The Avenger

Doha in this contect refers to the 2001 round of WTO talks that took place in Doha, Qatar. The focus on this round of talks was to lower global trade barriers to assist developing countries - something that splits industrial countries and developing countries.

This is exactly the thinking. Terrorism was on the initial list of topics, but not the final list for 2 reasons: 1. The task of the conference was to determine how to best spend a hypothetical $50 Billion to solve global problems - real spending on terrorism drawfs that today and another $50B doesn't get you all that much more 2. Terrorism, by and large, impacts mainly industrial nations and the goal of the consensus was to find ways to get results globally with particular attention being paid to the problems of the developing world. As for our friend Al Gore and global climate change, that topic also falls short on the list due to its lack of "bang for the buck" for a relatively small sum ($50B, in terms of global spending is really nothing). There have also been complaints that the group, being hand-picked by Bjorn Lomborg, is biased against environmental causes - Lomborg's views on global climate problems were well documented in his book The Skeptical Environmentalist (the book is a social scientist's attempt to discredit the work of numerous natural scientists).

Jamie Nails, part II.....

Yeah, we'll win the last game of the year, totally meaningless, to finish just out of the running for the player(s) we want to draft. It seems even when we win it hurts us these days.

Take that back NOW, say 20 Hail Marys and 10 Rosarys and you MIGHT just save your soul from eternal damnation. NEVER, EVER, speak ill against our lord and savior (don't even make me recount how he died for our sins)...

Biggest mistake about making your first pick is not understanding the scoring system in your league. In most systems, RBs are at a premium, so a Larry Johnson or Shaun Alexander would be a likely first overall pick. If your league awards as many points for a passing TD than an rushing or receiving TD then the case could be made for a guy like Peyton at #1. If you get points per recption as well as yardage and TDs, a go-to receiver like Chad Johnson or TO or Steve Smith could also be a first pick. Points for receptions also bump up RBs who catch lots of passes out of the backfield and increase the value of guys like LT. Add to all of this that most serious players use a value based drafting system where they look seriously at how much better a guy is than the next rated guy at the same position (how much better is Peyton than Brady as compared to how much Shockey is better than Crumpler). In short, there is no way to answer who will be number #1 unless you understand the scoring, roster/lineup requirements and how experienced your fellow owners are.

Sorry for missing the 7/1 deadline - my keepers for Wu Tang Financial will be: Rudi Johnson, RB, CIN Carnell Williams, RB, TB Jeremy Shockey, TE, NYG

No, he was actually just thinking outside of the box.

There should be no illegal touch penalty on a guy who went out of bounds but was the first to touch the ball if that guy was pushed out of bounds by an oposing player. You don't see it that much, but on punts you can essentially take a guy out of the play by pushing him out of bounds - he then can't be the guy to touch the ball first so there's no chance he'll down the ball at the goal line.

Statue of liberty play? Has that ever been used in the modern NFL? I always hear about it, but I've never seen it - that's the definition of overrated.

How did Clinton sign a record number if Reagan signed more than he did and they both served 8 years? It may only be a few more, but it ceratinly robs one of a tasty soundbite when they can no longer say "CLINTON signed a RECORD number".

My bad - I guess a 2 time Pro Bowler can still net you a 7th round pick - whodda thunk? I still think that gives the Bills rookie a trade value of a cooler full of gatorade (and maybe a stack of paper cups).

That, and the fact that a major superpower like the U.S. with a population of about 300 million can get beat by a country like Ghana who has the population and GDP of Deleware. Not too many Americans get fired up for that. Does anyone in the general population even know where Ghana is?

In the entire history of the league, has any team EVER traded for a punter? They don't even trade for kickers - when a guy goes down they find a replacement who never signed or and old guy who's no longer in the league. Even if this kid becomes the suprise sensation at punter nobody's going to offer up more than a cooler full of gatorade for the guy.

An estraged wife trying to get as much $$$ as she can through an ugly divorce trial - THERE's somone whose word is as good as gold - why would she lie?

Funniest thing I heard was on a talk station on Sirius (which was actually just syndicating a terrestrial radio show), they had an ad for XM - heard that one a few mornings in a row. I can just see the execs at Sirius doing a spit takes with their morning coffees....

Mike Williams still has weight and motivation problems. In other news, Generalismo Francisco Franco is still dead....

I'm not quite sure how it all works, but I do know that the songwriter (who is sometime the performing artist and sometimes not) or whoever owns the rights to the song (Michael Jackson owns many of the Beattles songs) gets a payment when the song is used for commercial purposes. In the context of professional sports, any song played during the game is used for commercial purposes - it's part of the entertainment that draws fans to come to the game and buy tickets. Any commercial use of a copyrighted song needs to be reported so a royalty for its use can be charged. Not sure of the exact mechanics, but my guess is sports teams assemble a list and send it out to groups like ASCAP which would generate some sort of fee schedule. While I don't think a few plays of R&R II will cost a team big bucks or make someone like Gary Glitter rich, it's terrible PR for a team to be writing a check to him for any amount which is kind of what the NFL memo to teams says if you read between the lines. Doesn't matter if it's $10 or $10,000 to use the song.

Then it's a bigger issue with using unlicensed music for commercial purposes (which I believe is a violation of federal law) and you get ASCAP and the whole music/publishing industry after you. That's a huge s***tstorm to get into - far bigger than one cause by people pissed that a team cut a check to a child molester.

It's all about the PR and teams having to pay money to a guy who is a convicted child molester - I'm not sure they're getting up on a moral high horse as much as they are trying to head off possible outrage and troubles. Glitter's had a history of this stuff (they found kiddie porn on his computer when he took it to be reraired in the UK), but I'm not sure he was ever convicted of anything serious - he has been now.

It's not that anyone thinks of Gary Glitter when they hear the song, but rather that the man gets royalties every time that song is used. It's a rough PR move for a team to have to send money to an imprisioned child molester. His situation is different than O.J. in that he was criminally convicted of a serious charge (lewd acts with 10 and 11 year old girls). No matter what you think of O.J. (I think he's guilty), in the eyes of the law he did not commit a criminal act (if he had been convicted I bet it would have had repercussions on his Hall/Wall status). I'll also add that one of the only things people hate more than a murderer is a child molester, and that's what Glitter is.

My thoughts exactly - how many legal cases can circumcision possible generate? It's not like you look in the phonebook under "Lawyers - Circumcision" and find a whole list of these guys. Imagine meeting that guy at a party - "Hi - my name is David Llewellyn and I'm an attorney. In my practice I specialize in wills, trusts, estates and circumcisions - but mostly circumcisions".

Don't know that I'd mess with any of the drug gangs/dealers in Lowell - they tend to play for keeps. Those 2 high school kids from Billerica 2 years ago thought they were gangsters and ended up dead in their SUV at the Courtyard Marriott.

That's actually my local Home Depot in Tewksbury, MA. Just wondering what you say when you call the cops to reports such a thing...."uh, yeah - is this the police? You're never gonna believe this but..."

Funny how I wasn't the one to bring up illegal immigration, but when I point out the the problem is with the uninsured (both legal and illegal) I am accused of taking up a trendy liberal cause of supporting full social benefits for those here illegally and doing so at the expense of stripping them from citizens. Seems to me that the trendy issue of the week is actually blaming illegal immigrants for all the problems of society. Having trouble getting hospital services? It's the illegal immigrants! Couldn't possibly be the working poor with no health insurance - they're citizens! [Edit: to further prove my point, there are an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the US at the present time, and 48 million Americans without healthcare. Even if we assume that the 48 million people include ALL of the illegals, that would still leave us with 36 million CITIZENS without healthcare. Complain about the illegal immigrant clogging the hospital emergency room, but don't forget about the 3 U.S. CITIZENS sitting next to that person.] Who's steering the conversation to the cause of the week now?