Yankee Doodle Closes

I'm still a bit stunned by the news that the beloved hamburger counter Yankee Doodle in New Haven has suddenly closed. Basically, without warning, 3rd generation burgerman Rick Beckwith decided that this past Tuesday the griddle at his grandfather's coffee shop would shut down for good. No more Double Doodles, no more fried donuts. No place (other than Louis' Lunch of course) to belly up and order a classic burger near Yale. As fate would have it, The Doodle is featured in my upcoming book as one of the most important hamburger spots in America. Rick - Do ya think you could give it one more shot?

Yankee Doodle Closes

I'm still a bit stunned by the news that the beloved hamburger counter Yankee Doodle in New Haven has suddenly closed. Basically, without warning, 3rd generation burgerman Rick Beckwith decided that this past Tuesday the griddle at his grandfather's coffee shop would shut down for good. No more Double Doodles, no more fried donuts. No place (other than Louis' Lunch of course) to belly up and order a classic burger near Yale. As fate would have it, The Doodle is featured in my upcoming book as one of the most important hamburger spots in America. Rick - Do ya think you could give it one more shot?

Missed Opportunities, Part 4

This is the final installment from the text of my talk to the Jewish Federation of Eastern Connecticut, delivered in New London, Jan. 20:

My understanding [based upon Yossi Beilin's observations as a participant, and by way of response to Tom Mitchell's comment on the previous post] is that the negotiators at Taba were about ready to send out teams to assess compensation terms for the families of the Palestinian refugees of 1948, who were to receive money rather than a physical right of return. The territorial solution involved the concept of settlement blocs– based upon the discovery of strategic analyst Yossi Alpher in ‘94 or ‘95 that about 80 percent of Jewish settlements in the West Bank were within a couple of miles of the pre-1967 border; this meant that a modest trade of territories between Israel and the Palestinians could produce a reasonable agreement and not require a physically and politically impossible removal of most settlers. To a certain extent, this concept still holds promise today as part of the solution.

In December 2003, a large number of notable political and cultural figures among both Israelis and Palestinians signed a model peace agreement called the Geneva Accord or Geneva Initiative. It was a projection of what the Taba conference might have produced if it were allowed to proceed to a conclusion, with contributions from many of the same negotiators on each side. It contained detailed solutions that most Israelis and Palestinians could agree to on final status issues: refugees, settlements, Jerusalem, final boundaries, a Palestinian state, security for Israel. To a certain degree, Ariel Sharon made a decision to unilaterally remove settlers from the Gaza Strip, as a reaction to the Geneva Accord in order to attempt to impose an arrangement upon the Palestinians without having to negotiate with them.

But as negotiations have rekindled with Annapolis, with negotiators now meeting regularly again, the Geneva Accord and other glimpses of an agreement are– hopefully– primary reading material. We can understand why negotiations did not seem practical when Arafat was in charge, but after Mahmoud Abbas took charge following Arafat’s death, a man who has repeatedly called the Intifada a mistake and called for a Palestinian state to live peacefully alongside Israel, it was a pity that Sharon ignored this important change on the Palestinian side.

The Intifada was a disaster for Israel but a calamity for the Palestinians. Not only did they lose lives at a rate of more than four for every Israeli killed, but all the material progress of the 1990s and a huge amount of infrastructure was destroyed. Roads were churned up, building destroyed, plans for an airport and a Gaza seaport devastated. The economy of the Gaza Strip hardly exists at all and that of the West Bank is limping along. Life in the West Bank is immobilized by hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints.

It can be said that Arafat to a large degree was responsible for Sharon’s election and the ascendency for the rejectionist right in 2001. But within two to three years, Sharon was making clear that he had changed. He hadn’t changed enough to engage in a new effort to negotiate peace with Arafat’s successor, Abbas, but he had changed enough to know that Israel had to withdraw from most of the Palestinian territories, in order to protect Israel’s Jewish and democratic character. But without the more practical and moderate new Palestinian leadership being rewarded with the prospect of improved conditions for their people, delivering at least tangible hope for their people, the likes of Hamas and other bad actors are in a position to come to the fore as they have.

Without Israel at least coordinating the Gaza withdrawal with the Palestinian Authority under Abbas, Hamas was able to claim that it was "armed resistance" that liberated Gaza and only armed resistance. But Hamas was elected very narrowly in January 2006 mostly on a reform, anti-corruption platform. They won about 75 percent of the legislative seats with only 44 percent of the vote as against 42 percent for Fatah, largely because Fatah was so disorganized that it actually ran candidates against itself in the constituency districts. The Palestinians had a form of proportional representation that included both competing national lists of candidates– in which the two parties, Fatah and Hamas tied– but also multi-representative constituency districts in which Fatah candidates ran against each other so that Hamas won a whopping majority.

But even though most Palestinians agree consistently in opinion surveys, as do most Israelis, in the need for a two-state solution, a peace agreement with Israel, Palestinians voted for Hamas to achieve change. In so doing, they also voted for a political movement that insisted on defending the right to attack Israelis, even after Israel had withdrawn totally from Gaza. In doing so, Hamas and the other violent groups destroyed the successful efforts made by James Wolfensohn, the former president of the World Bank, and others to secure greenhouses from the departing settlers. Israel’s reaction to the constant rocket attacks into Israel, primarily in the vicinity of Sderot, a couple of miles outside of Gaza, has been harsh. This reaction was especially brutal in response to the cross-border raid in June 2006 that killed two Israelis and captured the young soldier, Gilad Shalit. Several hundred Palestinians (600, I believe), about half of whom were fighters and the other half innocents, were killed in the summer of 2006.

Yet, an offer of a long-term truce from Hamas was recently rejected by Israel. It was considered by the Olmert cabinet and advocated by several ministers. It is hard to see an end to the rocket attacks, now with increasingly greater range, if an agreement isn’t reached somehow with Hamas to end the fighting. I’m not a fan of Hamas, I don’t especially trust their motives, but I believe that it’s more likely that Palestinians will successfully police themselves rather than for Israel to succeed in stopping these attacks. If rampaging through Gaza in 2006 accomplished nothing, I see no reason to expect that Israel can put down Palestinian resistance without internal cooperation. And it will be politically difficult for Abbas’s government in the West Bank to negotiate a peace agreement with Israel, in the name of all Palestinians, when Israel is engaged militarily in Gaza.

The forces are aligned for one last chance this year to achieve an agreement. It is said that the chemistry is good between Prime Minister Olmert and PA President Abbas. Olmert is on record as saying that if Israel does not soon reach an agreement to establish a Palestinian state as a peaceful neighbor, that Israel is doomed, that Israel will soon no longer be a majority Jewish state and that a disenfranchised Arab majority will win the sympathy of the world in the same way that the struggle against apartheid was won in South Africa. Olmert has used exactly the South African example, even saying the "a" word.

But it’s not clear to me that Olmert has the political will or the skill to take the bold moves necessary to make a reasonable agreement. It’s also not clear to me that Abbas has what it takes, or that the Bush administration– not known for its diplomatic prowess– has the ability to pull this off. If I were a betting man, I would bet against it.

Olmert needs to fulfill the first phase of the old Road Map that Pres. Bush unfurled back in 2003: to dismantle dozens of unauthorized settlements– illegal settlements– filled with young radicals who lord it over and often steal or damage crops and property of their Arab neighbors. Olmert must also be prepared to compromise over what is now the expanded Jerusalem, a much larger area than Jerusalem was prior to 1967; this means a willingness for Arab-populated neighborhoods of East Jerusalem to fall under eventual Palestinian sovereignty. It means a freeze on settlement activity, including plans to expand housing for Jews in the southeastern neighborhood of Jerusalem called Har Homa– strategically placed as it is to effectively cut off Arab East Jerusalem from the West Bank. If this occurs, 200,000 Jerusalem Arabs will lose all of their natural social and economic links with the West Bank. This could make these 200,000 Arab residents of East Jerusalem violently hostile, something that they have mostly not been so far.

At the same time, the Palestinians need to decide, once and for all, that the right of return they claim for the refugee generations must be exercised only in relation to a return to the small part of historic Palestine that is slated to become the Palestinian state. They also must renew a close security relationship with Israel and the US and other countries that might become involved in helping to maintain security for both Israelis and Palestinians. They must stop all incitement against Israel by the media and in the schools– progress which has been made but must be deepened and monitored; and this effort against incitement and the preaching of hatred should make greater progress once Israeli soldiers and settlers are no longer directly in the faces of Palestinians. ...

I went on to mention that Olmert’s political survival in office as prime minister is iffy— especially with the then-looming report of the Winograd Commission investigating the government’s conduct in the Lebanese war of 2006. But he may have dodged the bullet this week because of a relatively light rebuke in the final Winograd report.

Barack Obama & the Segregated Environmental Movement

Barack Obama could not get a job in the environmental movement. The exceptions that would hire him include Environmental Defense, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Law Institute and the World Resources Institute (see why). The rest of the enviromental movement makes the Bush Administration look like the NAACP when it comes to hiring and retaining Blacks. The traditional environmental movement is one of the most segregated sectors in America. The 'environment' in many of these groups is so hostile that they cannot retain Blacks even when they hire one. The only Blacks hired at these groups are in administrative positions. A recent phenomenon within the groups is to hire a black comptroller or development staffer. But no policy professionals. Another obfuscation tool is the hire 'one black rule,' also used by many industry associations, as a minimum shield against charges of discrimination. A recent "Oregonian" article describes the current racial status of the movement. We believe these groups are secretly proud of this racist elitism.

Environmentalists For Obama

So what does this have to do with Senator Barack Obama. Well he could become president or vice president. Why should a President Obama listen to a group of people who exclude people who look like him? And why would this powerful lobby care what a President Obama thought about them anyway? Although the Congressional Black Caucus, of which Obama is a member, has grown to over a tenth of the House and one percent of the Senate and are consistently the highest rated caucus in Congress on environmental issues, it has not affected the hiring practices in the mainstream green movement. Maybe they will rely on the fact that the presidential candidate has not bothered them during his four years in the Senate. Maybe mainstream greens have concluded that Obama does not care about their segregationist and discriminatory practices. Maybe a President Barack Obama would have no effect on the elitist greens. After all, the $6 billion per year environmental movement is a very powerful special interest lobby. And the unwritten 'No Blacks Allowed' policy would probably include a President Barack Obama.

Campaigners win key animal test FOI victory

Press release from the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection:

The Government has been unlawfully withholding the details of the animal experiments it licenses in the UK, according to a key ruling from the Information Tribunal released today.

The case was brought by the BUAV after the Home Office refused to reveal basic information about animal experiment licences the organisation had applied for under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). It attempted to argue that only the information which researchers applying for such licences chose to publish in summaries could be released.

The basic information asked for by the BUAV covers the purpose of the experiment, what is to be done to the animals, how the applicant intended to limit animal suffering and, crucially, how they proved it was essential they used animals rather than alternatives in their proposed experiments. The BUAV is not and has never been interested in information that identifies who is or was involved or where the research is or has taken place.

...

The organisation first asked for the licence information of five separate applications as a FOI test case soon after the Act came into force in January 2005. The Government had attempted to fudge its duty to release information so far by releasing ‘summaries’ of the licence information spun for public consumption. The tribunal agreed with the BUAV that such summaries are biased towards emphasising the positive aspects of the research and said they amounted to creating a “perception of a positive spin”. The BUAV argues this inevitably means any negative aspects such as animal suffering are downplayed.

‘This is not just a victory for the BUAV – this is a victory for the British public who expect to access honest and open information about the nature of animal experiments that take place in the UK. The Home Office’s repeated refusal to release basic non-confidential information about animal experiments just goes to further prove they are afraid of how the public will react if they are given real information about what actually happens to animals in UK laboratories, often at tax payers expense,’ said BUAV chief executive Michelle Thew.

The Home Office has been directed by the Tribunal to conduct a proper analysis of what is, and what is not confidential within the licence applications in question following the ruling.

Ends

Missed Opportunities, Part 3

More from the text of my talk to the Jewish Federation of Eastern Connecticut, delivered in New London, Jan. 20:

Ehud Barak won about 57 percent of the direct vote of Israelis in 1999 on Barak’s claim that he would finally end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But Barak ran up against a problem that few of us look at: Israel’s electoral system is dysfunctional.

We start with the fact that Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, is elected with an extreme form of proportional representation. There are no single constituency districts for seats in the Knesset; for the sake of elections, the entire country is one giant constituency with competing parties presenting electoral lists and how many of each party are elected depends upon how many votes a list gets in relation to these competing lists. It’s a mathematical exercise: lists that don’t get enough votes to elect two people do not pass the qualifying threshold. But this threshold, at about two percent, is very low relative to other countries with proportional representation. So many small parties are able to get into the Knesset and no single party has ever been able to win an outright majority of the vote. As a result, every government has always been a coalition that is blackmailed– in effect– forced to protect certain minority interests.

There was a short-term effort to reform this system that failed dismally: for three elections– 1996, ‘99 and 2001– the electorate cast one separate vote for prime minister, and another for a party list running for the Knesset. Actually, 2001 was only a vote for prime minister, something that would have been impossible under the previous system. Immediately after the 2001 election, the Knesset eliminated the separate ballot for prime minister and the old system was mostly restored. As a result of the most recent election in 2006, Members of the Knesset represent 11 separate lists and as many as 17 distinct political parties– some of these 11 lists include an alliance of two or three political parties which have agreed to run on a common list.

The reason that I’ve gotten into all this is that this proportional representation system makes Israeli governments weak and unstable. They are weak in that they often have to incorporate a large number of parties and different interests to achieve a majority in the Knesset; in a parliamentary form of government (unlike the separation of powers system we have in the US with a separately elected Congress and executive), a government cannot stay in office if it cannot command the support of a majority of the 120 Members of the Knesset.

The major political parties are weak and getting weaker. The current government of Ehud Olmert has a ruling party, Kadima, with only 29 seats. Olmert has cobbled together a coalition government in partnership with four or five other parties. The traditional major political parties have both plummeted in strength to historic lows: 19 seats for Labor and 12 for Likud.

Going back to Ehud Barak’s short-lived government in 1999-2000, his failures were partly due to the unstable coalition that he led. One of his coalition partners was the National Religious Party– an old Zionist party that has become quite right-wing in recent years because it is the most fervently supportive of the militant settler movement. Due to a combination of his sense of pragmatism and his bad judgment, Barak allowed this party to drive his policy on the settlements, and in fact during his short rein, even though he was the defacto liberal or left-wing prime minister, settlements were expanded.

As bold as Barak was in certain ways, he was not so bold as to break with precedent and have one or more Israeli-Arab parties in his coalition. This would have given him a more stable base than having right-wingers as part of his government. Since support from Israeli-Arab voters was critical in his decisive election victory, Israeli-Arabs felt insulted and grievously alienated from Israel because Barak failed to reward them politically. They were further alienated when 13 Arab citizens of Israel were killed by police in violent demonstrations in October 2000, after the intifada had started. It is widely agreed that the police used lethal force unnecessarily in this incident.

There were important ways that Barak failed his test as a political leader and a diplomat. But his unstable coalition forced him into a make-or-break desperate negotiation with Arafat at Camp David in the summer of 2000. This was after Barak had let a year go by without any effort at negotiation or agreement with the Palestinians (guaranteeing that he’d alienate the Palestinians).
Probably all who were involved made mistakes at Camp David. Barak was guilty of not taking, nor even seeking, advice and ad libbing his way in these negotiations. He proved that he had not made a successful transition from being a military officer and commanding general who gave orders to subordinates, rather than a political leader who needed to negotiate and compromise with other political leaders.

I wish that Arafat had responded positively to Barak’s take-it or leave-it style of negotiating, but he was disinclined to do so. It is possible that Arafat was never reliable as a partner for peace, but I don’t think it was because he was incapable of peace. I think rather that Arafat was always a schemer who was alert to keeping his options open; but if the peace process had been going well, I think he would not have opposed it. When it was failing, after the Camp David Summit, he was not inclined to go out of his way to save it. I don’t believe that he orchestrated the violence that became the second Intifada at the end of Sept. 2000, but he thought wrongly that some violence would help his negotiating position. He also thought that once started, he could control it to his advantage. He was entirely mistaken.

Instead, he destroyed Barak politically and caused the entire peace camp to be thrown out of power in the election of Feb. 2001, which overwhelmingly elected Ariel Sharon. Sharon himself had helped instigate the Intifada by insisting on marching on the Temple Mount, with the provocative escort of hundreds of Israeli security personnel; the Intifada broke out the very next day as Arab protestors started to pelt Jewish worshipers at the Western Wall with rocks. Israel responded with tear gas and lethal gunfire.

Even so, we can look back at Barak’s short stint as prime minister for not only his failure, but also for how close he came to success. In the time that he was not negotiating with the Palestinians, he came to literally within a few meters of a peace treaty with Syria; a few meters one way or the other is all that separated the parties. And in January of 2001, Israelis and Palestinians again met at Taba, Egypt, where they came very close to finishing a deal when time literally ran out, the elections took place and Ariel Sharon took office with a mandate NOT to negotiate. Click for Part 4.

Straw: "large array of safeguards" against "petty" FOI requests

Responding to a recent question in the Commons from Norman Baker MP, Jack Straw confirmed the Government believes the FOI Act should be extended to the private sector. In response to a subsequent question about the need for amendments to guards against "repeated, petty and often exorbitant" requests, he replied that "there is already a large array of safeguards in the Act and within the practice of the Information Commissioner."
Hansard 29 Jan 2008 : Column 156

Norman Baker (Lewes) (LD): What plans he has to bring forward amendments to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [182471]

The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): The Freedom of Information Act 2000 has now been in force for three years and appears to be working well, although we keep it under continuous review. We are not proceeding with amendments to the fees regulation. However, we are consulting on whether to extend FOI coverage to a range of organisations that are in the private sector, but carry out public functions. An independent review of the 30-year rule is under way and due to report this summer.

Norman Baker: I welcome that response, and agree with the direction of travel that the Secretary of State is taking. Does he agree that it is a nonsense that the British Potato Council is covered by the 2000 Act but private water companies, which provide an essential and monopolistic service, are not? Furthermore, the British Railways Board, which simply exists in a cosy corner somewhere, is covered, but Network Rail is not. Will he sort that out?

Mr. Straw: I fully understand the hon. Gentleman’s point and thank him for his earlier remarks. As the boundary between the public and private sectors for the delivery of what are essentially public services has moved, so we believe that the arrangements should move as well. That is why we are consulting on the matter.

Mr. Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP): Would the Secretary of State consider amendments to the 2000 Act that would protect the public’s right to the information but guard against repeated, petty and often exorbitant requests that are made frequently and do nothing to add to freedom of information?

Mr. Straw: There is already a large array of safeguards in the Act and within the practice of the Information Commissioner. If the hon. Gentleman has specific examples of concern to him, I am ready to follow them up, including with the commissioner.

A brave new world (or, our answer to FUD)

Posted by Nitin Mangtani, Lead Product Manager, Enterprise Search

A flurry of media and market interest in enterprise search makes us glad we're instead focused on the user experience in search. On Monday, January 21, 2008, Microsoft offered to buy FAST Search & Transfer, for $1.2 billion. Coupled with recent multimillion-dollar investments by Intel and SAP in the enterprise search vendor Endeca, these moves suggest the extent to which many are scrambling to fill out their existing enterprise search offering.

Others have taken a different approach. In a moment of deja vu, we discovered that another enterprise search player, Autonomy, has recently circulated a white paper about the Google Search Appliance called "Google in the Enterprise." This new document competes with Autonomy's earlier effort to portray us as something we are not.

Before we clarify some of the significant inaccuracies of this white paper, we'd like to point out that all the market movement in enterprise search hints at what we've known since launching the Google Search Appliance five years ago: The key to coming out ahead lies not in any FUD-fueled sales strategy or multimillion-dollar investment in traditional technology, but in the realization that there's a revolution afoot.

This revolution is making information easier to find, share, and deliver to everyday workers. This brave new world means responding to business demands with products that deploy quickly and update simply, so users can access the information they need to be productive -- all without having to spend a fortune. Low upfront and deployment costs are the name of the game. And searching for information behind the firewall can be as easy and powerful as searching for information on Google.com.

Now on to the fine print. Here are a few corrections to the Autonomy white paper we'd like to make:

1. Comprehensiveness: Autonomy states that the Google Search Appliance "does not index all your critical content." On the contrary, the Google Search Appliance was designed to search all critical content in the enterprise, including file shares, intranets, databases, and real-time business data - all from one simple search box. The Google Search Appliance also comes equipped with on-board content connectors, such as those for SharePoint and Documentum, and the content connector framework, which is a published, open source framework that provides flexibility for anyone -- customers, SIs, ISVs -- to rapidly extend the reach of the Google Search Appliance.

2. Security: The paper states that the Google Search Appliance's "security features are not sufficient for enterprise use." In actuality, the Google Search Appliance provides two levels of security; first, the Google Search Appliance provides out-of-the-box support for multiple security access control systems (such as SAML standards, SSO, NTLM, etc.). Secondly, the Google Search Appliance supports document-level security with all content sources, which ensures that end-users see only those documents in the results list to which they have access.

3. Relevancy: According to hundreds of search relevancy and judgment tests that anyone (competitors or prospects) can run from the National Institute of Standards & Technology, Google's enterprise search precision and relevancy are the highest in the industry. Our relevancy has been put to the test in thousands of enterprise deployments around the world and more than 50% of our customers switched to Google because of our higher relevancy.

4. User Experience: While we couldn't find the words "user experience" anywhere in the Autonomy paper, Autonomy claims that the Google Search Appliance "does not offer the advanced retrieval or automatic information operations required by the enterprise." The Google Search Appliance does offer advanced operations; however, we've made sure to keep interfaces fast and easy to use. According to usability expert Jakob Nielsen, "the search front end should make searching the intranet effortless" and "a company with poor intranet usability would save $3 million per year if it improved its intranet usability to an average level. And a company with average intranet usability would save $2.4 million per year if it improved its intranet to the usability level found in the best 25%." We think he's on to something.

Finally, Autonomy mentions that the Google Search Appliance "capabilities are still being honed." This is certainly true: We are constantly working to improve the appliance, to make sure it offers ever increasing relevancy out of the box. The fact is that we employ thousands of engineers focused on search relevancy and quality. In addition, we are the fastest innovator in the industry. In the last three months alone, seven new Google Enterprise Labs experiments have been launched (by Google, not third parties as Autonomy claimed) to enhance the enterprise search experience.

Although the above list is by no means thorough, we feel it's important to clarify misinformation about enterprise search. Ultimately, it might be better to let our products and our customers from all industries do the talking. It's a brave new world in enterprise search, and we're already deeply engaged in it. How about you?

Disclosure logs

Written Answers to PQs by Norman Baker MP show that government departments only include a tiny percentage of FOI responses in their disclosure logs:

25 Jan 2008 : Column 2271W
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of Freedom of Information requests received by his Department have given rise to responses that have been published by his Department. [180214]

Mrs. McGuire: This Department has adopted a selective disclosure log whereby only the most interesting and high profile pieces of information released in response to Freedom of Information requests are published. In 2005 and 2006 around 1 per cent. of such responses were published on the Department's web-based Freedom of Information disclosure log. The Department does however routinely publish large amounts of information on its website including policy documents and research, analysis and statistics.

25 Jan 2008 : Column 2308W
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what percentage of Freedom of Information requests received by his Department have given rise to responses that have been published by his Department. [180222]

Meg Munn: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has published 5 per cent. (165) of responses to 3,125 Freedom of Information Act requests received between January 2005, when the Act came into force, and the end of September 2007. The FCO has adopted a selective disclosure log whereby only the most interesting and high profile pieces of information are published.

23 Jan 2008 : Column 2045W
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what percentage of freedom of information requests received by her Department have given rise to responses that have been published by her Department. [180211]

Mr. Dhanda: Communities and Local Government has adopted a selective disclosure policy whereby only the most high profile pieces of information and those of wider public interest are published as a matter of course on the disclosure log on its website at:

•http://www.communities.gov.uk/coporate/about/freedom-of-information/disclosure-log/

To date, 5 per cent. of responses to requests made to Communities and its predecessor Department, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Environmental Information Regulations 2004 since 1 January 2005 have been published.

21 Jan 2008 : Column 1564W
Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of Freedom of Information requests received by his Department have given rise to responses that have been published by his Department. [180223]

Angela Eagle: The number of requests to HM Treasury, along with those of other central Government bodies, is published by the Ministry of Justice in quarterly and annual reports. Information has so far been published up to September 2007 and shows that HM Treasury had received 3,260 requests.

HM Treasury website includes a disclosure log which publishes those disclosures judged to be of wider public interest. For the aforementioned period, the Treasury has published 78 disclosures on their website—2.4 per cent. of all requests received.

14 Jan 2008 : Column 883W
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of Freedom of Information requests received by his Department have given rise to responses that have been published by his Department. [175708]

Derek Twigg: The following table details the number of requests received, and the number and percentage of these which have been published via the online Disclosure Log in each of the last three years since the FOI Act came into force. Figures for 2007 are currently available only up until the end of September of that year.



The Disclosure Log is available at the MOD's website at:

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FreedomOfInformation/DisclosureLog

and is easily accessible from the main FOI website, www.foi.mod.uk


14 Jan 2008 : Column 884W
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what criteria are used to decide which of his Department’s responses to requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 are published on the Department’s website; and if he will make a statement. [175715]

Derek Twigg [holding answer 7 January 2008]: Where responses to requests made under the Freedom of Information Act are judged to be of wider public interest, the Ministry of Defence publishes them through the Department’s online Disclosure Log. In determining which responses are of wider public interest, the Ministry of Defence assesses whether responses meet one or more of the following criteria:

• response to a request received from parliamentarians, businesses and academics;
• response to a request received from the media;
• response containing information relating to topical or high-profile subjects or judged to be of interest to the wider public, or that promote the transparency or accountability of MOD;
• response to a repeated or common request; and
• response to a request that asks for a copy of a response to a previous request.
  

These criteria are broadly in line with the “Best Practice Guidance on Disclosure Logs” issued by the then Department for Constitutional Affairs in 2005. However, these criteria are neither prescriptive nor exhaustive, and other responses are considered for publication if they are identified as potentially being of wider public interest.

AAEA International Environmental Protection Activities

AAEA is a small but powerful organization. AAEA believes in the phrase, "Act Locally, Think Globally." That is why AAEA recently participated in activities in Puerto Rico, Brazil, China and France. So in addition to our domestic operations, AAEA has 'boots on the ground' in Nigeria and China.

AAEA Nigeria Director Ifeanyi Joshua Ezekwe has 17 years of experience in environmental services management. AAEA wants Nigeria to enhance its energy infrastructure and environmental protection. Nigeria has the best 'sweet' crude oil in the world, but there are many issues surrounding its production and use. Nigeria also needs to expand its electricity production and infrastructure. Mr. Ezekwe gives us valuable outreach services in Africa's largest country.

AAEA (CECE) China Director Zhang Xiaoping provides us with important outreach services in China. Our China work is through the AAEA parent Center for Environment, Commerce & Energy (CECE) because the African American title of our organization would not make too much sense in China. Director Zhang was invaluable to our American delegation when we visited energy, agricultural and chemical facilities in 2007. China is a dynamic society with very challenging energy and enviromental issues facing it, particularly in the air and water quality areas. And these issues have global implications and specific effects on the U.S. We decided to work in China because of the global warming issue. If you're not addressing China, then you are not seriously addressing the issue. Maybe we will set up shop in India soon for the same reason.

AAEA Has 'Boots on the Ground' in New York and Midwest

AAEA is addressing environmental and energy issues in the Northeast and the Midwestern regions of the U.S. We are working to assure that these regions have reliable energy at reasonable prices. Electricity, natural gas, oil, hydro, wind and ethanol are all critical resources that are needed to assure that the American way of life can be maintained. AAEA promotes the efficient use of these resources and we seek to expand participation in policy decision making regarding environmental issues.

AAEA New York Director Dan Durett, left, is providing the 'boots on the ground' to assure energy delivery reliability in the Big Apple, the state and the Northeastern Region. Mr. Durett has decades of experience in addressing energy and environmental policies. AAEA New York wants a new power plant licensing law passed and wants to assure that enough electricity is available to support the region.

AAEA Midwest Director James Mosley, right, is addressing important environmental and energy issues in the Midwestern Region. With the passage of the Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007, and its requirement to utilize 36 billion gallons per year of ethanol, Mr. Mosley is a vital resource for our work in that region. There are issues surrounding the use of coal that AAEA will have a significant role in addressing too.

Green Jobs

It looks like the old CETA (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act) Program is coming back in the form of alternative energy training and jobs. The Green Jobs Act of 2007 (H.R. 2847) was part of the Energy Security & Independence Act of 2007 (H.R. 6) and amended the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 to establish an energy efficiency and renewable energy worker training program. AAEA will work to assure that this program is successful, particularly as it relates to at-risk youth.

The Green Jobs Act (GJA) directs the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to:

(1) establish an energy efficiency and renewable energy worker training program that targets certain persons (including individuals in need of updated training related to the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries, veterans, unemployed workers, and at-risk youth) and sectors of the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries; and

(2) establish a national research program to collect and analyze labor market data to track workforce trends resulting from energy-related initiatives under this Act.

The GJA directs the Secretary to award:

(1) National Energy Training Partnerships Grants on a competitive basis to nonprofit partnerships to carry out training programs that lead to economic self-sufficiency and develop an energy efficiency and renewable energy industries workforce;

(2) grants to states to administer, in coordination with a one-stop delivery system, labor market and labor exchange programs that include funding to state agencies to identify job openings, administer skill and aptitude testing, and provide counseling and case management services;

(3) energy training partnership program grants to states to administer renewable energy and energy efficiency workforce development programs; and

(4) at least 10 Pathways Out of Poverty Demonstration Program competitive grants to community based nonprofit organizations to carry out training that leads to impoverished families gaining economic self-sufficiency.

Americans Could Suffer Due To Loss Of Energy Backbone

America appears to have lost its will to provide abundant energy supplies to its citizens at reasonable prices. AAEA supports the production of sufficient supplies of energy that should be used efficiently and sold at reasonable prices. There are signs that supplies will tighten and prices will be too high because of misguided politics and misplaced priorities. There is virtually unlimited energy in the world so one would think it could be provided at reasonable prices. Unfortunately, each energy sector is being hampered, or could be hampered, from providing Americans with freedom generating energy. About 85% of our electricity comes from coal, nuclear power and natural gas. Oil has its own domestic contraints. Each sector has its challenges.

Oil: AAEA is promoting plug-in fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles as the front line replacement for gasoline. But with 300 million vehicles using most of our 20 million barrels of oil a day (half imported) and no refineries being built because of clean air laws, the price can only go up. And although we fear that ethanol could increase smog and special pipelines will have to be built to get it from field to filling stations, 36 billion gallons per year of the liquor have been mandated by Congress.

Coal: Global warming concern could lead to policies, including cap-&-trade or carbon taxes, that will increase the cost of producing electricity. Coal policies should accent technological solutions that will not inordinately increase the price of electricity to customers. We favor massive subsidies for coal to gasoline conversion (Fischer-Tropsch) using nuclear power on the front end to split hydrogen and oxygen in water for oxygen use in the coal plant fire box and hydrogen for the conversion and fuel cell production (See Full Description). Yet the Sierra Club [map] has a major push going to prevent the building of new coal plants.

Nuclear energy: The technology already solves global warming problems and over time could keep electricity prices stable (but definitely not the old 'too cheap to meter.') Yet appropriate subsidies to assure the building of the next 6 plants could be threatened by changing political winds and promotion of chic new trends, such as 'Green Jobs.' No mainstream environmental groups support nuclear power (opponents and proponents discount AAEA), but maybe litigation will be kept to a minimum and Wall Street will play ball, although power companies and investment houses will be closely scrutinizing expensive capital projects.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): This is currently the path of least resistance for building new power plants, but there isn't enough of it domestically and tight supplies raise prices. There are 5 LNG terminals in the U.S. today. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Coast Guard have approved 14 plants with 5 others approved in Canada and Mexico, 20 proposed and 20 more potential sites, but LNG simply is not taking off. Two projects in California were rejected and projects in Maryland and in the Long Island Sound are languishing. State NIMBYism is killing these projects.

Film encapsulates fate of Tunisian Jewry

Among the memorable films I’ve seen in Lincoln Center's Jewish Film Festival is the world premiere of "Villa Jasmin." This is the basically true story of a French-Tunisian Jew who returns as a 30 year old with his pregnant wife to explore the family roots he left behind 20 years before in Tunisia, when he departed for France as an orphan (both his parents had died of natural causes within three months of each other).

His father was a politically active left-wing journalist, arrested by the Vichy French authorities and turned over to the Nazis who put him in a concentration camp. He survived largely because he was regarded as a political prisoner (sheltered by his Italian last name) rather than as a Jew.
It's a window on Tunisian-Jewish life, including the split between the older community of Arabic speakers and the more recent arrivals from Livorno, Italy who were French speakers. There are resonances and real-life confirmations of Robert Satloff's findings in his book, "Among the Righteous," on warm North African Muslim-Jewish relations during, before and after World War II.

The director is Ferid Boughedir, a Francophone of Tunisian-Arab background who spoke at the premiere. He made the movie as a favor to his friend, Serge Moati. Moati is a French-Tunisian-Jewish writer and filmmaker who wrote a novel of the same name, from this story of his actual journey to recount his parents' lives together. Apparently, Moati felt too close to the story to make the movie himself. Some of the actors are also of North African-Jewish background and French-language culture.

As with many Tunisian Jews, the father in the story was caught in the contradictions of their situation. He speaks French and hardly any Arabic, is dedicated to French culture but also looks forward to independence from French rule. He is not ashamed of his Jewishness but is an enthusiast of French Republican-style secularism. When his wife mentions upon his return from Europe that her brother has become a Zionist, he simply states that it’s too bad that his brother-in-law has given in to a "fantasy." Given the fate of North African Jewry, however, it’s Serge, the French-speaking Tunisian Jew, dedicated to a vision of life in an independent Arab country informed by the French Revolution’s "Declaration of the Rights of Man," who may have been unrealistic.

But there is nobility in his universalistic idealism. In a late scene in the film, Serge addresses his party comrades who rally to celebrate his safe return from European imprisonment; he mentions comrades with obvious Jewish names, arrested with him, who did not survive. They close the meeting by singing the socialist anthem, the Internationale.

As Mr. Boughedir, the filmmaker, indicated in his talk, Tunisia still has a viable Jewish community of a few thousand and has enjoyed a level of tolerance there that is uncommon in the Arab and Muslim worlds. But as he also admitted, this is left over from the much larger community of 200,000, most of which fled in the face of anti-Semitic riots following the Six Day War in 1967. According to Boughedir, the Tunisian government restored order and prosecuted many of the rioters, but the damage was done to the trust most Tunisian Jews had in their future in an Arab country. Still, according to the director, many Jews return to their former homeland each year as visitors.

Postscript: One offhand remark of Mr. Boughedir indicated to me how little non-Jews (even educated and sympathetic non-Jews) appreciate the tiny minority status of Jews in the world (perhaps 15 million today, as opposed to 18 million on the eve of the Holocaust). This is significant because it underscores how the vulnerability of Jews is little understood. When asked how many Tunisian Jews there had been, he said, "200,000– not even half a million." Now 200,000 is a relatively large community by Jewish standards; there were only about ten or so that were larger, but perhaps not realizing how few Jews there are in the world, he saw this number as small.

President Bush State of the Union: On Environment & Energy

"To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil. Last year, I asked you to pass legislation to reduce oil consumption over the next decade, and you responded. Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power. Let us continue investing in advanced battery technology and renewable fuels to power the cars and trucks of the future."

"Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride. The United States is committed to strengthening our energy security and confronting global climate change. And the best way to meet these goals is for America to continue leading the way toward the development of cleaner and more efficient technology."

FERC Issues Final EIS on Broadwater LNG Project

FERC Staff issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the Broadwater LNG Project (Docket Nos. CP06-54-000, et al.-Issued: January 11, 2008). The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) in cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard (Coast Guard); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service; and the New York Department of State has prepared a final EIS for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal and natural gas pipeline (referred to as the Broadwater LNG Project) proposed by Broadwater Energy LLC and Broadwater Pipeline LLC (jointly referred to as Broadwater). AAEA supports this project and presented testimony at four of the FERC hearings in New York and Connecticut.

The proposed LNG terminal would be located in New York State waters of Long Island Sound, approximately 9 miles from the nearest shoreline of Long Island, and about 10 miles from the nearest shoreline in Connecticut. The terminal consists of a floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) that would be attached to a yoke mooring system (YMS) which includes a mooring tower embedded in the seafloor. The FSRU would look like a marine vessel and would remain moored in place for the duration of the Project (expected to be 30 years or more). LNG would be delivered to the FSRU by LNG carriers, temporarily stored, vaporized (regasified), and then transported in a new subsea natural gas pipeline that would extend beneath the seafloor from the FSRU approximately 21.7 miles to an offshore connection with the existing Iroquois Gas Transmission System (IGTS) pipeline in Long Island Sound. Natural gas would be routed from the FSRU to the subsea pipeline and into the IGTS pipeline for delivery at an average flow rate of about 1.0 billion cubic feet per day. LNG would be delivered to the FSRU by 2 to 3 LNG carriers per week to meet the Project’s planned send-out volumes of natural gas. (MORE)

The Case For Fully Restoring American Rail

This is easily the best station aside from Chicago. The station is near the stadium and several other big destinations. The signs are new and this is clearly a thriving place. We pull in next to a Ski Train, which in the winter takes skiiers straight to the resort. As part of servicing the train, men with absurdly long squeegees wash every window. I appreciate that.

DailyKos

The Case For Fully Restoring American Rail

This is easily the best station aside from Chicago. The station is near the stadium and several other big destinations. The signs are new and this is clearly a thriving place. We pull in next to a Ski Train, which in the winter takes skiiers straight to the resort. As part of servicing the train, men with absurdly long squeegees wash every window. I appreciate that.

DailyKos

Missed Opportunities, Part 2

This is the second installment of the prepared text for my talk to the Jewish Federation of Eastern Connecticut, delivered on Sunday, Jan. 20, in New London:

The first seriously bad incident during the Oslo peace process occurred on Purim, in February 1994. Baruch Goldstein, a medical doctor and West Bank settler who lived in Kiryat Arba next door to Hebron, murdered 29 Palestinians at prayer in Hebron, spraying them with his machine gun, before he was overwhelmed and beaten to death in turn. Goldstein was a disciple of the right-wing extremist, Meir Kahane.

Most Israelis and most Jews around the world were mortified by what Goldstein had done, but other than issuing apologies, Israel did nothing. Yitzhak Rabin’s government debated a radical response that I believe might have made a difference and decisively improved the future outcome of events. They discussed forcibly evicting the extremist settler community in Hebron and possibly in Kiryat Arba as well. It would have been very difficult to do this in Kiryat Arba, a settlement with several thousand occupants, but easier in Hebron, where about 400 Jews were guarded by a couple of thousand soldiers.

We can’t know if evicting the settlers from at least one of these places would have been regarded by most Palestinians as an adequate response to Goldstein’s crime, but the argument could certainly have been made and something very concrete would have been done. When the History Channel ran a documentary on Palestinian terrorism a couple of years ago, it claimed that Yiyah Ayyash, known as "the engineer," the master bombmaker for Hamas, became a terrorist as a personal reaction to the Goldstein massacre in Hebron. Ayyash adapted the suicide belt for Palestinian use. He was responsible for the deaths and injuries of a hundred or more Israelis in ‘94 and ‘95.

Following Rabin’s assassination in Nov. 1995, Shimon Peres took over as prime minister. Early in January 1996, the Shin Bet, Israel’s General Security Service located Ayyash and Peres gave his okay to killing him with an exploding cell phone. Sadly, in the middle of the election campaign, Hamas and Islamic Jihad struck back with four or five terror attacks. Three were devastating — two on the same bus line in Jerusalem and one at a mall in Tel Aviv, killing numerous children in costume for Purim. All in all, about 60 Israeli civilians were murdered with many more injured. Peres immediately lost his 20 point lead in the polls over Bibi Netanyahu.

Peres was suddenly locked in an unexpectedly tight election race with Netanyahu, the much younger, photogenic and well-spoken Likud candidate. When Hezbollah started raining missiles on northern Israel in March or April ‘96, Peres felt the need to show strength in the Israeli response. Israel warned the entire population of a vast area of southern Lebanon to abandon their homes and began a massive bombardment by artillery and aircraft. This went on for days on end until about 100 Lebanese civilians seeking shelter at a UN position were killed by Israeli shells; this was a tragedy caused by Israel responding to rockets launched nearby by Hezbollah. Israel’s offensive was immediately halted but Israel was left explaining what went wrong. In the meantime, Israeli Arabs were outraged. Many would have been expected to vote for Peres in the election, but they stayed away from the polls in droves, guaranteeing Netanyahu a squeeker of a victory.

Peres had tried to prove himself as a strong, security-minded prime minister– first in killing a terrorist leader and then in Lebanon. Both of these moves, however, resulted in disaster. The key decision that led to disaster was the killing of Ayyash. I don’t have tears for the man, he deserved to die. But he was killed at a time that Hamas and the other terrorist factions were quiet. That very same month of January 1996, Israel made a large-scale turnover of authority to the Palestinians in most West Bank cities and towns. Then there were the first-ever Palestinian national elections. In the eyes of many Israelis, the terror attacks of February and March ‘96 proved that the Palestinians were unreliable as partners for peace. But more accurately, two terrorist factions were reacting to Israel’s killing of one of their leaders.

In the meantime, Netanyahu had campaigned as a moderate, not a complete foe of the Oslo process. In fact, the last two negotiated agreements Israel concluded with the Palestinians were made with Netanyahu in charge. One of them involved Israel withdrawing from 80 percent of the city of Hebron, the only major West Bank city where Jews live.

There was one serious shooting episode during the Netanyahu years– a raging gun battle that resulted from bad communications regarding the building of a tunnel entrance near the Temple Mount/Dome of the Rock holy site, without Palestinian approval. But once both sides got past that, the late ‘90s, from 1997 until the peace process collapsed late in 2000, were among the safest years Israel ever experienced. This was mainly due to cooperation between Israel and Palestinian Authority security forces.

Nevertheless, Netanyahu was not eager to conclude the Oslo process, which would have meant a final negotiated agreement regarding the core issues: borders, especially regarding Jerusalem, the future of the settlements, the nature of a Palestinian state, the status of the Arab refugee population from 1948. So, Israelis, including Israeli Arabs, voted a landslide victory for the Labor party candidate, Ehud Barak, over Netanyahu. Click for Part 3.

J. Harold Greenlee on the Gospel of the Third Dimension

The following article is now available on-line in PDF:

J. Harold Greenlee, "Gospel of the Third Dimension," His 24 (1964) 1-3, 11.

In this short article Dr. Greenlee argues that there are good reasons why skeptics should consider the possibility of miracles.

Couple from Iran Cycles Around the World for Peace

On CNN International

Couple from Iran Cycles Around the World for Peace

On CNN International

Bocce changed passports?

From an article in the Telegraph, describing the amenities of Celebrity Cruises latest vessel,the Solstice.

Cruise Lines offers surf & turf

Bocce changed passports?

From an article in the Telegraph, describing the amenities of Celebrity Cruises latest vessel,the Solstice.

Cruise Lines offers surf & turf

USA Should Recycle Nuclear Waste Just Like France

Micheal O'Connell, Kateri Callahan, Derrick Freeman, Rob Keast,

Keith Smith, Norris McDonald, Gilles Clement, David Brown, Jack Spencer & Laurie Harrison

Used uranium fuel from commercial nuclear power plants can be recycled. Such reuse makes it a renewable resource and the USA should reduce the amount of actual waste that will go to Yucca Mountain, the mandated repository for geologic storage. Although the U.S. abandoned such recycling back in the 1970s, the French are leading the way in spent fuel reprocessing and reuse. AAEA President Norris McDonald went on a fact finding mission in November 2007 with a group of other Americans to tour France's reprocessing facility, La Hague.

The AREVA La Hague industrial complex reprocesses spent nuclear fuel on a 740 acre site with 6,000 employees. The recycling process consists of separating and conditioning the various components of the spent fuel so that they can be recycled as uranium and plutonium fuel. The energy materials contained in the fuel can be recycled because 97% of the spent fuel is recyclable when it leaves the nuclear reactor, 96% as uranium and 1% as plutonium, while 3% is non-reusable final waste.

In the photo above the fact finding group is standing over the final storage area for the reprocessed fuel where it is allowed to cool for 3 years before being shipped out for refabrication.

MORE

Preview of ISRAEL HORIZONS

A preview of the winter 2008 issue of ISRAEL HORIZONS, the quarterly publication of Meretz USA -- including a list of the contents and some links-- is now available at the Meretz USA Website.

ICO orders release of more information on MPs' spending

ICO press release: 22 January 2007

The Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, has ordered the House of Commons to release further details of some MPs’ spending, including incidental expenses and staff costs, on the grounds that such expenses arise from their role as public representatives and are reimbursed from the public purse.

The Information Commissioner has ruled that a breakdown of the total amounts claimed by some individual MPs for travel, incidental expenses, staffing, central IT provision, centrally purchased stationery and additional cost allowance should be released under the Freedom of Information Act. In the Commissioner’s view the legitimate public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the prejudice to the rights, freedom and legitimate interests of MPs.

This follows a request under freedom of information for details of spending relating to a number of MPs, including Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy, during the year 2003-2004.

The travel expense information requested in this case is the most detailed travel information considered by the Information Commissioner to date. After consideration the Information Commissioner has ordered disclosure of the individual amounts claimed for 2003-2004 broken down by mode of travel under the following headings, MPs’ travel (further broken down by European and travel on parliamentary business within the UK), family and staff’s official business travel and summary details of the number and cost of individual journeys.

In making his decision the Information Commissioner considered whether the information requested related to individuals acting in an official rather than a private capacity. In the Information Commissioner’s view if individual MPs had not been elected to carry out their role as public representatives they would not be entitled to claim the related expenses. However the Information Commissioner fully accepts that MPs are entitled to a degree of privacy and are entitled to expect that personal information about their private lives will be appropriately protected from disclosure.

The Information Commissioner ruled that it would be unfair to disclose the specific sums paid to named staff members during the year covered by the request. The Information Commissioner believes that releasing the total staffing costs broken down by month for the year requested and the number of staff this pertains to each month would not be unfair.

Read the decision notice

SIC newsletter Jan/Feb 2008

The first Inform newsletter of 2008 is available from the Scottish Information Commissioner's website:

Welcome to the first Inform of 2008. 2007 was a busy year for my Office, with over 230 formal decisions issued. Of these, however, only around 5% related to the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the EIRs). In this issue I consider the relationship between the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and the EIRs in more detail while I also highlight a significant recent decision which provides guidance for authorities on managing this relationship.

Re-appointment of SIC

The Scottish Parliament yesterday approved a motion to reappoint Kevin Dunion as Scottish Information Commissioner. The reappointment is until 23 February 2012.
Official Report Col 5537:

Scotland's freedom of information legislation is held in high regard throughout the world, largely because of Kevin Dunion's work. New Zealand is looking to adapt much of what we do and several other countries are looking to Kevin Dunion and his staff for help and advice on how to establish freedom of information regimes. Malawi, with which the Parliament has a close association, is one of those countries and is considering basing its freedom of information regime directly on that in Scotland. We are well ahead of what is happening south of the border.

Col 5538

That situation is due in large part to Mr Dunion and his excellent staff. He has never shied away from difficult decisions—the Scottish Executive has not always agreed with or welcomed his decisions. He has seldom been challenged and has never lost a court case. Mr Dunion has done an excellent job in establishing his office. I wish him every success in further developing the freedom of information regime in Scotland in the next four years.

Zaitzeff...Mmmmmmmm

It doesn't matter that I can't pronounce the name. It also doesn't matter that the place can hold a maximum of 12 hungry burger lovers. I ate a burger today at Zaitzeff on Nassau St. in lower Manhattan that knocked me over. It seems that fewer and fewer burgers in NYC these days are made with good old ground chuck. Everyone seems to have an angle, either stuffing their burgers with things like foie gras and braised short ribs (my friend Daniel Boulud's DB Burger - wow what a burger) or mixing different cuts of beef to make a sort of 'everything' patty (I'm thinking of BLT Burger that boldly mixes chuck, sirloin, short rib, AND brisket to little effect). Zaitzeff is there too, offering a sirloin burger and a Kobe beef burger made from American raised Wagyu cows (not to be confused with Japanese Kobe). I've eaten a ton of burgers in the past 7 years, tons, and even I still can't really tell the difference between Wagyu Kobe and a great beefburger cooked the same way. What I do know however is that the Kobe burger I ate today kicked ass. It was cooked to a perfect medium and served on a decent toasted Portuguese-type bun with sauteed onions. I made the mistake of ordering mine with mustard, a mistake because every burger spot in NYC believes they have to serve high-end mustard with their high-end burgers. If you are into overpowering, makes-your-eyes-water Dijon, go for it. For those who know me, spicy brown (or yellow) is the only way to go. In the tiny kitchen behind the register you can watch your burger being made on the compact flattop (and fries bubbling in a cast-iron skillet, not a deep fryer). It's a great burger spot and glad that good friend Carey tipped me off to the place.

Zaitzeff...Mmmmmmmm

It doesn't matter that I can't pronounce the name. It also doesn't matter that the place can hold a maximum of 12 hungry burger lovers. I ate a burger today at Zaitzeff on Nassau St. in lower Manhattan that knocked me over. It seems that fewer and fewer burgers in NYC these days are made with good old ground chuck. Everyone seems to have an angle, either stuffing their burgers with things like foie gras and braised short ribs (my friend Daniel Boulud's DB Burger - wow what a burger) or mixing different cuts of beef to make a sort of 'everything' patty (I'm thinking of BLT Burger that boldly mixes chuck, sirloin, short rib, AND brisket to little effect). Zaitzeff is there too, offering a sirloin burger and a Kobe beef burger made from American raised Wagyu cows (not to be confused with Japanese Kobe). I've eaten a ton of burgers in the past 7 years, tons, and even I still can't really tell the difference between Wagyu Kobe and a great beefburger cooked the same way. What I do know however is that the Kobe burger I ate today kicked ass. It was cooked to a perfect medium and served on a decent toasted Portuguese-type bun with sauteed onions. I made the mistake of ordering mine with mustard, a mistake because every burger spot in NYC believes they have to serve high-end mustard with their high-end burgers. If you are into overpowering, makes-your-eyes-water Dijon, go for it. For those who know me, spicy brown (or yellow) is the only way to go. In the tiny kitchen behind the register you can watch your burger being made on the compact flattop (and fries bubbling in a cast-iron skillet, not a deep fryer). It's a great burger spot and glad that good friend Carey tipped me off to the place.

'Release dossier', ministry told

Chris Ames
Tuesday 23 January 2008
New Statesman

The Information Tribunal has today ordered the Foreign Office to release the secret draft of the Iraq WMD dossier written by former top spin doctor.

The move casts doubt over the government’s claim that the document played no part in the production of the dossier.

However, the Tribunal has allowed a handwritten note to be redacted which the Foreign Office claimed would be damaging to international relations.

The FCO has said that it is studying the Tribunal decision and declined to name the authors of the handwritten comments.

The secret draft was written by John Williams, the FCO’s then director of communications, on 7 and 8 September 2002, just days after Tony Blair announced that the government would publish a dossier of intelligence showing that Saddam Hussein threatened the world with his weapons of mass destruction.

It preceded what the government would later claim to be the first draft, written by Joint Intelligence Committee chairman John Scarlett on 10 September.

See also:

'No more draft dodging' by Chris Ames on The Guardian's commentisfree

Read the Tribunal's decision

Quick Visit to Five Guys Brooklyn

In need of some greasy goodness, wife Casey and I called in an order the other day to the newish Brooklyn outpost of the east coast burger phenomenon Five Guys. Ordering for me is pretty straightforward - I usually get the most popular burger on any menu. Ordering for my vegetarian wife at a burger spot is a little more challenging. Fortunately for the wife, Five Guys has a 'burger' on the menu called a 'veggie cheese' (no photo, sorry). The idea is to take any vegetables offered on the regular burger (lettuce, onions, peppers, pickles, etc.) and add them to a grilled cheese.  Their grilled cheese itself is an original - a squishy white bun is turned inside-out and grilled with a slice of cheese between. The veggie can also be ordered without cheese, but what fun is that? The cheese kinda glues the veggie together anyway. The vegetable sandwich is a great idea but by no means a recent invention. During the depression (and the WW2 rationing that followed), the vegetable sandwich made its way onto many a burger joint menu when ground beef was scarce. Throwback burger spots like Kewpee in Lima, OH and Wilson's in Findley, OH still serve the vegetable sandwich and have been for over 70 years.

Quick Visit to Five Guys Brooklyn

In need of some greasy goodness, wife Casey and I called in an order the other day to the newish Brooklyn outpost of the east coast burger phenomenon Five Guys. Ordering for me is pretty straightforward - I usually get the most popular burger on any menu. Ordering for my vegetarian wife at a burger spot is a little more challenging. Fortunately for the wife, Five Guys has a 'burger' on the menu called a 'veggie cheese' (no photo, sorry). The idea is to take any vegetables offered on the regular burger (lettuce, onions, peppers, pickles, etc.) and add them to a grilled cheese.  Their grilled cheese itself is an original - a squishy white bun is turned inside-out and grilled with a slice of cheese between. The veggie can also be ordered without cheese, but what fun is that? The cheese kinda glues the veggie together anyway. The vegetable sandwich is a great idea but by no means a recent invention. During the depression (and the WW2 rationing that followed), the vegetable sandwich made its way onto many a burger joint menu when ground beef was scarce. Throwback burger spots like Kewpee in Lima, OH and Wilson's in Findley, OH still serve the vegetable sandwich and have been for over 70 years.

Gaza Breakout

One would have the heart of a stone not to feel for the thousands of Gaza Palestinians who broke through the border barriers with Egypt at Rafah to buy goods and breathe the air outside their imprisoned enclave. In a comment to my previous post, Shimon Gottschalk asked my opinion of the demonstration/convoy of relief supplies planned by Israeli peaceniks at the Israel-Gaza border this weekend: I sympathize with efforts to ease the blockade on people who are suffering from privation; I am not favorably inclined toward the political message of the demonstrators, who apparently blame the entire situation on Israel.

At the same time, I believe it unfortunate that the Olmert government rejected a Hamas proposal for a truce a few weeks ago. Nevertheless, as we are reminded by Ami Isseroff in his posting of Jan. 23, "Gaza Gimmix," the severity of Israel’s siege of Gaza is a response to the almost constant attacks against southern Israel and other manifestations of the Hamas regime’s violent intent toward the people of Israel and its internationally-recognized borders. As Isseroff points out:

Hamas originally came to power in "democratic" but basically illegal Palestinian elections. The elections were illegal because under the Oslo accords that were the enabling document[s] for the elections, Hamas, which does not recognize the right of Israel to exist and insists on violence, should not have been allowed to participate in elections to a government that is supposed to negotiate peace with Israel.

I recall Meretz party leader Yossi Beilin making the same observation, even though he very much wants a cease-fire arranged with Hamas. Still, I think that Isseroff is unnecessarily caustic and hard-hearted in referring to the Gaza "crisis" and "siege" in quotes, as if there is no humanitarian crisis there and no siege. This is all problematic, but unlike how the peace demonstrators see things, Isseroff and I are in agreement that Hamas is a large part of the problem.

Primary Political Environment Heating Up

To become the Democratic nominee for president, a candidate needs to capture a majority of the 4,049 delegate votes. State primaries and caucuses select 3,253 “pledged” delegates, who are obligated to vote for the candidate their state chose. An additional 796 “unpledged” delegates — consisting mostly of party leaders and elected officials — are free to vote for any candidate.

2008 Democratic Primary Calendar

To become the Republican nominee for president, a candidate needs to capture a majority of the 2,345 delegate votes. States are listed according to the first major event in its selection process; with several states still jockeying for early positions, some dates may change. Daily delegate totals reflect all delegates allotted to the state, even though some may not pledge their vote until a later date.

2008 Republican Primary Calendar

Source: The New York Times