Here's an unsettling story about old CIA interrogation techniques. I accept that when force is used the mistakes that accompany human endeavors turn deadly, and that governments are no smarter or more ethical than the individuals that make them up. But could our government at least refrain from making The Prisoner appear more factual than fictional?

Also, re the CIA: what's with these guys? I don't mean the torture or the illegalities or any of that, but the wackiness and the incompetence. I don't really know anything about the world of intelligence gathering, but the CIA's track record doesn't look very good. Though I guess the obvious response is, how would we know about the stuff they got right, or prevented? But, just from what information has leaked out or been declassified over the last fifty or sixty years, the CIA seems to enjoy a surplus of crazy in relation to other intelligence agencies.

Variety Egg Hands Out An Earful Of Applesauce Re Night Stalker Getting The Icy Mitt

For instance:

Eye hasn't officially ordered a back nine on that show, but if it turns in a solid perf this Friday, the pickup will be a no-brainer.

. . .

Meanwhile, ABC has pulled the plug on its revival of "Night Stalker," halting production on the skein effective immediately. Seg skedded for this week will be replaced by a two-hour edition of "Primetime Live."

What possible advantage does "skedded" have over scheduled? And "Eye" instead of CBS? Unnecessary jargon is the worst. What a ridiculous publication.

As far as the show goes, I don't think anyone will miss it. It wasn't bad. In fact, as far as the broadcast networks go, it was probably the show I liked the most in the timeslot. Or, that's not right. It's the only show in the timeslot that I wasn't actively avoiding. Plus it was on right after Alias, and where was I going to go? But it was just kind of inertly there.

I find it odd that I've seen more TV promotions for the King Kong video game (excuse me, for Peter Jackson's King Kong: The Official Game of the Movie) than for King Kong the movie. Maybe they haven't completely switched on the promotional campaign yet, and granted that a commercial for the game counts as a commercial for the movie, but with a budget of two-hundred million plus dollars I'd expect a crazy media blitz. On the other hand, perhaps movie studios learned a lesson from Godzilla, which had an inordinately expansive promotional campaign that seemed to backfire. That is, in addition to the film not being any good, people seemed to be put off by the whole, you know, vibe. I guess? Media prognostication! (Also: the much toned-down campaign for Attack of the Clones.)

The real money will probably be in next year's Peter Jackson's King Kong: King Kong 2: Revenge of the Death Spiders: The Official Sequel to the Bestselling Official Game of the Movie.

A worrisome indicator: Philips HeartStart Home Automated External Defibrillator. "Recommended because you added Star Trek The Next Generation - The Complete Seventh Season to your Wish List. . ." It goes on to suggest that the confluence of TV science fiction in said list apparently indicates I'm in the market for a machine to keep my heart beating.

Actual topicality!

Of all the various pro- and con-Alito information out there, this piece by William Saletan seems to me to be the most in-depth examination, despite its, well, cheekiness, of potential trouble, re reproductive rights.

Now, here's my question, Judge. Do you really think an undue burden for a grown woman is the same as an undue burden for a teenager? Do you think a woman deserves no more deference than a girl?

Of course, the real issue here is: how ought we divide up reproductive rights between all interested parties? The article talks about fathers, in the case of adult women, but genetically speaking the (potential) grandparents each have a one-fourth stake in the matter. Then there are the siblings, if any, of the parents, as well as any other children they have; clearly this is unworkable.

And yet, the idea that, for instance, a man's brother has some interest in his family, and therefore a set of legal rights and responsibilities, can be found in some, more ancient, cultures. And while we in the West don't have such mores codified into such strict laws any longer, less strict obligations, legal and otherwise, remain.

At any rate, the problem as I see it is this: human law works, more or less, when it is applied to the artifacts of human reason. But reproductive issues are pre-rational and, indeed, pre-human.

I'm running out of steam now, but I also wanted to mention something about how, for most of our history, we've been able to ignore questions about the nature of life because of our almost complete lack of any power to do anything about it. As that changes, our moral standards, developed as they were in a situation of powerlessness, are going to grind uncomfortably against this newfound power. I would imagine that the abortion debates are going to be looked back on as quaint and gentlemanly affairs compared to what came after.

This week I've decided to stay up to date on current events. Or, rather, I've decided to stay up to date on current events beyond DVD news and music reviews.

I picked Slate as my main source, both on account of generally finding something interesting to read there and because of their daily roundup of what's in the major U.S. papers (so long as we define "major U.S. papers" as the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times, but apparently that is indeed the usual definition).

Easy enough, only it turns out that Slate publishes a lot of articles each day. And then, if I want to actually read the stuff they refer to in those major papers, that's another big chunk of reading material. So basically I've spent an inordinate amount of time reading (virtual) newspapers lately, and what I'm wondering is, how do people who really keep up with this stuff, in a professional capacity, manage it?

Afterwards I made some brownies.