; which limits men's emotional spectrum to anger; which forces men to exist in a permanent state of insecurity, constantly monitoring the boundaries of their masculinity and engaging in displays of bravado to prove their self-worth; which considers sheer brawn and physical toughness the only acceptable kind of strength, while the kind of strength which informs one's character, what might be described as emotional strength, the kind of strength that means walking away from a fight, or being patient, or showing empathy, isn't allowed to play much of a role at all in the definition of masculinity—which leaves men, whose physical attributes of masculine strength will wane with time and age, keenly aware that their masculinity is ever threatened by their own mortality, because they haven't been encouraged to cultivate a compassion and resiliency that can't be measured in kilos or KOs.

That's not about being a man. That's about being a man in a Patriarchy, who's never been offered an alternative paradigm.

Well. I've got an offer for you, gents! (Though you needn't just listen to me!)

And, suffice it to say, I don't agree with the contention that an awareness of how the Patriarchy hurts men, too, should "persuade ladies to cut their guys a little slack." Women don't have the luxury of "slack." Most gay/bi men don't have the luxury of "slack." Most trans* men don't have the luxury of "slack." Many men who are physically disabled, many men with dwarfism, many men with psychological disabilities, any man who is (wrongly) perceived, for whatever reason, to be "weak" via some inability to conform to the exacting demands of the Patriarchal male norm, don't have the luxury of "slack."

Slack is a privilege.

Understanding that subscribing to Patriarchy-approved narratives of masculinity is the issue, not some innate maleness, but something over which men have some control, have a choice, means that if "ladies" (and all the other men who have made a different choice regarding masculinity) are persuaded to do anything, it should be to expect more.

Once upon a time, I suggested to Iain that something he was doing (which was pissing me off) stemmed from a latent sexist notion that it was his prerogative as The Man to do this specific thing, which is not an accusation I wield carelessly or often; I have little reason to, since Iain is rationally egalitarian—and viscerally egalitarian for the most part, too. Anyway, we talked it out, and Iain was generously honest, saying that, yeah, that was the reason he was doing it and, wow, he hadn't realized it, but, shit, that feeling was totally there, ick. No hard feelings; it's not like I've never been called out for deeply internalized bullshit. We move forward with a new understanding.

It took a long time to get there, though, and at one point, Iain had said, "You know, if you weren't a feminist, this probably wouldn't even bother you."

I replied, "No, if I weren't a feminist, it would still bother me, but instead of acknowledging that you're an indoctrinated member of a patriarchy just like I am, I'd just think you were being a lousy shithead."

He chewed on that for a moment, and then said, "Fuck."

That was the first time Iain really understood how my feminism was benefiting him—that feminism doesn't make me see problems that aren't there, but provides the tools which allow me to analyze and prescribe solutions based on a context larger than my immediate experience. And existent outside the narrowly-drawn borders of constrictive stereotyping.

Implicit in feminism/womanism is not only the belief, but the expectation, that men are not brutish nor infantile—nor stupid, useless, inept, emotionally stunted, or any other negative stereotype feminists have been accused of promoting—but instead our equals just as much as we are theirs, capable not only of understanding feminism (and feminists), but of actively and rigorously engaging challenges to their socialization, too.

Feminists, of course, have the terrible reputation, but it isn't we who consider all men babies, dopes, dogs, and potential rapists. The holders of those views are the women and men who root for the patriarchy—which itself, after all, takes a rather unpleasantly dim view of most people.

I don't have slack to offer men. What I have is the alternative to a life spent swallowing one's emotions and feeling a constant anxious insecurity where one's contended self-esteem should be—and that seems a lot more valuable to me than "slack."

The recent publication of the EIA review of Shale Gas has caught the world’s attention, and led to the perception that the coming decades may well see natural gas become the dominant fuel. It suffers, however, a couple of disadvantages that, for some countries, make it not always the fuel of choice. India and Pakistan, have serious energy shortages as Tom Whipple recently pointed out.

In Pakistan the electricity is now turned off for 18-20 hours some days in many cities and 20 hours in rural villages. The onset of summer temperatures, shortages of fuel oil for thermal generation and falling water levels have increased the power shortfall to record levels. Without electricity to run the pumps urban water supplies quickly shut down. Without power to run the mills, exports are falling, leaving the country without money to import oil. In short we are seeing a classical downward spiral.
At the same time, in India, the domestic natural gas supply is falling, requiring increased, and more expensive imports that can only be achieved using LNG resources.

There have been discussions for years over the possibility of running gas pipelines from Turkmenistan and Iran down through Pakistan and into India to provide the natural gas needed to help. The TAPI pipeline from Turkmenistan is currently at a stage where it may be moving forward. Pakistan is ready to commit to purchasing gas by this July, but . . .

In the four nations’ ministerial meeting last week, both India and Pakistan had agreed to the broader aspects of the gas sales and purchase agreement (GSPA), but crucial things like the price of gas and transit fee are yet to be decided.

At present the Turkmen are expected to demand at least $7 to $7.50 per kcf, which is the price that they are getting from China. And transit fees to get the gas through Afghanistan and Pakistan to India will be added to that. (In context that is about the same price as LNG when it is currently delivered in India, and above the $4.94 to $6.42 price of domestically produced gas).

The current hope is that the pipeline will be started in 2013, with full flow to all three countries by 2016. The pipeline will have to run a thousand miles before it reaches India. And this highlights one of the problems with natural gas. It is harder to deliver than other fuels.

Oil can be put on rail cars, or tankers, as well as being piped, as can coal (though there are very few places that use pipelines to move coal). But natural gas either requires a direct pipeline, or it has to be condensed to liquid form for shipment. When large volumes are involved turning the NG into LNG requires construction of both a condensing plant at the supply end and a re-gasification unit at the customer end. Both require time to build. And one the gas is regenerated, the customer has only a limited capacity for storage, and depends on the flow coming through the delivery pipe to keep power being generated.

Coal at the other extreme used (in my youth) to be delivered to our house from the back of a horse-drawn cart. It was dumped in the street, and we shoveled it into the “coal bin” out of which we then hauled it, a bucket load at a time, into the house, and dumped it on the fire. Logistics were a lot simpler, and we kept at least a couple of weeks supply in reserve in the bin.

Times have changed somewhat, for although shovels may still dig out the coal, they now can load a hundred tons, rather than a few pounds. Rail cars can haul 120 tons apiece in unit trains of 100 cars, and power stations may use 10,000 tons of coal a day to generate 850 MW of baseload power. But the coal is often still dumped in heaps at the power station, to be used when needed. Stations will usually keep 60 to 90 days of supply on hand.

India is aware of these advantages, but has internal problems with developing enough domestic coal supplies for the power that it needs. Coal India has said that it can only deliver 100 million tons against the 330 million ton increase in demand that, over the next five years, that power stations now being built will need.

With domestic coal production floundering amid a sharp upsurge in power capacity addition, over 40,000 MW of new generation capacity could get stranded over years for want of fuel. This is close to 70 per cent of the power capacity slated to come up during the period, most of which is being set up by private developers.

With a current generation capacity of 173,626 MW, this threatens the generation of some 42,000 MW.

There is a catch with using imported coal to meet all the shortfall, because of the construction of the Indian boilers. They blend about 10% of the higher thermal content imported coal with domestic coal but there are technical problems with a higher concentration that limit how high it can be raised, as well as the additional cost factor. However new construction can be built to handle higher concentrations of imported coal, it just costs more – which is expected to be a problem in relatively poor parts of the country.

Seeing this as an opportunity, however, Adani Enterprises, an Indian coal company, has just bought the Abbot Point coal terminal in Australia, after buying coal properties in Queensland last year. Over the next five years they will bring the mines on line and be able to feed up to 50 million tons into the Indian subcontinent. It is not enough, in itself, to meet the shortfall, but it is evidence that firms in India are aware of the problem and are moving to find answers. They will do so, however, in the face of stiff competition from China. And this competition underlines the conclusions that I drew in an earlier post about the unrealistic projections of future coal use by folk such as Tad Patzek and Dave Rutledge.

Unfortunately also this does not solve the immediate problem that India faces with a current shortage of available fuel. Nor does it get Pakistan any closer to finding a short-term solution to power shortages in that country. There comes a certain point where, when warnings go unheeded, the consequences must be suffered, though sadly often not by those who weren’t paying enough attention.

By. Dave Summers

David (Dave) Summers is a Curators' Professor Emeritus of Mining Engineering at Missouri University of Science and Technology (he retired in 2010). He directed the Rock Mechanics and Explosives Research Center at MO S&T off and on from 1976 to 2008, leading research teams that developed new mining and extraction technologies, mainly developing the use of high-pressure waterjets into a broad range of industrial uses. While one of the founders of The Oil Drum, back in 2005, he now also writes separately at Bit Tooth Energy.

Mark Hughes has given his Fulham players three more tests before the end of the season.

The Cottagers boss has guided the London club into the top half of the table with a good recent run but he wants the squad to continue working hard as they prepare for their final three matches of the season, beginning with Liverpool at Craven Cottage on Monday night.

“We’ve still got challenges with three games to go," Hughes told the club’s official website.

"If we get maximum points in every game we have left we will achieve the highest point tally that any Fulham side has reached in the Premier League.

“That’s a challenge for us and something we’ll use as motivation going into these last remaining games. It would have been easy to switch off after the Bolton game to be fair because we were safe but I didn’t get an inkling that that was what the players were feeling when we went up against Sunderland. In the second half I thought we were excellent and we took the game away from them.

“We look strong and fresh – the enjoyment in our play is there for everyone to see. We don’t look tired, jaded or mentally strained. We look forward to every game we’ve got left and it’s a shame the season is close to finishing because we’re really playing some great stuff and getting some positive results.

“We’re going into games expecting to play well and expecting to win. Everybody now understands their responsibilities and the demands that are placed on them. They’re producing at the moment. It was difficult at the beginning of the season but as we come to the climax of the season we’re really pleased with what we’ve produced. “It’s about making sure we’re still achieving. To finish in the top ten would be outstanding and I’ve always felt we’ve got the quality to do that.”

 

Click here for the No1 coverage of all the gossip and transfer news around Fulham.

Happy Friday to all you 11W fans out there and a good morning to those of you reading this version of Skull Session as part of your morning routine. It's time to cap off another great week in the world, and cure the hangovers that Cinco de Mayo dealt you.

Memorial Day is just three weekends away and with no football and basketball on the dockett, the last weekend in May is all I have to look forward to at this point. Sure baseball is great and the U.S. Open is just around the corner, but there is nothing like the sweet taste of barbecue on your lips when you fire up that grill, open your backyard pool, and soak in the first really good weather of the year.

Speaking of barbecue, if you didn't know, Eat Too Brutus (the second version) will be taking place this fall on October 29 when the Buckeyes host the Badgers. Not only will you get to see OSU get some revenge on our buzzcut enemies to the northwest, but you'll also get the chance to shmooze it up with this guy, this guy, and especially this guy, as well as enjoy some great food and refreshments all the while. More details are sure to come soon, but if you are ready to book your trip back to the 614 for this fall, we suggest you keep the Wisconsin game in mind.

Already Dissing the Buckeyes. Si.com has released their early 2012 NFL mock draft, and the only Buckeye to crack the first round is Mike Adams , going to the New York Giants. It's also pretty interesting that in another column by a different writer featuring the top 40 prospects for next year's draft class, that Mike Brewster is the only Buckeye included. Before you get all huffy and puffy, make sure to take a look at their early 2011 mock draft and see Ryan Mallett going first overall, Da'Quan Bowers going second, and Robert Quinn going third. Oh, did I mention, none of those players were actually chosen in the first round of this year's draft? And they call these guys experts?

Not the Only Ones in Trouble. Between the Tat Five, Tresselgate, and now Dorian Bell's career going up in smoke (pun intended), the Buckeyes have been in the news for all the wrong reasons lately. It's good to know that the world isn't only focused on bashing your team, and we can sure thank Boise State and Miami for that this week. The Broncos, as you surely know right now, were hit with a variety of violations and accusations of a lack of institutional control across their athletic department. The Broncos' football squad will face some sanctions due to the "minor violations", and even if they aren't severe enough to keep OSU out of the mainstream media permanently, it's nice to see someone else in hot water. On another note, our friends to the southeast got some negative attention this week, when The U's Jeff Brown was arrested for alleged sexual assault after supposedly forcing sex upon an intoxicated female. I'd sure like to read all the Miami fans' comments about Tressel from last week after an incident like this. They don't call it "Thug U" for no reason.

We Need a Minor Leagues. An editorial to the Plain Dealer suggests that there should be a minor league system for football and basketball. While I'm not sure the effectiveness would be the same as it is for baseball, I couldn't agree more. There are plenty of collegiate athletes that deserve the opportunity to develop on their own timelines in preparing to compete at the next level (cough Kosta Koufos cough, cough Byron Mullens cough), while still making professional money to support their families who are in need. I think both the NFL and NBA could benefit from such a system, as could all the college athletes who "go pro in something other than sports". Or they could just change the NBA early entry rules. You choose.

Hearing Whispers. We often hear "insider" news around these parts, but at times it's not always sure how reliable the source is. Well, today, we have two pieces of news for you from pretty trusted sources that we'd like to share with you. First, regarding Brionte Dunn "re-opening" his commitment, that is very real. While Dunn is still committed to OSU, there is danger of him going elsewhere (see: Michigan) if the NCAA hammer comes down on the Buckeyes and there is a bowl ban. We are hearing from our sources that if the Bucks are eligibile for post-season play, that Dunn should stick to his word, but if there are USC-type punishments on hand, expect Dunn to take a very serious look up north. The second piece of news we have to you is regarding the OSU quarterback battle. We spoke to two players this week and when asked about who they thought would start the first game of the year, they both said either Braxton Miller or Kenny Guiton. That's good news for those of you on TeamAnyoneButBauserman, but we surely have a long way to go before Tressel and Fickell determine who their guy will be heading into the 2011 sea

Big Ten Bits. Here are some Big Ten recruiting thoughts. Doug Worthington is one who is in full support of Jim Tressel. The Cedar Rapids Gazette ranks the B1G stadiums. PSU may have some unoticeable uniform changes. Indiana's new strength coach is doing wonders for the Hoosiers. Some recruiting nuggets from the state of Michigan. Wisconsin is #23 in Athlon's top 25 countdown for 2011.

The great John Lennon once said, “It’s a fear of the unknown. The unknown is what is.”

May 28th, 2011. The UEFA Champions League final. The unknown demon of FC Barcelona’s fears will manifest itself into human form, codename Little Pea.

As a United fan myself, I am not deluded, Barcelona go to the match as favourites. The best midfield in the world, probably the best strike force in the world, the best player in the world, the second best defence in the world (after United); it makes for harrowing reading.

Yet what really irks me is the wild assertions from fans of teams that are, surprise suprise, not actually in the final, of how United will get “hammered.”

“There’s not even any point turning up,” a particularly bitter Chelsea fan claimed.

I can see their logic. A demolition of the great Real Madrid, of Jose Mourinho, the demi-god and heir apparent for a place at the summit of mount Olympus. Yet if you think about it, the second leg was the fifth El Clasico of the season, such is the totalitarian dominance these two sides exhibit over the rest of their La Liga minions.

Five matches to weigh up the opposition, in a ground you are by now familiar with, against players whose game you have ample opportunity to analyse at close quarters. As opposed to one match in a foreign country, against players who you may play once in a while.

Manchester United vs. Barcelona is a whole different ball game.

Of all the players at United’s disposal, I think it is Javier Hernandez that Barcelona will be most worried about. The man that came out of nowhere to become a revelation. I will make the claim that 90 percent of Barcelona’s players will never have faced Hernandez as a cautious estimate as a few might well have faced him on international duty.

Yet even this was a year ago. Since he arrived at OT and was schooled into the United psyche, Hernandez’s game has blossomed, and he is a different prospect now than he was nine months ago. Video tapes can only teach you so much, especially with a player as unpredictable as Chicharito.

He is the archetypal goal poacher, kicking balls off his own face, heading it in with intentional back-headers. It is basic instinct at it’s most refined level. Hernandez possesses pace in abundance too, with stats at the World Cup citing him as its fastest player.

With the exception of Gerard Pique, who still isn’t as fast as Hernandez, Barcelona’s defence contains a 33-year-old Carles Puyol, who despite still being one of the world’s best defenders with his back to goal. When turned, he no longer has the legs for a footrace with Hernandez.

At right back Barcelona have Dani Alves, a precocious talent, but one inclined to make long forays up the pitch, leaving gaps behind that United’s patented counter-attacking play can exploit.

Finally, in the absence of the brilliant Eric Abidal, after his inspirational victory over the cancer that looked to curtail him (article to come), the defence will quite possibly be completed by Javier Mascherano, a small, slow, defensive midfielder. A player, who despite portraying a great defensive instinct and holding prowess, has an inclination to allow his fiery temperament to influence his play, and as a central defender the stakes are all the higher.

Then there is Hernandez’s movement. In my recollection, I have never seen a player so adept at finding himself in the right place at the right time.

It shows resonance to the play of a young Michael Owen, but in my opinion he was more technical and had worse movement than Hernandez. Chicarito finds space where their shouldn’t be any. His lighting pace, pulls the defenders this way and that, exploiting gaps where he finds them or drawing defenders away, to allow Wayne Rooney or one of the midfielders to fill the void.

Puyol et al will have never faced a player like Hernandez, watched him maybe, but when the whistle sounds, he will become a different proposition. The Rooney, Hernandez double-act, when working effectively, like they were against an admittedly abysmal Schalke in the first leg, are almost unplayable.

Such is the manner in which they complement each other's play. Hernandez pushes and finds the gap, leaving Rooney space to bring out his repertoire and play in a winger or a midfielder or go on himself, where any defensive errors are inevitable punished by the pea green reaper.

Barcelona’s defenders while have to adjust to the unconventional style of Hernandez’s play as the game is going on, but will 90 minutes really be enough?

In my opinion, where the game will be won and lost is in the midfield. Barcelona will inevitably set the tempo, but it is what Manchester United do with the ball when they have it that will be the defining factor in the game.

Sir Alex will, in all likelihood, adopt a defensive formation, at least to start. For this reason, with the premium placed on tracking back to defend, I can see Nani being dropped, with Valencia and Giggs preferred. Park Ji Sung also is a shoe-in to start, such is his stoic stipulation to his defensive duties when the need is at its greatest, probably as a partner to Michael Carrick.

Where, therefore, does this leave Chicharito?

Rooney’s inclusion is inevitable, so, depending on how cautious Sir Alex is, there will, in all likelihood, be another striking birth. Berbatov, a player low on form and panache, for whom his goals earlier in the season seem like a distant memory, or Hernandez, unleashed from the start to tear the weakest part of this impregnable Barcelona unit asunder?

I know who I would choose. Whatever strategy Fergie cooks up though, the brilliant thing about Hernandez, as opposed to, to give an example Berbatov, is that his impact is not diluted by starting from the bench.

In his short time at the Theatre of Dreams, Chicharito has conjured up fond memory’s of another slightly built forward who was plucked from obscurity to weave his mark on super-sub folklore. And we all know how the Champions League final of '99 ended for Ole Gunnar Solskjaer.

With three weeks to go until the showpiece event, the tension is palpable. Barcelona will enter the match as favourites, justifiable trumpeted as the "best club side in history," yet football has an uncanny knack of delivering a surprise or two.

In my humble opinion, the way that Sir Alex chooses to utilise Javier Hernandez could be key to the destination of the trophy at ninety minutes end.

Barcelona may well win, that I am not arguing with. Just don’t claim that the result is a foregone conclusion.

“It will be as easy as shelling peas for Barcelona,” another friend said. He, like Barcelona, clearly didn’t know too much about the littlest pea of them all.

 

It didn't take long for Doug Marrone to return a proud program to responsibility. What's next for Ryan Nassib, Chandler Jones and the Orange?

NOTE: Confused? Don't miss the definitions and footnotes at the bottom.

Yesterday, our own Spencer Hall pointed us toward a lovely post from The Run of Play that I may have otherwise missed.

The sole and entire point of sports is to enjoy sports; even if you think athletic competition has a deeper purpose, that it helps with moral instruction or enforcing community ties or whatever else, it’s only able to serve that purpose because it’s fun in the first place. If your love of soccer has brought you to a point where you’re no longer really able to see the game as something wonderful and amazing except in narrow moments of unequivocal triumph, then you are doing it wrong, no matter how many kills you rack up on the internet. On that note, it’s also not unimportant that the mind-warp of hyperpartisanship is eventually going to make you think and say things that are, let’s be frank, really f***ing stupid, and that there’s no need for you to be really f***ing stupid just to support your club. ...

So look: don’t be like this. There’s no reason to. It’s really, really easy not to be, once you decide you don’t want to. The secret is to care, I mean really care, about something other than your club. That thing can be the game itself, or the truth, or just being a reasonable person. You can care about something other than your club and still be totallysupercommitted to your club. It doesn’t mean not supporting your team through thick and thin; it just means being able to tell the difference between thick and thin, and not thinking that your favorite forum, or your group of like-minded supporters, is so important that it throws reality on the wrong end of a greater-than sign. It means doing this for fun, and not for revenge or for a sense of deep-down defining identity, even if you’re a crazy tattooed ultra. You can be a crazy tattooed ultra and still be fine, for that matter. You just can’t be an idiot.

This is a beautiful sentiment.  It is the reason I share things I love about college football every Saturday morning.  It is something I have attempted to communicate many times, but seeing this I know I have fallen short.

It is also a sentiment that would have been difficult to communicate to Syracuse fans in earnest in the middle part of the last decade.

This is a program with as much history as any northeastern program not named Penn State (and hell, they can at least compete with PSU in that regard as well).  Jim Brown.  Ben Schwartzwalder, Ernie Davis and the 1960 Cotton Bowl.  John Mackey.  Floyd Little and Larry Csonka.  Art Monk.  Dick MacPherson coaching Don McPherson (which just confused the hell out of me).  Moose Johnston.  Donovan McNabb to Marvin Harrison.  Dwight Freeney.  The Carrier Dome (I'm a sucker for unique venues).

This is also a program that was simply dreadful during the Greg Robinson years.  Only once between 2005 and 2008 did Syracuse finish with more than three wins or rank better than 89th in F/+ (4-8, 69th in 2006).  In that span, only Duke had a worse major conference program.  A team with potentially the most history in the Big East was significantly dragging down the Big East's averages.

Enter Doug Marrone.  While he still has quite a road to hoe when it comes to returning Syracuse to college football's upper echelon, in just two years on the job, he has at least returned them to respectability.  Syracuse ranked 75th in F/+ in 2009, then broke through with an 8-5 season, ranking 57th in 2010.  Improvement has been incremental but potentially sustainable, and it's quite possible that Syracuse fans can once again find the joy in being Syracuse fans.

2010 Schedule & Results*

Record: 8-5 | Adj. Record: 6-7 | Final F/+ Rk**: 57
Date	Opponent	Score	W-L	Adj. Score	Adj. W-L
3-Sep	at Akron	29-3	W	20.9 - (-4.7)	W
11-Sep	at Washington	20-41	L	15.4 - 36.0	L
18-Sep	Maine	38-14	W	25.1 - 26.4	L
25-Sep	Colgate	42-7	W	43.2 - 32.9	W
9-Oct	at South Florida	13-9	W	28.8 - 7.8	W
16-Oct	Pittsburgh	14-45	L	23.8 - 32.2	L
23-Oct	at West Virginia	19-14	W	33.1 - 17.3	W
30-Oct	at Cincinnati	31-7	W	23.7 - 11.8	W
6-Nov	Louisville	20-28	L	22.8 - 28.3	L
13-Nov	at Rutgers	13-10	W	13.5 - 25.6	L
20-Nov	Connecticut	6-23	L	12.6 - 27.7	L
27-Nov	Boston College	7-16	L	29.8 - 32.8	L
30-Dec	vs Kansas State	36-34	W	35.9 - 33.8	W

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
Points Per Game	22.2	93	19.3	17
Adj. Points Per Game	25.3	78	23.7	33

Sometimes it takes a while to remember how to win.  On a play-by-play basis, Syracuse improved significantly in Marrone's first year.  In 2009, the Orange improved from 92nd in overall S&P+ to 64th while undergoing the Greg Paulus experiment, but their win total only improved from three to four and their F/+ ranking from 89th to 75th.  Sometimes per-play success comes before per-drive or per-game success.

In 2010, however, the Orange actually regressed in terms of play-by-play stats -- they fell from 64th to 78th in overall S&P+ -- but they learned how to win.  They improved from 75th to 57th in F/+, they improved from 1-2 in one-possession games to 4-1, and they won an epic, confusing Pinstripe Bowl over Kansas State.  In terms of Adj. Record, Syracuse probably didn't play at the level of a true, eight-win team in 2010, but ... tell that to fans who enjoyed being relevant and winning (or simply attending) bowls again.

In all, the offense faded significantly down the stretch despite the emergence of receiver Marcus Sales, but they rebounded with a ridiculously fun performance against Kansas State.  The defense trended toward regression as well, but not enough to prevent Syracuse's first eight-win season since Dwight Freeney was terrorizing QBs in 2001.  (Seriously, he had 27 TFL/sacks and 23 QB hurries that season. Good god.)

Offense***

Category	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	89	83	91
RUSHING	53	39	62	Adj. Line Yards:
PASSING	100	104	100	14
Standard Downs	63	73	57	Adj. Sack Rate:
Passing Downs	100	88	104	106
Redzone	68	73	60

Q1 Rk	95	1st Down Rk	72
Q2 Rk	100	2nd Down Rk	87
Q3 Rk	67	3rd Down Rk	80
Q4 Rk	18

The 'Cuse had a confused offense in 2010.  They passed a hair more than average even though they weren't very good at it, and their variability was off the charts.  They grew more conservative the closer they got to the end zone (they ran 30 percent of the time on passing downs between their 26 and midfield, 40 percent of the time when they crossed midfield), and they didn't necessarily seem to trust a rather efficient running game.  They were a terrible first-half offense that slowly got better as the game progressed (and came through big-time in the fourth quarter).

At 220 pounds, Delone Carter (1,233 yards, 5.3 per carry, -4.9 Adj. POE, nine touchdowns) was a strong enough runner to perhaps wear defenses down later in games.  (A faster pace would have helped with the exhaustion factor as well.).  Carter's gone, replaced by a couple of interesting, smaller backs; his Adj. POE suggests he is rather replaceable, but we'll see about the size factor.  We'll also have to see if Syracuse understands itself a little better this fall.

The key to that, I guess, is the passing game, since 'Cuse evidently wants to pass.  Ryan Nassib (2,334 yards, 6.5 per pass, 56% completion rate, 19 TD, 8 INT) returns to 'Cuse for his senior season, and for better or worse, he's got most of last year's weapons back.  Van Chew (611 yards, 14.9 per catch, 8.5 per target, 58% catch rate, 5 TD) is perhaps one of the better receivers you've never heard of, a solid big-play threat who could benefit from a group of solid possession receivers.  It would appear that tight end Nick Provo (306 yards, 11.1 per catch) could be that possession guy, but his 56% catch rate -- quite poor for a tight end -- needs improving.

In fact, the only primary targets who caught more than 58% of the passes thrown their way were running back Antwon Bailey (75% catch rate on mostly super-short passes) and home run hitter Marcus Sales (414 yards, 15.9 per catch, 10.4 per target, 65% catch rate, 4 TD), who could improve Syracuse's offense all by himself if he has a full season like last November.  In all, Marrone felt shaky enough about this unit to bring in six new receiver recruits for the fall, so just because last year's leaders return doesn't mean they'll be this year's leaders.  Chew and Sales could be a helluva combo if consistent, though.

Other tidbits:

• Bailey (554 yards, 4.9 per carry, -6.6 Adj. POE, 2 TD; 306 receiving yards, 8.7 per catch) and Prince-Tyson Gulley (74 yards, 5.7 per carry, +0.8 Adj. POE) appear to be the Orange's 1-2 punch at running back heading into the fall.  Bailey was obviously an interesting run-and-catch guy last year; I'm curious to see if his role changes without Carter around to take on the large portion of the carries.
• The 'Cuse line could see solid improvement this fall; they were excellent in run blocking but terrible in pass blocking (perhaps Nassib waited far too long to get the ball out of his hand?) last year, and they return four starters, including a second-team all-conference performer at left tackle (Justin Pugh) and two seniors on the right (Andrew Tiller, Michael Hay).

Defense

Category	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	58	64	56
RUSHING	60	62	56	Adj. Line Yards:
PASSING	61	65	60	57
Standard Downs	50	54	50	Adj. Sack Rate:
Passing Downs	57	54	56	86
Redzone	28	24	34

Q1 Rk	66	1st Down Rk	48
Q2 Rk	22	2nd Down Rk	34
Q3 Rk	79	3rd Down Rk	84
Q4 Rk	54

Like yesterday's team, Iowa State, Syracuse made a living off of bending, bending, bending, then figuring out a way not to break.  Unlike Iowa State, however, a) Syracuse wasn't all that great at attacking the ball, and b) Syracuse figured out a way not to be horribly inefficient.  The Orange were spectacularly, admirably average on D last year, ranking between 50th and 65th in every major overall, success rate, and PPP+ sub-category.  They were great in the redzone, on second downs, and in the second quarter ... and consistently mediocre in just about every other facet of the game.

This being the case ... it's rather difficult to get too worked up about either returning or departing personnel, isn't it?  For what it's worth, the 'Cuse should be stronger around the perimeter, weaker in the middle.  Three interesting defensive ends return, including Chandler Jones (47.5 tackles, 9.5 TFL/sacks, 3 FF, 4 PBU) and Mikhail Marinovich, Todd's younger brother, male model and hookah enthusiast.  Plus, there is ample quality at the safety position in Phillip Thomas (75.0 tackles, 4.0 TFL/sacks) and Shamarko Thomas (52.5 tackles, 3.5 TFL/sacks).  However, tackles Anthony Perkins (3.5 TFL/sacks) and Andrew Lewis (4.5 TFL/sacks) depart, along with middle linebacker and lead play-maker Derrell Smith (93.0 tackles, 9.0 TFL/sacks, 3 FF, 3 FR).  Last year, the Orange line was better against the run than in rushing the quarterback; the opposite will probably be true in 2011.

Other tidbits:

• It always interests me when teams rank quite differently in terms of my play-by-play measure and Brian Fremeau's per-drive measure.  Syracuse's D ranked just 58th in Def. S&P+ but a much healthier 37th in Def. FEI.  (Split the difference, more or less, and you get an overall Def. F/+ ranking of 43rd.)  The main reason for this should be obvious -- redzone efficiency.  Holding teams to field goals is a solid way to end up on the right side of the "points versus expected points" equation.
• Syracuse had a lovely total of tackles for loss in 2010 despite the mediocre numbers; it appears that opponents caught on to their aggression as well.  They ran more frequently than average on passing downs to counter the aggression.  That the Orange attacked a lot but still couldn't get to the quarterback that often is either confusing or off-putting.

Syracuse's 2010 Season Set to Music

Just put this song on in the background of your favorite Pinstripe Bowl highlights, and you're set, right?

Fun Stat Nerd Tidbit

Here.

Summary and Projection Factors

Below is a small handful of projection and change factors most pertinent to the Football Outsiders' preseason projections you will find in this summer's Football Outsiders Almanac 2011.

Four-Year F/+ Rk	81
Five-Year Recruiting Rk	65
TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin****	-4 / -3
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	12 (7, 5)
Yds/Pt Margin*****	-1.0

Thought they have yet to catch back up to the rest of the Big East, Syracuse is making their way back toward average.  Though I can't predict any incredible surge this year, Marrone has enough pieces in place to continue the slow-but-steady ascent.  And the schedule should comply nicely.  Though the Orange will likely be projected in the No. 50-70 range, they should still begin the season 5-1, with home wins over Wake Forest, Rhode Island, Toledo and Rutgers and a win at Tulane.  From there, they should at least be able to scrape out a sixth win and a second straight bowl bid.

The Big East is a conference with an incredible number of above-average teams and, currently, no elite power.  That's good and bad, of course; there are almost no easy wins, but if you take a healthy step forward, you're just as likely to pass four teams as one.  With Louisville improving, somebody will have to assume last place this fall and in coming years, but despite less-than-amazing recruiting, it's looking less and less likely that it will be Syracuse.  That alone should be cause for celebration in upstate New York.

 

 

---

* For more on the 'Adj. Score' and 'Adj. Record' measures below, feel free to read this Football Outsiders column. Adj. Score is a look at how a team would have performed in a given week if playing a perfectly average team, with a somewhat average number of breaks and turnovers. The idea for the measure is simple: what if everybody in the country played exactly the same opponent every single week? Who would have done the best? It is an attempt to look at offensive and defensive consistency without getting sidetracked by easy or difficult schedules. And yes, with adjusted score you can allow a negative number of points, which is strangely satisfying.

** F/+ rankings are the official rankings for the college portion of Football Outsiders. They combine my own S&P+ rankings (based on play-by-play data) with Brian Fremeau's drives-based FEI rankings.

*** What is S&P+? Think of it as an OPS (the "On-Base Plus Slugging" baseball measure) for football. The 'S' stands for success rates, a common Football Outsiders efficiency measure that basically serves as on-base percentage. The 'P' stands for PPP+, an explosiveness measure that stands for EqPts Per Play. The "+" means it has been adjusted for the level of opponent, obviously a key to any good measure in college football. S&P+ is measured for all non-garbage time plays in a given college football game. Plays are counted within the following criteria: when the score is within 28 points in the first quarter, within 24 points in the second quarter, within 21 points in the third quarter, and within 16 points (i.e. two possession) in the fourth quarter.  For more about this measure, visit the main S&P+ page at Football Outsiders.

**** Adj. TO Margin is what a team's turnover margin would have been if they had recovered exactly 50 percent of all the fumbles that occurred in their games. If there is a huge difference between TO Margin and Adj. TO Margin (in other words, if fumbles and unlucky bounces were the main source of a good/bad TO margin), that suggests that a team's luck was particularly good or bad and might even out the next season.

***** Phil Steele has long tracked Yards Per Point as a means of looking at teams that were a little too efficient or inefficient the previous season. A positive Yds/Pt Margin means a team's offense was less efficient than opponents' offenses, and to the extent that luck was involved, their luck might even out the next year.

The 2011 Euroleague Final Four tips off at noon ET on Friday in Barcelona, bringing together the four top teams in European basketball for a weekend in which nearly all of the NBA will be represented in the Old World. The Final Four offers a good opportunity for NBA personnel to gauge prospects playing in the games, as well as do some digging on other players whose teams didn't make it.

Euroleague is a tournament held in addition to the normal league seasons for these clubs, much like soccer's Champions League. Thirty-two teams are whittled through group play and a knockout tournament until we have a Final Four. This year's edition features teams from the continent's top three leagues -- Spain's Real Madrid, Italy's Montepaschi Siena and Greece's Panathinkaikos -- and Maccabi Electra from Israel.

Interestingly, none of the 2010 Final Four teams made it back this year. Ricky Rubio's Barcelona club, which holds the 2010 Euroleague title, was knocked out by Panathinaikos in the quarterfinals. Olympiacos, the 2010 runner-up, was knocked out by Montepaschi in the same round. CSKA Moscow and Partizan Belgrade, the two other 2010 finalists, didn't survive group play.

The games will be shown on NBA TV beginning at noon ET on Friday. Here's a quick look at the teams.

REAL MADRID

Madrid features a few players known to NBA fans, led by Sergio Rodriguez, the former Blazers, Kings and Knicks point guard affectionately known as "Spanish Chocolate" for his bombastic style. Madrid also have Sergio Llull, a Rockets point guard prospect who could transition to the NBA within a couple of years, and Ante Tomic, a Croat 7-footer whose rights belong to the Jazz.

The important Madrid player in terms of prospects, though, is Nikola Mirotic. The 20-year-old Montenegrin power forward has declared for and will likely remain in the 2011 NBA Draft, but is considered a threat to remain in Europe for a few years, dropping him from lottery consideration.

MACCABI ELECTRA

Maccabi is coached by American David Blatt, who led the Russian national team to some rousing success and is considered one of Europe's finest young coaches. The roster includes Jeremy Pargo, Richard Hendrix and David Blu, formerly known as David Bluthenthal, a memorable USC forward about a decade ago. (And yes, he changed his name to "David Blu.") West Virginians will recognize D'Or Fischer.

NBA scouts will be watching 21-year-old Serbian center Milan Macvan and also legend Greek center Sofo Schortsanitis, but only because he's impossible to look away from.

MONTEPASCHI SIENA

NBA fans can rekindle their deep love affairs with Marko Jaric and Malik Hairston. Others can enjoy the stylings of Greek guard Nikos Zisis, whose nickname is "Lord of the Rings." Montepaschi also boasts aging Lithuanian legends Rimas Kaukenas and Ksistof Lavrinovic. But the player NBA scouts will be watching -- and should be signing -- is Bo McCalebb, who led Partizan to the Final Four last year. The University of New Orleans product is among the best guards in Europe.

PANATHINAIKOS

One of Greece's superlative powers -- Olympiacos is the other -- has no shortage of Greek stars, led by Dimitris Diamantidis. This team is built more to win than to showcase young talent, but Nick Calathes, who played at Florida and whose right belong the Mavericks, is someone to watch. Other than Calathes, Mike Batiste, an Arizona State product, is the top American.

***

Montepaschi and Panathinaikos tip off at noon ET on NBA TV; Maccabi and Madrid will follow. The winner will play Sunday for the Euroleague championship.

When Boston College hockey forward Brian Gibbons watches a basketball game, he pays attention to how the point guard distributes the ball. While taking in a football game, he observes how the running back weaves through holes.

When Boston College hockey forward Brian Gibbons watches a basketball game, he pays attention to how the point guard distributes the ball. While taking in a football game, he observes how the running back weaves through holes.