news.notes20090514a

[Biography of the Day] from [Britannica]

Margaret of Valois
Born this day in 1553, Margaret of Valois, whose 1572 marriage to the king of Navarre failed to end fighting between Catholics and Protestants, earned fame for her licentiousness and her Mémoires, an exposé of life in France.

[On This Day] from [Britannica]

1948: Declaration of Israel's independence
Israel declared its independence this day in 1948 and was quickly recognized by the United States, the Soviet Union, and numerous other countries, fulfilling the Zionist dream of an internationally approved Jewish state.


[TODAY'S TOP STORIES] from [The Japan Times]

[NATIONAL NEWS]

Thursday, May 14, 2009
Cabinet member exits after tryst
Konoike lived it up with lover in Atami: weekly

By MASAMI ITO
Staff writer

Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshitada Konoike resigned Wednesday for "personal reasons" after a magazine hit newsstands with a full account of a trip he and a lover took to a hot-spring resort, during which he used a special JR pass that lets Diet members ride shinkansen for free.

Shukan Shincho, which went on sale Wednesday, exposed the three-day rendezvous between the married Konoike and a woman at the Atami resort in Shizuoka Prefecture, where they played golf and dined in high style from April 28 to 30. That was around the time the government started scrambling to deal with swine flu concerns.

The magazine said he used a free JR pass for Diet members that is supposed to be used only for official duties.

The article quotes the 68-year-old Konoike as admitting to both having an affair with the woman and to using the train pass for the trip.

He was not available for direct comment Wednesday. He entered a hospital Tuesday night after submitting his resignation.

His boss, Chief Cabinet Secretary Takeo Kawamura, announced Wednesday morning that Konoike quit over health issues. His replacement is Katsuhito Asano, a member of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's Upper House caucus.

"It is true that Konoike has been expressing worry over his health," Kawamura explained. "But he also apologized over the magazine article, saying it was due to his lack of virtue, and it is my understanding that the article was a part" of the reason why he stepped down.

In the article, Konoike is quoted as admitting to loving both women and alcohol, even going so far as to brag that he has dated 10 women at the same time in the past. He blamed it on his genes.

"It is in my DNA from my grandfather," Konoike was quoted as saying. "My father was the same, drank heavily and ran after women — that DNA is in me, too."

DNA or not, it is true this was not the first time Konoike had been busted by the magazine over an indiscretion. In January, Shukan Shincho reported he let a married woman stay overnight in his quarters in the Upper House members' housing facility in Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo.

"Lawmakers and senior government officials need to have a high level of ethics," Kawamura said. "I warned Konoike about this in the past."

The scandal comes at a bad time for Prime Minister Taro Aso, whose political fortunes have recently been taking a turn for the better. Konoike is a close ally of Aso and a heavyweight in the prime minister's LDP faction.

Some of Aso's best friends have also turned out to be his worst nightmares.

In February, Shoichi Nakagawa resigned as finance minister and entered a hospital after appearing drunk at a news conference after the Group of Seven finance meeting in Rome. And the choice of Asano to replace Konoike could trigger fresh criticism because he, too, is a member of the Aso clan.


[NATIONAL NEWS]

Thursday, May 14, 2009
Okada, Hatoyama enter race

By ALEX MARTIN
Staff writer

Democratic Party of Japan Vice President Katsuya Okada and DPJ Secretary General Yukio Hatoyama declared Wednesday they will enter the race to replace President Ichiro Ozawa, who announced his resignation earlier in the week under a cloud of scandal.

The election Saturday is likely to be a one-on-one battle. Both have led the party before, but if the DPJ wins the next Lower House election as it was favored to earlier this year, the president would likely become prime minister.

"I plan on declaring my candidacy for the presidential election" on Thursday, Okada said, adding that he is confident he can lead the DPJ to victory and finally knock the Liberal Democratic Party-New Komeito ruling bloc out of power.

"There's no more time to stall. We need to oust the current government, not only for the DPJ, but for Japan," Okada said.

The Lower House election must be held by fall.

Later the same day, Hatoyama told reporters that he, too, will run for the presidency to promote policy debates to get voters behind the DPJ.

"I'd like to show how this nation should be through debates," Hatoyama said.

Because the voting will be limited to Diet members, Okada will likely face a difficult road. Hatoyama reportedly has the backing of Ozawa and his followers, who are trying to retain influence in the party despite the resignation of their embattled leader.

Okada meanwhile is garnering support from DPJ members who have maintained their distance from Ozawa and his strong but somewhat dictatorial leadership style.

The election could boil down as a power struggle between pro-Ozawa and anti-Ozawa lawmakers.

Okada dismissed such talk as media speculation and said he has the support of several party members, including some close to Ozawa. He said it is necessary to hold a "good" election.

"The election cannot be about pro-Ozawa or anti-Ozawa," Okada said.

If Hatoyama becomes the president, the move might be criticized as an attempt to avoid change despite Ozawa's resignation.

Meanwhile, some have criticized Okada for wanting to raise the consumption tax, a position counter to traditional DPJ policy.


[BUSINESS NEWS]

Thursday, May 14, 2009
Current account surplus dives 50%

(Kyodo News) The current account surplus fell at a record pace in fiscal 2008, hit by plunging exports amid the global recession, the Finance Ministry said Wednesday.

The surplus was down 50.2 percent from a year earlier to 12.23 trillion, shrinking for the first time in seven years, the ministry said in a preliminary report.

The decline is the largest since the ministry started releasing balance of payments figures under the current format in 1985.

The balance of trade in goods and services also fell into the red for the first time on record, posting a deficit of 1.003 trillion, compared with a surplus of 9.09 trillion in fiscal 2007.

The latest report indicates just how vulnerable the economy is to a slump in overseas demand.

Japan had a record surplus in its current account for five straight years through fiscal 2007. The current account is considered the broadest measure of trade in goods and services with the rest of the world.

In March alone, the current account surplus dropped 48.8 percent from a year earlier to 1.49 trillion, marking the 13th straight monthly decline in the balance of payments.

Experts believe Japan is unlikely to register a large surplus in its current account anytime soon, but some predict that exports will pick up at a gradual pace in the coming months.

"We forecast that exports will slowly recover from this fiscal year," said Atsushi Matsumoto, a researcher at Mizuho Research Institute, noting there are signs of improvement in consumer sentiment in major economies, including China and the United States.

"A big surplus is unthinkable," he said. "But Japan's current account surplus could register double-digit growth in fiscal 2009 as a fall in crude oil prices will likely lead to a cut in the total import value."

For all of fiscal 2008 through March 31, the surplus in merchandise trade plunged 90.0 percent to 1.17 trillion, the smallest amount on record.

Exports for the 12-month period fell a record 16.3 percent to 67.72 trillion as the global economic crisis sapped demand for the nation's automobiles and high-tech products. Imports contracted 3.9 percent to 66.55 trillion.

But the deficit in the services account, including payments in transport and tourism, shrank to 2.17 trillion from 2.6 trillion in fiscal 2007, falling for the first time in three years, partly because a sharp rise in fuel surcharges discouraged overseas travel.

The income surplus narrowed for the first time in six years to 14.56 trillion, compared with 16.75 trillion in the previous fiscal year, with returns received by firms and individuals from overseas investment declining.

The current account balance is the difference between a country's income from foreign sources and foreign obligations payable, excluding net capital investment.

news.notes20090514b

[Today's News] from [The Guardian]

Andrew MacKay made 'unacceptable' second home claim 'for eight or nine years'
Cameron aide claimed second home allowance on one property while his wife, Julie Kirkbride – who is also a Tory MP – claimed second home allowance on another

Deborah Summers and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 14 May 2009 11.48 BST
Article history

A key David Cameron aide who resigned today after filing "unacceptable" expense claims has admitted wrongly claiming second home allowance for "eight or nine years". .

Andrew MacKay, who earlier stepped down as the Conservative leader's senior parliamentary and political adviser, admitted he made am "error of judgment" and apologised for the mistake.

His about-turn came less than 24 hours after telling his local paper he was confident there was nothing "unreasonable" in the expenses he claimed over the past four years.

However, it emerged today that the Bracknell MP, who is married to fellow Tory Julie Kirkbride, the MP for Bromsgrove, claimed the maximum second home allowance on their London home until April this year.

At the same time, Kirkbride claimed the full second home allowance on a Bromsgrove home they also share.

Following his resignation, MacKay told the BBC: "I thought we were acting reasonably. I was claiming what had been agreed by the fees office. It has now been put to me that this does not seem completely reasonable."

Asked how long the arrangement had been in place MacKay replied: "Eight or nine years."

He was unable to say how much he and his wife had claimed in second home allowance over that time.

"We only have records going back four years," he said, adding that he would present that information to a scrutiny panel set up by Cameron earlier this week.

The Conservative leader said of MacKay: "He submitted his expense claims to an examination. I don't believe the claims were reasonable or acceptable and he has now resigned."

Earlier, MacKay had told the Bracknell Forest Standard: "I have checked through all my expense claims over the past four years ... I am confident there is nothing unreasonable in there at all.

"Last year, I was well down in the bottom third of MPs based on what I claimed, and I am still determined to make more savings in the next financial year."

Although MacKay has relinquished his post as Cameron's aide, he is expected to remain as a Conservative MP.

The resignation suggests that the Telegraph may be preparing to focus its next set of disclosures on the various pairs of married MPs in the Commons.

Previous controversies have surrounded claims made by the Tory couple Sir Nicholas and Ann Winterton, the married cabinet ministers Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper, Labour backbenchers Alan and Ann Keen and Northern Ireland first minister Peter Robinson and his fellow DUP MP spouse, Iris.

This morning the Tory leader threatened to expel other senior Conservatives who refused to repay extravagant expenses claims, and the prime minister, Gordon Brown, held urgent talks about the political future of a former Labour minister.

The two were forced to take steps to contain the crisis after new revelations exposed a £16,000 claim by the former Labour agriculture minister Elliot Morley for mortgage interest he did not pay.

Douglas Hogg, the Tory grandee who claimed more than £2,000 for cleaning his moat, appeared to be resisting the Tory leader's demands for him to face a scrutiny panel.

"Any Conservative who does not comply faces having the party whip withdrawn," Cameron warned.

Brown is understood to have requested more information following a meeting with Labour's chief whip to discuss Morley's fate.

The summit was sparked by the latest leaked details of Westminster claims that showed Morely continued claiming for mortgage interest for 18 months after his mortgage was paid off.

Morley also faces the prospect of legal action after the TaxPayers' Alliance campaign group called for a police inquiry and said it would launch a private prosecution if Scotland Yard did not investigate.

The Scunthorpe MP, who was made a privy counsellor as a minister under Tony Blair, told the Telegraph, which published details of his expenses claims, that he did not believe he had committed an offence.

"I have made a mistake, I apologise for that and I take full responsibility," he said.

"My priority was to repay and if I suffer financially as a result of that, I have only myself to blame."

He will be among a number of Labour MPs ordered to explain their claims to Nick Brown, the chief whip, at a crunch meeting, as the prime minister tries to limit the fast-growing damage from the revelations.

Brown's political spokesman would not speculate on possible punishments, insisting Morley had to be given his say, but added that the prime minister would be meeting the chief whip "as a matter of urgency".

Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said he would consider bringing a private prosecution against the MP if no police action was taken.

"The news about Elliot Morley is the most concerning and disgusting yet," he said.

"This has gone beyond the question of a flawed system, and the police must now be called in.

"If they do not investigate, then the TaxPayers' Alliance will consider bringing a private prosecution against Mr Morley and any other MPs who appear to have broken the law."

news.notes20090514c

[Today's Paper] from [Los Angeles Times]

Crash inquiry focuses on skills, pay of pilots
Working conditions for the crew of the ill-fated flight to Buffalo, N.Y., raise questions about regional airlines.

By Dan Weikel and Peter Pae
May 14, 2009

A federal investigation into the deadly crash of a Colgan Air twin-engine turboprop near Buffalo, N.Y., this year is raising broad questions about the flight training and working conditions for pilots at regional airlines across the country.

A National Transportation Safety Board hearing Wednesday in Washington revealed that the pilot and co-pilot of the ill-fated plane were low-paid, had to commute hundreds of miles to work and probably were fatigued as they made the evening flight Feb. 12 from Newark, N.J.

On approaching Buffalo, the Bombardier Dash 8 Q400 went into a stall that the pilots were unable to correct. Fifty people died in the worst transportation accident in the United States in seven years.

The three days of hearings, which began Tuesday, are focusing on the practices of Colgan Air, which operated Continental Connection Flight 3407. NTSB officials said Tuesday that the captain, Marvin Renslow, had failed flight checks in the aircraft five times before he passed, and that he was unfamiliar with emergency procedures to prevent the aircraft from stalling.

Under questioning from the board Wednesday, Mary Finnigan, Colgan's vice president for administration, said the airline paid Rebecca Shaw, the co-pilot, $16,200 a year. The board disclosed that Shaw once supplemented her salary by with a second job in a coffee shop.

"The things from the hearing are so troubling -- the lack of training, the laissez-faire attitude in the cockpit and the airline officials screwing up," said Barry Sweedler, a former senior manager for the NTSB who is now a safety consultant based in Northern California. "I would think that the NTSB would come out with some recommendations before they are finished with the investigation."

Including the Buffalo accident, 135 people have been killed in five crashes involving regional airlines since 2002. NTSB officials looking into the crashes found pilot fatigue, high turnover rates among pilots and a pattern of sloppiness at the airlines.

Roger Cohen, executive director of the Regional Airline Assn., a national organization, said airlines were addressing the many safety, training and fatigue issues raised by the Buffalo crash. He added that the issues were important to major airlines as well.

Three-quarters of the nation's 640 airports are served only by regional airlines, of which there are 70 in the United States. About a quarter of the flights at Los Angeles International Airport are operated by commuter carriers, which typically fly turboprop planes or regional jets with 20 to 80 seats.

The regional airlines are considered an entry-level job or stepping stone for pilots interested in working at major carriers, where captains of large aircraft are paid $125,000 a year on average. Captains at Colgan earn $50,000 to $53,000 a year.

Other testimony by airline officials Wednesday indicated that the company did not pay cost-of-living adjustments to pilots who lived in expensive areas such as New York, though they paid such adjustments to managers.

When asked by the board whether Colgan expected Shaw to live in the New York area, near her base in Newark, Finnigan said, "Pilots are told what the pay scales are. Our pay scales are within the industry standard."

The hearing revealed that regional airline pilots often had long commutes to reach their assignments. The NTSB said 93 of Colgan's 137 Newark-based pilots considered themselves commuters, including 49 who traveled more than 400 miles and 29 who lived more than 1,000 miles away.

The two pilots were based at Colgan's Newark office, but Shaw lived near Seattle and Renslow lived in Florida. They commuted to work by using flight privileges given to them by other airlines at little or no cost.

On the day before the crash, Shaw left Seattle on an overnight FedEx flight, the NTSB said. She arrived in Newark at 6:30 a.m. after changing planes in Memphis, Tenn.

The NTSB said Shaw sent text messages throughout the day, an indication that she wasn't sleeping.

Renslow, who arrived in Newark from Tampa, Fla., three days before the flight, was seen sleeping in the crew lounge, which is prohibited by the airline, officials said.

Board member Kitty Higgins said fatigue had been a factor in other crashes and was a major concern for the NTSB and the Federal Aviation Administration.

"When you put together the commuting patterns, the pay levels, the fact that the crew rooms aren't supposed to be used [for sleeping] but are being used -- I think it's a recipe for an accident, and that's what we have here," Higgins said.

Barry Schiff, a Camarillo-based aviation safety consultant and a former airline pilot, said the revelations about the working conditions for the pilots in the Buffalo crash were "shocking but not surprising."

Schiff said long hours, little rest and low salaries were endemic for pilots who worked for regional carriers. And despite new attention given to the "appalling" working conditions, he thinks little will be done.

"This has happened before and it will happen again," said Schiff, whose two sons were pilots for regional carriers. "I pray that it doesn't happen again, but I don't believe the FAA will do much about it."

Schiff said one of his sons was able to move to a larger carrier, but his other son gave up his pilot career after working in what the son called horrific conditions.

"These guys don't even have time to eat," he said. "They grab a candy bar when they can."

news.notes20090514d

[Today's Paper] from [The New York Times]

Obama Urges Rules on Investments Tied to Financial Crisis

By STEPHEN LABATON and JACKIE CALMES
Published: May 13, 2009

The administration asked Congress to move quickly on legislation that would allow federal oversight of many kinds of exotic instruments, including credit-default swaps, the insurance contracts that caused the near-collapse of the American International Group.

The Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, said the measure should require swaps and other types of derivatives to be traded on exchanges or clearinghouses and backed by capital reserves, much like the capital cushions that banks must set aside in case a borrower defaults on a loan. Taken together, the rules would probably make it more expensive for issuers, dealers and buyers alike to participate in the derivatives markets.

The proposal will probably force many types of derivatives into the open, reducing the role of the so-called shadow banking system that has arisen around them.

“This financial crisis was caused in large part by significant gaps in the oversight of the markets,” Mr. Geithner said in a briefing. He said the proposal was intended to make the trading of derivatives more transparent and give regulators the ability to limit the amount of derivatives that any company can sell, or that any institution can hold.

The initiative was well received by senior Democrats in Congress with jurisdiction over the issue. The proposal had been expected, but some lawmakers, impatient with the pace of the new administration’s efforts, had begun moving ahead themselves.

Hinting at a lobbying campaign to come, Robert Pickel, the chief executive of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, a trade group, said his organization “looked forward to working with policy makers to ensure these reforms help preserve the widespread availability of swaps and other important risk management tools.”

But some in the financial industry say that regulation is inevitable. “Nobody is in a ‘just say no’ mode,” said Steven A. Elmendorf, a former aide to the House Democratic leadership who represents several major financial institutions and groups. “Everybody understands that we’ve been through a financial crisis and that change has to happen. And the only question is how the change happens.”

The administration is seeking the repeal of major portions of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, a law adopted in December 2000 that made sure that derivative instruments would remain largely unregulated.

The law came about after heavy lobbying from Wall Street and the financial industry, and was pushed hard by Democrats and Republicans alike. It was endorsed at the time by the Treasury secretary, Lawrence H. Summers, who is now President Obama’s top economic adviser.

At the time, the derivatives market was relatively small. But it soon exploded, and the face value of all derivatives contracts across the world — a measure that counts the value of a derivative’s underlying assets — outstanding at the end of last year totaled more than $680 trillion, according to the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland. The market for credit-default swaps — a form of insurance that protects debtholders against default — stood around $38 trillion, according to the international swaps group. That represents the total amount of insurance that has been written on various kinds of debt, but the amount that would have to be paid out if the debt went into default is considerably less.

As the credit crisis has unfolded, trading in credit-default swaps has cooled, market participants said. The collapse of A.I.G. took a huge player out of the market and banks, hobbled by losses, have curbed their activities in the market. Still, derivatives trading desks have been profit centers at major banks recently.

The biggest banks and brokerage firms, including JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, as well as major insurers, are all major players in derivatives.

Derivatives are hard to value. They are virtually hidden from investors, analysts and regulators, even though they are one of Wall Street’s biggest profit engines. They do not trade openly on public exchanges, and financial services firms disclose few details about them. The new rules are meant to change most, but not all, of that opacity.

Used properly, they can reduce or transfer risk, limit the damage from market uncertainty and make global trade easier. Airlines, food companies, insurers, exporters and many other companies use derivatives to protect themselves from sudden and unpredictable changes in financial markets like interest rate or currency movements. Used poorly, derivatives can backfire and spread risk rather than contain it.

The administration plan would not require that custom-made derivative instruments — those with unique characteristics negotiated between companies — be traded on exchanges or through clearinghouses, though standardized ones would. The plan would require the development of timely reports of trades, similar to the system for corporate bonds.

The letter suggested that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would play a leading role in the oversight of the market, although it would also leave important elements to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Over the years, the turf battle between those agencies contributed to the neglect of that market by government overseers.

Some lawmakers in the House and Senate have already introduced measures to regulate derivatives. But a number of members have pressed the administration to put out its own plan.

Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee that oversees the S.E.C., and Representative Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee with oversight of the commodities trading commission, released a joint statement saying, “we agree there must be strong, comprehensive and consistent regulation” of derivatives. “We will work closely together to achieve that goal,” they added.

While derivatives regulation will be a focus of some market players, of equal concern to many in the financial industry are what the Obama administration and Congress might do to regulate compensation for executives across the board, not just at institutions that have accepted federal bailout money.

The Treasury is acting on two paths. First, it plans as soon as next week to announce revised compensation rules for companies getting assistance, to make those rules conform with a law Congress passed in February that was more stringent than the Treasury’s own guidelines.

Separately, Treasury officials have just begun discussing with the Federal Reserve and the S.E.C. what the government can do industrywide — through incentives, restrictions or a mix of the two — to guard against eye-popping compensation that rewards excessive risk-taking of the sort that contributed to the current crisis.

The fear among many in the industry — and some in the administration — is that whatever limits Mr. Obama proposes, Congress will seek to add even more, in response to public anger.

In addition to the regulatory changes it is seeking, the administration is also continuing to expand its bailout programs for various industries. Mr. Geithner announced on Wednesday that the administration would provide a new round of capital assistance to smaller community banks, and would increase the amount that they can borrow from the program.

Beyond derivatives, he also said that the administration would be presenting a comprehensive proposal to overhaul the regulation of the financial system. He said a central goal would be to eliminate the ability of companies to pick the least onerous regulator.

“We need a much simpler financial oversight structure,” he said. “It’s not going to be comfortable for everybody but it’s important to do.”

news.notes20090514e

[Today's Newspaper] fom [The Washington Post]

Obama Shifts on Abuse Photos
Releasing Images of Detainee Mistreatment Would Endanger U.S. Troops, President Says

By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 14, 2009

A month after making public once-classified Justice Department memos detailing the Bush administration's coercive methods of interrogation, President Obama yesterday chose secrecy over disclosure, saying he will seek to block the court-ordered release of photographs depicting the abuse of detainees held by U.S. authorities abroad.

Obama agreed less than three weeks ago not to oppose the photos' release, but he changed his mind after viewing some of the images and hearing warnings from his generals in Iraq and in Afghanistan that such a move would endanger U.S. troops deployed there.

"The publication of these photos would not add any additional benefit to our understanding of what was carried out in the past by a small number of individuals," Obama said yesterday. "In fact, the most direct consequence of releasing them, I believe, would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in danger."

Civil liberties and human rights advocates said the reversal would serve to maintain the Bush administration's legacy of secrecy. Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, said Obama's shift was "deeply disappointing."

"Even given that the photos will undoubtedly generate outrage in the region, the best way to dampen that outrage is to hold those responsible accountable," Roth said.

The photos were assembled as part of about 200 criminal investigations conducted before and after the disclosure in 2004 of widespread prisoner abuse by U.S. troops at Abu Ghraib, the former Iraqi prison that the U.S. military turned into a detention and intelligence-gathering center.

Previously released pictures taken at Abu Ghraib -- depicting Iraqis stacked naked in piles and pyramids, tormented by dogs, chained to beds and placed in other painful or humiliating positions -- enraged many in the Middle East and became symbols of the deeply unpopular U.S. invasion and military occupation of Iraq.

But no commanding officers or Defense Department officials were jailed or fired in connection with the abuse, which the Bush administration dismissed as the misbehavior of low-ranking soldiers.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a Freedom of Information Act request in October 2003 for all photographs pertaining to U.S. military detention operations. It filed a lawsuit the following year after that request was denied.

Last September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ordered the photographs released. The Bush administration challenged the ruling, but the court denied that petition in March.

Amrit Singh, the ACLU lawyer who argued the case, said the court ordered the release of 21 photos taken in Afghanistan and in Iraq outside of Abu Ghraib. She said 23 other photos taken in undetermined locations are part of the lawsuit. Civil liberties advocates say that as many as 2,000 other photos could be subject to release.

"There's a substantial number of photographs about which we know nothing," Singh said. "All we know is that some of them depict prisoner abuse."

In an April 23 letter to Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Obama administration stated that "the parties have reached an agreement that the Defense Department will produce all the responsive images by May 28, 2009." Press secretary Robert Gibbs said yesterday that Obama had not viewed the photos at that time.

Last week, Obama gathered White House lawyers and informed them that he did not "feel comfortable" releasing the photos because doing so could provoke a backlash against U.S. troops, administration officials said.

Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, said the administration had been informed that the time to challenge the release had passed. He said Obama had also been informed that the Bush administration had challenged the photos' release only on law enforcement and privacy grounds, and had never invoked a national security exemption to the Freedom of Information Act.

"That's a big fact when you are commander in chief," Emanuel said. "When you have a window that you were told had been shut that is still open, an argument that's never been made and a secretary of defense who is telling you that your commanders on the ground are concerned, you make this decision."

At the end of the meeting, Obama directed the lawyers to prepare a challenge to the photos' release. He informed Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, of his decision at the end of a Tuesday meeting at the White House.

"Odierno was really the one who persuaded" Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates "that this was one that had to be fought," said Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, who said Gen. David D. McKiernan, the outgoing commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, also expressed concern about the administration's position.

"With 20,000 additional forces coming into Afghanistan, an election in August and the fighting season in full swing right now, the timing is particularly bad," Morrell said.

Gibbs said Obama has seen a representative sample of the photos, which the president described yesterday as "not particularly sensational, especially when compared to the painful images that we remember from Abu Ghraib."

But one congressional staff member, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the photos, said the pictures are more graphic than those that have been made public from Abu Ghraib. "When they are released, there will be a major outcry for an investigation by a commission or some other vehicle," the staff member said.

Human rights officials said Obama's decision to oppose the release of the photos is less consequential than his pending decisions on restoring modified Bush-era military commissions to try detainees and on whether to allow a wide-ranging investigation -- followed by possible prosecutions -- into interrogation methods.

"This essentially renders meaningless President Obama's pledge of transparency and accountability that he made in the early days after taking office," said Singh, the ACLU lawyer. The Obama administration "has essentially become complicit with the torture that was rampant during the Bush years by being complicit in its coverup."

news.notes20090514f

[Today's Papers] from [Slate Magazine]

Obama Changes His Mind

By Daniel Politi
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009, at 6:39 AM ET

The Washington Post leads with President Obama's decision to try to block the release of photographs showing the abuse of detainees by U.S. soldiers. Last month, the administration said it wouldn't fight a court order to release 44 photos by May 28, but Obama changed his mind after he saw some of the photographs and heard from top Pentagon officials that releasing the images could endanger troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Wall Street Journal leads its world-wide newsbox with word that the Obama administration is discussing ways to detain terror suspects. The administration is apparently considering a proposal to indefinitely hold some Guantanamo detainees inside the United Stats with the approval of a new national security court.

The New York Times leads with the unveiling of a new plan to increase oversight of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that were largely responsible for sparking the financial crisis. The Obama administration has called on Congress to increase regulation over derivatives, which largely managed to escape federal oversight even though the market has grown exponentially in the last few years. The Los Angeles Times leads with a look at how the hearing about the Colgan Air crash near Buffalo, N.Y., that killed 50 people is raising questions about the safety of regional airlines as a whole. The pilot was apparently unfamiliar with important emergency procedures, the co-pilot was paid $16,200 a year, they both commuted hundreds of miles to work, and they probably flew tired that fateful day. USA Today leads with a look at how around 20,000 soldiers are unavailable for combat because of wounds and injuries, the largest number since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began. At a time when investigators are looking into the soldier who shot five fellow service members in Baghdad, the Army says it might have to scrap plans to increase the time off between deployments. But Army officials are optimistic that the plan to withdraw troops from Iraq will be enough to help the situation.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he changed his mind about releasing the photographs that depict detainee abuse after the top commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan raised objections. It appears that is what swayed Obama as well. How shocking are these photographs? Last month, published reports made it seem as though the images wouldn't be anywhere as graphic as the infamous Abu Ghraib photographs. Now it's not so clear. The executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had fought for the release of the photographs, says officials have described them as "worse than Abu Ghraib." The WP hears the same view from a congressional staff member who says that the release of the photos would lead to "a major outcry for an investigation by a commission or some other vehicle." But one Pentagon official tells the NYT that while the photos do depict detainees in humiliating positions, they're not as provocative as the images from Abu Ghraib. For his part, Obama said the photos aren't "particularly sensational."

The LAT notes that while Obama's reversal has angered his liberal base, the president might see it as a "showdown" that is "politically necessary." After all the criticism he has received from the right lately, this is one decision that won him praise from Republicans. And now, even if the courts eventually force the release of the photographs, Obama can always say he tried to do what was best for the troops. The White House said the argument that the photos shouldn't be released because they could spark a backlash had never been made in court. But the LAT says that's not true and points out that the issue was rejected by both a district court judge and a court of appeals.

Currently, a big part of the trading in derivatives markets goes on behind closed doors. In fact, no one can even say how big the market is. Now the administration wants trading in these exotic instruments, such as the credit-default swaps that brought on AIG's demise, to be more open and transparent. Although one might expect the financial industry to be up in arms against the plan, it seems everyone recognizes that some sort of regulation is inevitable. The WP notes that under Obama's plan, specialized derivatives, such as those negotiated between companies, would still be allowed to continue trading largely outside the control of regulators. This has led some to worry that traders will be motivated to create even more complex derivatives just to stay one step ahead of regulation.

The WSJ goes inside with the administration's new drug czar declaring that he wants to end the idea that the United States is fighting "a war on drugs." The statement illustrates how the Obama administration is likely to focus on treatment rather than jail time for drug abusers. Gil Kerlikowske, the head of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said that the popular phrase has become an impediment to dealing with the country's drug issues. "[P]eople see a war as a war on them," he said.

Remember yesterday's lead story in the LAT that revealed the U.S. military had begun working on a new joint program with Pakistani officials to operate armed Predator drones and go after insurgents? Well, today the NYT's sources say that's not true. And apparently there are no plans in the works for the military to even operate its own armed drones inside Pakistan. The NYT does say that the U.S. military flew "a handful" of unarmed drone surveillance missions and provided Pakistan with information that was collected along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. In an attempt to build up goodwill, the military offered a large amount of images and real-time footage, but it's "not clear whether the cooperation will continue," particularly since "requests for additional flights abruptly stopped without explanation," notes the NYT.

The WSJ takes a trip to the Dog House, the smallest office at the California Capitol. It's a two-room space that clocks in at 391 square feet and doesn't even have a reception area. The office's nickname "denotes both its dimensions and the occupant's status," notes the WSJ. In Sacramento, office space is decided by the leadership, so if a lawmaker is in the Dog House, it means he must have upset someone important. Inside the office there's a plaque placed by a former occupant: "The Dog House: Standing up for your Principles."

Remember when a sunscreen's sun protection factor didn't get past 30? Those were the good old days. Now, "SPF creep has hit the triple digits," declares the NYT. With SPF 100+ on the shelves, dermatologists say all these increasing numbers simply confuse people. It would be easy to assume that SPF 100 gives you double protection than SPF 50, but that's hardly the case. "SPF 100 blocks 99 percent of UVB rays, while SPF 50 blocks 98 percent," the NYT explains. Most people underapply sunscreen, so dermatologists say that rather than worry about the SPF, it's more important to reapply often.