Like clockwork, Jonathan Pollard is back in the news once again. Every couple of years public speculation (and political pressure from some quarters) mounts to release the imprisoned American spy, who passed classified documents to Israel (for money) in the early 1980s before getting caught. Since being imprisoned in the mid-1980s, revisionist historians have, contrary to known facts, turned Pollard in some circles into a sort of 'dual patriot' to both the United States and to Israel, one who should therefore not still be imprisoned, they assert.
Jonathan Pollard is back in the news now because the possibility has been floated that he might be released as part of a broader agreement among Israel and the Palestinians critical to jump-starting peace talks between them. You can read more about it on CNN HERE.
I wrote previously about Jonathan Pollard in 2012 HERE and in 2010 HERE (a more detailed re-examination of his spying, and subsequent arrest and trial).
Thursday, April 3, 2014
Epilogue: John Edwards At Bunny Mellon's Funeral
I'm typically intrigued by the under-reported epilogues to high profile news stories, and this one is no exception. Yesterday John Edwards apparently showed up uninvited to the funeral for Bunny Mellon, who back in 2008 (when she was in her late 90s) was convinced by John Edwards and his team to donate over $700K to his failed Presidential campaign. Some of that money was notoriously later used to support his mistress, Rielle Hunter.
According to THIS article in today's New York Post, John Edwards was turned away by Bunny Mellon's famly, despite the funeral being open to the public. Undeterred, Edwards apparently stayed anyway and watched the service "with the rest of the overflow crowd on a big screen at an adjacent parish house," and then "was working the crowd near the graveside after the service."
I wrote HERE three years ago about the unexpected origins of Bunny Mellon's family fortune, and about her colorful earlier life.
According to THIS article in today's New York Post, John Edwards was turned away by Bunny Mellon's famly, despite the funeral being open to the public. Undeterred, Edwards apparently stayed anyway and watched the service "with the rest of the overflow crowd on a big screen at an adjacent parish house," and then "was working the crowd near the graveside after the service."
I wrote HERE three years ago about the unexpected origins of Bunny Mellon's family fortune, and about her colorful earlier life.
$50M Paintings, Stolen in 1970, Recovered This Week
An Italian auto worker for Fiat bought a couple of paintings for $100 back in 1975, at an auction of items from a train station's lost and found. He had no idea they were stolen masterpieces, apparently, and they hung in his house anonymously for almost 40 years thereafter. Now retired, his son recently sent them to be appraised, and that led ultimately to the revelation that the two paintings were actually a Gaugin still life and a Bonnard, worth a collective $50M today, that were stolen from a British aristocrat back in 1970.
You can read more, including interesting details about the original 1970 theft, HERE.
You can read more, including interesting details about the original 1970 theft, HERE.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Can High Finance Save Red Lobster From "Shrimp Inflation" And "Lobster Deflation"?
Last December, the parent company of Red Lobster (and Olive
Garden,
among other chains), Darden Restaurants, which is the largest
full-service restaurant company in the world and a Fortune 500 company, announced plans to
spin-off
the consistently under-performing seafood chain.
But now there's a shareholder battle brewing at Darden over the fate of Red Lobster. Some significant investors don't want to sell the chain now while it's down (at a discount), but instead want to try to fix it, to preserve more shareholder value. In the meantime, they want Darden to leverage its extensive real estate holdings by establishing a Real Estate Investment Trust, or REIT, which these activist shareholders assert could increase shareholder value by $1 billion. You can read more in today's New York Post HERE. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are also apparently involved.
But there may be a fundamental cost issue at the root of Red Lobster's problems, according to THIS article. "The price of shrimp, arguably the most democratic of seafoods, has skyrocketed over the past several years, largely because of a bacterial disease ravaging shrimp in Vietnam, Thailand and China, according to Quartz. That’s a huge problem for Red Lobster, which offers shrimp at bargain price. So-called shrimp inflation has cost Red Lobster an estimated $30 million over the past year, executives said on the call.. On the other end of the spectrum is lobster, the most decadent of seafoods... 'For a lot of guests (Red Lobster) is a special-occasion experience,' Eugene Lee, Darden’s chief operating officer, said on the call. But lobster isn’t so special any more. Thanks to a glut in the North American lobster supply, prices have sunk to historic lows over the past few years. Now, diners looking for a cheap lobster meal can get their fix at places like Golden Corral, Whole Foods and even Quiznos, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week."
But now there's a shareholder battle brewing at Darden over the fate of Red Lobster. Some significant investors don't want to sell the chain now while it's down (at a discount), but instead want to try to fix it, to preserve more shareholder value. In the meantime, they want Darden to leverage its extensive real estate holdings by establishing a Real Estate Investment Trust, or REIT, which these activist shareholders assert could increase shareholder value by $1 billion. You can read more in today's New York Post HERE. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are also apparently involved.
But there may be a fundamental cost issue at the root of Red Lobster's problems, according to THIS article. "The price of shrimp, arguably the most democratic of seafoods, has skyrocketed over the past several years, largely because of a bacterial disease ravaging shrimp in Vietnam, Thailand and China, according to Quartz. That’s a huge problem for Red Lobster, which offers shrimp at bargain price. So-called shrimp inflation has cost Red Lobster an estimated $30 million over the past year, executives said on the call.. On the other end of the spectrum is lobster, the most decadent of seafoods... 'For a lot of guests (Red Lobster) is a special-occasion experience,' Eugene Lee, Darden’s chief operating officer, said on the call. But lobster isn’t so special any more. Thanks to a glut in the North American lobster supply, prices have sunk to historic lows over the past few years. Now, diners looking for a cheap lobster meal can get their fix at places like Golden Corral, Whole Foods and even Quiznos, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week."
In Search Of... Michael Rockefeller
In November 1961, while on an expedition to remote, coastal New Guinea searching for art objects for his family's then-new Museum of Primative Art in New York, 23 year old Michael Rockefeller (son of Nelson Rockefeller, and heir to the family fortune) disappeared mysteriously.
He was traveling in a 40 foot catamaran with a Dutch anthropologist and two native guides when it capsized. Michael elected to swim the three miles to shore. He was never seen again, despite an extensive search, and was presumed to've drowned in the strong current, or to've been attacked and killed by sharks or crocodiles. The possibility that Michael may've actually made it to shore, only to've been attacked by local tribesmen, who at the time had almost no contact with the outside world and who were reputed to be cannibals and headhunters, was dismissed as lurid speculation.
An episode of "In Search of..." from 1978, which you can watch on You Tube in its entirety HERE, re-examined this mystery, with emphasis on this more grizzly potential ending. In this 35 year old TV interview, the chief of the Asmat tribe denies that they killed Michael Rockefeller, after which narrator Leonard Nimoy intones, "The full and true story of Michael Rockefeller's disappearance may never be known. If the answer lies among the Asmat, a nearly impenetrable cultural curtain prevents a final solution."
But a new book published just weeks ago reveals that local cannibals had indeed attacked and killed 23 year old Michael Rockefeller after he successfully reached the shore in 1961, in revenge for a prior attack on them by the Dutch colonial government in 1958. The local tribemen then concealed their village from the extensive search parties sent by the Dutch to look for young Rockefeller, and denied to everyone that they had killed him, for fear of retaliation. But they did confess at the time to a Dutch priest who traveled and lived among them.
According to THIS New York Daily News article about the new book, "The priest wrote the Dutch government and included the names of the murderers and which body parts they ate, according to documents Hoffman found in government archives in the Hague. 'IT IS CERTAIN THAT MICHAEL ROCKEFELLER WAS MURDERED AND EATEN BY OTSJANEP,' van Kessel wrote in all caps. 'This was revenge for the shooting four years ago.' But correspondence from the church to van Kessel told the priest to keep quiet. The incident was 'like a cabinet of glass' and he must keep silent so 'the mission will not fall from grace with the population,' church officials wrote."
He was traveling in a 40 foot catamaran with a Dutch anthropologist and two native guides when it capsized. Michael elected to swim the three miles to shore. He was never seen again, despite an extensive search, and was presumed to've drowned in the strong current, or to've been attacked and killed by sharks or crocodiles. The possibility that Michael may've actually made it to shore, only to've been attacked by local tribesmen, who at the time had almost no contact with the outside world and who were reputed to be cannibals and headhunters, was dismissed as lurid speculation.
An episode of "In Search of..." from 1978, which you can watch on You Tube in its entirety HERE, re-examined this mystery, with emphasis on this more grizzly potential ending. In this 35 year old TV interview, the chief of the Asmat tribe denies that they killed Michael Rockefeller, after which narrator Leonard Nimoy intones, "The full and true story of Michael Rockefeller's disappearance may never be known. If the answer lies among the Asmat, a nearly impenetrable cultural curtain prevents a final solution."
But a new book published just weeks ago reveals that local cannibals had indeed attacked and killed 23 year old Michael Rockefeller after he successfully reached the shore in 1961, in revenge for a prior attack on them by the Dutch colonial government in 1958. The local tribemen then concealed their village from the extensive search parties sent by the Dutch to look for young Rockefeller, and denied to everyone that they had killed him, for fear of retaliation. But they did confess at the time to a Dutch priest who traveled and lived among them.
According to THIS New York Daily News article about the new book, "The priest wrote the Dutch government and included the names of the murderers and which body parts they ate, according to documents Hoffman found in government archives in the Hague. 'IT IS CERTAIN THAT MICHAEL ROCKEFELLER WAS MURDERED AND EATEN BY OTSJANEP,' van Kessel wrote in all caps. 'This was revenge for the shooting four years ago.' But correspondence from the church to van Kessel told the priest to keep quiet. The incident was 'like a cabinet of glass' and he must keep silent so 'the mission will not fall from grace with the population,' church officials wrote."
Sunday, October 21, 2012
"Hoarders" of 1947
I'm not a huge fan of the cable TV series "Hoarders," about people who live in homes crammed to the ceiling with junk, trash, and 'collectibles.' To its credit, the show tries to get at the root of the problem, which is almost always psychological and typically based on trauma (frequently childhood trauma). For me, that makes the show tragic rather than whimsical.
Nevertheless, until now I've always assumed that 'hoarding' was a modern phenomenon, somehow a decadent manifestation of post-WWII consumer culture in America.
But THIS article in today's New York Daily News, about two brothers who lived for decades as notorious hermits in a Harlem brownstone before WWII amid the clutter of a lifetime, suggests the phenomenon of 'hoarding' is much older, and is perhaps psychological, not cultural, after all.
Homer and Langley Collyer were found dead in their dilapidated home in 1947, after not having been seen in public for years. This article has a 21 photo slideshow of what police found when they broke into the home, looking for the men. There were 5 grand pianos buried under the piles of junk, as well as a stash of pornography and a skeleton. The men's bodies were also found, after an extensive search. One brother apparently died when he accidentally triggered one of their own booby traps. The other, already an invalid reliant on his brother for care, died helpless and unattended soon thereafter.
Nevertheless, until now I've always assumed that 'hoarding' was a modern phenomenon, somehow a decadent manifestation of post-WWII consumer culture in America.
But THIS article in today's New York Daily News, about two brothers who lived for decades as notorious hermits in a Harlem brownstone before WWII amid the clutter of a lifetime, suggests the phenomenon of 'hoarding' is much older, and is perhaps psychological, not cultural, after all.
Homer and Langley Collyer were found dead in their dilapidated home in 1947, after not having been seen in public for years. This article has a 21 photo slideshow of what police found when they broke into the home, looking for the men. There were 5 grand pianos buried under the piles of junk, as well as a stash of pornography and a skeleton. The men's bodies were also found, after an extensive search. One brother apparently died when he accidentally triggered one of their own booby traps. The other, already an invalid reliant on his brother for care, died helpless and unattended soon thereafter.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Why Is Gvt. Encouraging Deer To Cross Road?
"Listeners of a North Dakota radio station got a good laugh when an
incensed caller complained about the government putting up deer crossing
signs in high-traffic areas. But the caller, only identified as Donna, didn’t seem to understand
that such signs aren’t for deer to be told where they can cross — but rather for drivers..."
“'I’ve even seen [the signs] on the interstate,' Donna said on the Fargo-area radio station, Y94 Playhouse. 'Why are we encouraging deer to cross at the interstate?' But her questioning didn’t end there. 'It seems to me that it’s so irresponsible of us to allow these deer crossings to be in an area where these deer are so likely to be struck by oncoming traffic,' she said."
“'I’ve even seen [the signs] on the interstate,' Donna said on the Fargo-area radio station, Y94 Playhouse. 'Why are we encouraging deer to cross at the interstate?' But her questioning didn’t end there. 'It seems to me that it’s so irresponsible of us to allow these deer crossings to be in an area where these deer are so likely to be struck by oncoming traffic,' she said."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
