Eeyore's News and View

Is Snopes.com infallible?
By Drew Zahn
Millions of Americans, including national leaders, who rely on the popular online hoax-buster Snopes.com as the ultimate authority in separating truth from fiction, may be surprised to learn that behind the Wizard's curtain, is just a husband and wife doing research on their own.
In fact, Snopes, routinely cited by many as the final word on both frivolous and important stories, is not the well-staffed think tank of researchers, journalists and computer hacks one might expect – but rather, the work of David and Barbara Mikkelson, living in a Los Angeles suburb.
And though Snopes arguably deserves the popularity it has accrued over the years, many have come to regard the site as virtually infallible – which it definitely is not, say critics. Yet today, major news organizations such as the Associated Press and MSNBC cite Snopes as a definitive source for determining accuracy in suspicious stories. Six to 8 million viewers visit the site monthly. National Review Online calls Snopes "indispensable."
In fact, as WND has reported, a U.S. senator recently dismissed an issue as significant as determining the eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as president based on the word of Snopes.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 320,000 others and sign up now!
"Rumors pertaining to [Obama's] citizenship status have been circulating on the Internet," wrote Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., to a constituent, "and this information has been debunked by Snopes.com, which investigates the truth behind Internet rumors."
Some, however, question whether Snopes merits its reputation as an unbiased, accurate source for debunking controversial issues as "myth," including WND's Joseph Farah.
"Some of you are shocked to hear Snopes is not the last word on truth – that it is not the bible of rumors and urban legends," Farah wrote in a column criticizing not just the website's pronouncements on whether or not a story is a myth, but also how its writer (usually Barbara Mikkelson) determines what does and doesn't qualify as a reliable source.
Bias in myth-busting?
Some critics argue that embedded in the explanations of Snopes conclusions is a political or social bias, citing the great American essayist E.B. White, who wrote, "I have yet to see a piece of writing, political or non-political, that does not have a slant. All writing slants the way a writer leans, and no man is born perpendicular."
Snopes even became the subject of an Internet myth itself, a widely distributed e-mail claiming it was owned by "a flaming liberal in the tank for Obama" and that TruthOrFiction.com was a less biased myth-busting website.
In response, the Mikkelsons claim to be as neutral as possible and reject the political activist label.
"We have no sponsors, investors, or partners, nor do we have any affiliation or relationship (financial or otherwise) with any political party, religious group, business organization, or any other group or agency," states the Snopes FAQ page. "We pay all the costs of producing and operating this website ourselves and derive our income from the advertising it provides."
For its part, the TruthOrFiction website mentioned in some of the critical e-mails even produced a piece on the rumor that Snopes "is a secret tool of the Democratic Party to Promote Barack Obama," labeling the accusation as "fiction."
WND asked David Mikkelson what safeguards might be in place to prevent bias from creeping into its articles.
"Our safeguard is the millions of readers (including major news organizations, government agencies, universities, and authors) who value our site's long-established reputation for fairness, accuracy, and reliability," Mikkelson responded. "We would not maintain such a reputation if we did not consistently apply objective standards in our reporting."
What about the sources Snopes uses?
Other critics question the process of how the Mikkelsons choose sources they consider definitive in determining truth.
Mikkelson told WND Snopes considers several factors in determining if a source is trustworthy, including the source's history of reliability, corroboration of other sources, tangible evidence and independent verification of the source's information.
The Mikkelsons admit, however, that Snopes is only as reliable as the sources it cites, and they invite readers to look for the truth themselves.
"We don't expect anyone to accept us as the ultimate authority on any topic, which is why our site's name indicates that it contains reference pages," states the Snopes FAQ page. "The research materials we've used in the preparation of any particular page are listed … so that readers who wish to verify the validity of our information may check those sources for themselves."
When Farah wrote about Snopes in his "Beware the Internet!" column, his criticism keyed in on the website's choice of sources.
Snopes was investigating claims that the Environmental Protection Agency was covering over safety concerns with compact fluorescent light bulbs. In determining the concerns a myth, however, Snopes cited as evidence the EPA.
"Notice the sources Snopes relies upon to conclude beyond any doubt CFLs don't pose a serious health threat to anyone," Farah writes, "the same government agency pushing CFLs. Where I come from (nearly 30 years of solid journalism experience), this is not considered good reporting. This is not considered the best way to seek truth and enlightenment or even objective facts."
In the case of reports and dozens of lawsuits arguing that Barack Obama may not actually be constitutionally eligible to serve as president, Snopes has determined that Obama – despite his refusal to release his long-form birth certificate (which names the delivering hospital, doctor and other specifics) to the press or the courts – is a natural born citizen and eligible to serve as president.
The hoax-buster's choice of sources in making the determination, however, has again led to criticism.
The Snopes conclusion refers to an image posted on another website, FactCheck, which in turn cites as documentation of Obama's Hawaiian birth a "Certification of Live Birth" that the Obama campaign posted during 2008.
Critics, however, have pointed out that the "Certification of Live Birth" posted online is not, in fact, the same as a "Birth Certificate," and COLBs have been issued by Hawaii to parents whose children are not even born in the state.
California lawyer Orly Taitz, whose work is on her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation website, has written to state lawmakers across the nation, confronting the Snopes explanation directly:
"The State of Hawaii, statute 338, allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to get a Hawaiian birth certificate. Mr. Obama has never presented any corroborating evidence that he was actually born in Hawaii. His paternal grandmother in Kenya and the ambassador of Kenya made statements that he was born in Kenya," she said.
"The image that Mr. Obama has posted on the Internet was not a valid birth certificate, but rather a limited value document, called Short Version Certification of Live Birth. The Certification of Live Birth does not name a hospital, name a doctor, have any signatures or a seal of the Hawaiian Health Department on the front of the document. This document is usually given to parties that don't have a proper hospital birth certificate and it is given based on a statement of one relative only. Even the state of Hawaii doesn't give full credit to these documents," she continued.
Taitz has suggested the records from the "Annenberg FactCheck" cited by Snopes be subpoenaed "as to how did they claim to have examined Obama's birth certificate and found it valid. Neither the state of Hawaii, nor Obama has ever released such birth certificate, and there is no evidence of Obama being born in any hospital in Hawaii."
While Snopes and its critics may be at odds over the sources Snopes uses – and thus in disagreement over how reliable the site may be in every case – they do agree on one principle:
"I've got to tell you, you can't believe everything you read on the Internet," writes Farah. "You've got to use common sense and discernment in sorting out the good from the bad."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=91196

Chavez tightens state control of food amid rocketing inflation and food shortages
2009-03-06
President Hugo Chavez is tightening state control over Venezuela's food supply, setting quotas for food staples which are to be sold at government-imposed prices.
Venezuela's public finances are unravelling, with oil prices at $40 a barrel, while the national budget is calculated at $60 a barrel. Inflation is running at over 30 per cent, yet with the new measures Mr Chavez is seeking to ensure that his core support, the poor, can still fill their shopping baskets with food.
"If any industry wants to ride roughshod over the consumers, with a view to getting better dividends, we are going to act," said Carlos Osorio, the national superintendent of silos and storage. "For the government, access to food is a matter of national security."
Production quotas and prices have now been set for cooking oil, white rice, sugar, coffee, flour, margarine, pasta, cheeses and tomato sauce.
White rice, the staple for many Venezuelans, can now only be sold at a price of 2.15 bolivares (71p) per kilo. Private companies insist that production of that kilo costs 4.41 bolivares (£1.46) and that government regulations are impossible to fulfil and companies will quickly go broke. Companies that are dedicated to rice production must ensure that 80 per cent of their efforts are dedicated to white rice. The new regulations set production percentages, as companies were rebranding their products to avoid the government controls, like flavouring the rice, as the price restrictions apply only to white rice.
"Forcing companies to produce rice at a loss will not resolve the situation, simply make it worse," said Luis Carmona of Polar, a rice company that has been singled out by the government for trying to sidestep restrictions.
Government price controls on basic goods have been in place, in various forms, since 2003. But the restrictions have forced Venezuela to become increasingly reliant on imports of these products as local farmers will not supply the selected food staples at government prices.
Mr Chavez last month won a referendum allowing him to stand indefinitely for re-election. With that now achieved the Venezuelan leader, who has vowed to turn his South American nation into a model Socialist state, is now taking some unpopular decisions needed to stabilise his floundering economy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/4938993/Venezuelas-Hugo-Chavez-tightens-state-control-of-food-amid-rocketing-inflation-and-food-shortages.html

I know this is old news, she has been accused of this before
Pelosi Made Repeated Requests for Military Aircraft, Documents Show
Representatives for Judicial Watch, which obtained e-mails and other documents showing the requests, say House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has treated the Air Force as her "personal airline."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly requested military aircraft to shuttle her and her colleagues and family around the country, according to a new report from a conservative watchdog group.
Representatives for Judicial Watch, which obtained e-mails and other documents from a Freedom of Information request, said the correspondence shows Pelosi has abused the system in place to accommodate congressional leaders and treated the Air Force as her "personal airline."
The e-mails showed repeated attempts by Pelosi aides to request aircraft, sometimes aggressively, and by Department of Defense officials to accommodate them.
"I think that's above and beyond what other members of Congress are doing and what is expected of our elected officials," said Jenny Small, a researcher with the group.
The group reported that Pelosi was notorious for making special demands for high-end aircraft, lodging last-minute cancellations, and racking up additional expenses for the military.
In one e-mail, aide Kay King complained to the military that they had not made available any aircraft the House speaker wanted for Memorial Day recess.
"It is my understanding there are NO G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable ... The Speaker will want to know where the planes are," King wrote.
In another, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King wrote: "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker."
Pelosi's office has not yet responded to requests for comment.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/10/study-pelosi-repeated-requests-military-aircraft/

US protests 'harassment' by Chinese vessels
WASHINGTON (AP) - Chinese ships surrounded and harassed a Navy mapping ship in international waters off China, at one point coming within 25 feet of the American boat and strewing debris in its path, the Defense Department said Monday. The Obama administration said it would continue naval operations in the South China Sea, most of which China considers its territory, and protested to China about what it called reckless behavior that endangered lives.
At one point during the incident Sunday the unarmed USNS Impeccable turned fire hoses on an approaching Chinese ship in self defense, the Pentagon said. At another point a Chinese ship played chicken with the Americans, stopping dead in front of the Impeccable as it tried to sail away, forcing the civilian mariners to slam on the brakes.
"We view these as unprofessional maneuvers" and a violation of international law, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.
The incident had overtones of spycraft, but the U.S. ship is not, strictly speaking, a spy ship. It maps the ocean floor with sonar, compiling information the Navy can use to steer its own submarines or track those of other nations.
The Impeccable was specifically designed to augment the Navy's anti-submarine capability, although military spokesmen would not be specific about the ship's duties when it was surrounded.
A Pentagon accounting of the confrontation documents the actions of the startled and cornered American crew as a Chinese vessel closed to within 25 feet. Pictures released by the Navy give a sense of the surreal scene: The Chinese mariners had stripped to their underwear following the blast by the Impeccable's fire hoses.
Whitman called that "immature," and said the confrontation was the most aggressive of a series of incidents recently in the same area.
Impeccable's crew radioed to tell the Chinese ships that it was leaving the area and requested a safe path to navigate, the Pentagon said.
But two of the Chinese ships stopped directly ahead of the Impeccable, forcing it to an emergency stop, the U.S. account said. The Chinese also dropped pieces of wood in the water in Impeccable's path.
The incident came just a week after China and the U.S. resumed military-to-military consultations following a five-month suspension over U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. And it came as Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi was due in Washington to meet with U.S. officials.
"We're going to continue to operate in those international waters, and we expect the Chinese to observe international law around that," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.
A protest was lodged with the Chinese government by the U.S. Embassy in Beijing over the weekend and was repeated to a Chinese defense attache at a Pentagon meeting Monday.
In Beijing, Chinese officials did not immediately respond to voicemail messages and e-mail regarding the U.S. allegations.
Pentagon officials said the incident followed "increasingly aggressive" acts by Chinese ships against the Impeccable on Wednesday and Saturday and against the USNS Victorious surveillance ship on Thursday while it operated in the Yellow Sea.
The Chinese ships included a Chinese Navy intelligence collection ship, a Bureau of Maritime Fisheries Patrol Vessel, a State Oceanographic Administration patrol vessel and two small Chinese-flagged trawlers, officials said.
China views almost the entirety of the South China Sea as its territory. China's claims to small islets in the region have put it at odds with five governments - the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.
Pentagon officials said the close encounter followed these other incidents last week:
_On Wednesday, a Chinese Bureau of Fisheries Patrol vessel used a high-intensity spotlight to illuminate the Victorious, an ocean surveillance ship, as it operated in the Yellow Sea, about 125 nautical miles from China's coast, the Pentagon said. The next day, a Chinese Y-12 maritime surveillance aircraft conducted 12 fly-bys of Victorious at an altitude of about 400 feet and a range of 500 yards.
_On Thursday, a Chinese frigate approached USNS Impeccable without warning and crossed its bow at a range of approximately 100 yards, the Pentagon said. This was followed less than two hours later by a Chinese Y-12 aircraft conducting 11 fly-bys of Impeccable at an altitude of 600 feet and a range from 100-300 feet.
_On Saturday, a Chinese intelligence collection ship challenged Impeccable over bridge-to-bridge radio, calling her operations illegal and directing Impeccable to leave the area or "suffer the consequences."
Sunday's incident near Hainan Island is reminiscent of a much more dramatic foreign policy crisis with China that played out in the same area. The forced landing of a U.S. spy plane and China's seizure of the crew in April 2001 came just four months into President George W. Bush's tenure.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090310/D96QR9H00.html

Woman claims gun denied in D.C. because of color
March 10, 2009 - 4:11pm
WASHINGTON - A D.C. woman has sued the city, claiming officials would not let her register a handgun because of its color.
According to the suit filed Monday in U.S. District Court, Tracey Hanson tried to register a two-tone, stainless steel and black pistol. But the .45-caliber semiautomatic was denied because it doesn't appear on the California Safe Handgun Roster. The roster only lists that model in olive drab green, dark earth or black.
The lawsuit was filed by Alan Gura, who argued the Supreme Court case that overturned D.C.'s handgun ban. The suit, which also lists two other plaintiffs, asks that D.C. be prohibited from enforcing gun regulations based on the California list.
City officials said they had not seen the lawsuit and could not discuss it.
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=596&sid=1620534

Body odor: New proof of ID?
The Department of Homeland Security plans to study the possibility that human body odor might be used to determine when people are lying, or to identify individuals in the same way that fingerprints can.
In a federal procurement document posted Friday on the Web, the department´s Science and Technology Directorate says it will conduct an "outsourced, proof-of-principle study to determine if human odor signatures can serve as an indicator of deception. ... As a secondary goal, this study will examine ... human odor samples for evidence to support the theory that an individual can be identified by that individual´s odor signature."
Officials said the work was at a very early stage, but the announcement brought criticism. Barry Steinhardt, of the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty project, said the plan showed that the department had "misplaced priorities."
"The history of DHS´ deployment of these technologies has been one colossal failure after another. There is no lie detector. This research has been a long, meandering journey which has taken us down one blind alley after another."
Mr. Steinhardt said that even well-established biometric identity technologies such as fingerprinting had resulted in inaccurate identifications of people, including Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield, who received an apology from the FBI after being wrongfully accused of having had a hand in the 2004 Madrid train bombings.
"None of the biometrics for identity have worked very well, with the possible exception of DNA," he said, adding that even fingerprint evidence was "increasingly being challenged in courts around the country."
The procurement notice says the department is already "conducting experiments in deceptive behavior and collecting human odor samples." The research it hopes to fund "will consist primarily of the analysis and study of the human odor samples collected to determine if a deception indicator can be found."
"This research has the potential for enhancing our ability to detect individuals with harmful intent," the notice says. "A positive result from this proof-of-principle study would provide evidence that human odor is a useful indicator for certain human behaviors and, in addition, that it may be used as a biometric identifier."
Amy Kudwa, a Homeland Security spokeswoman, said "proof-of-concept" work was the earliest stage of technological development.
The directorate "is trying to determine what factors of human behavior and chemistry can provide clues to the intent to deceive," she said. The work would be carried out by the Federally Funded Research and Development Center run by the nonprofit Mitre Corp., which conducts cutting-edge research for the U.S. military, Homeland Security and intelligence agencies, Ms. Kudwa said.
Scientific research shows that so-called volatile organic compounds present in human sweat, saliva and urine can be analyzed using a technique known as gas chromatograph-mass spectrometry.
Research published by the Royal Society in London in 2006 found "a substantial number of marker compounds [in human sweat] that can potentially differentiate individuals or groups."
Researchers took five samples each from 179 people over a 10-week period and analyzed them, finding hundreds of chemical markers that remained more or less constant for each person over time. An analysis of these compounds "found strong evidence for individual [odor] fingerprints" the researchers concluded.
They warned, however, that some people appear to have less distinctive odors than others.
"The reason for the variation in distinctiveness is unclear," the researchers said. More importantly, the odors of some people changed during the course of the study. "Not all subjects had consistent marker compounds over time, which might be due to physiological, dietary, or other changes," they concluded.
The researchers also cautioned that some of these marker compounds might be "exogenous chemical contaminants," from skin care or perfume products, or tobacco smoke and other substances present in a person's environment. About a quarter of the 44 apparently distinctive marker compounds they were able to analyze appeared to be artificial contaminants, the researchers said.
"Determining the origins of individual and sex-specific odors - and controlling exogenous chemical contaminants - may provide the most important challenge for future ... studies," the researchers said.
Analysts said those challenges are likely to be significant, and they will multiply if the techniques are deployed in the field.
"While some of these sensors perform well in the lab, the real world may be different," said technology consultant and author John Vacca. "The technology is still in its infancy."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/10/body-odor-new-proof-id/