The Trolley Mall Terrorist

The family of Sulejman Talovicm said:

“We are Muslims, but we are not terrorists,”

True, not all Moslems are terrorists, but all terrorists are Moslems. ?

However, terrorists seem to need to be Islamic.

(AP) A fast-thinking pilot with passengers in cahoots fooled a hijacker by braking hard upon landing, then accelerating to knock the man down. When he fell, flight attendants threw boiling water in his face, and about 10 people pounced on him, Spanish officials said Friday.

Shades of Flight 93 but this time with a better outcome.   This illustrates that the fight against terror is indeed a global one and is not driven by the United States actions.  Pray these idiots never learn French.

I see that Billy Hollis has posted an article on his new Q&O digs, as regards digital rights management.  For those of you who don’t know that phrase the translation is “copy protection” .

My response was that of a jaded IT support specialist, who has seen all kinds of “security” come and go.  In most ways, DRM is the same as any other security measures within the digital world. Thus, I posted the rules of DRM:

Rules:

1: System Security WILL eventually be broken by hackers, period.

2: The more of a pain security is to the legal users, the more help the hackers will have from legal users toward the goal of defeating the security.

3: Those who don’t understand that relationship, will see their business suffer as word gets out about how unusable the product is… and then get their stuff pirated, anwyay, pursuant to rule 1.

Clearly, these rules take their queues from other basic laws in the real world… basic laws which, not surprisingly the social left has been doing it’s level best to ignore for years… laws of economics, of human social interaction, and so on.

Do you suppose that the music companies being based in that Liberal Bastian, southern California, or the software companies, one in particular, being based in left-leaning Seattle, has anything to do with their pursuit of trying to rewrite those laws by means of government, and calling it ‘DRM’?

Shape is not substance. Liberals put undue emphasis on shape and tend be blind to substance.

Rico, Think Progress, is incensed over MIchelle Malkin’s comment:

I have to tell you, in general, I’m skeptical of anything that has Bill of Rights tacked on to it

I suppose Rico also accepts the theory of anthopogenic global warming because the theory has science tacked on to it as well? ?

Addendum I: (Bit)

I think that he’s “incensed” for one major reason: Liberals have always pursued their agendae in that fashion… to tack stuff onto the Bill of rights, that weren’t there in the first place. Malkin has broken the code, and he doesn’t like that. What this comes down to, is the age-old argument, between a constitutional original intent, and everything else.

Addendum II:  (David L)   When I read Rico’s article in the wee early morning, the number and intensity of the comments were striking.  There were links to about three other blog responses.   The apparent anger hinted a significant blog response.

It seems that cooler heads have prevailed.  The liberal blogger, aside from Andrew Sullivan, do have common sense after all.   Michelle’s comment was precisely defined.   She was not attacking the Constitution.  She expressed scepticism about ideas with the phrase Bill of Rights tacked on.   It is a significant difference and one that most, dare I say all, the TP commenters missed.

Memorandum is not showing Michelle’s article and have not found a lot of responses to it on blogs.   I have been deprived of diet of low hanging fruit.

Don Surber provides an excellent description of said events

If so, she did well. I don’t agree with her full-throttle conservatism. But she has developed into a force on TV. She has figured out how to touch lib buttons without pulling a Bill Arkin.

Last night’s button-popper was:

“I have to tell you, in general, I’m skeptical of anything that has Bill of Rights tacked on to it.”

So tempting a sentence. So alluring. Like a plastic bone attracting a dog by looking meaty, they bit. Pretty soon she had the libs acting as if she attacked the Constitution. Think Progress even linked video.

Of course, she did not mention the Constitution. She attacked crappy legislation that equates being inconvenienced on an aeroplane with the right a fair trial by an unbiased jury of one’s peers — or the right to own a gun.

As it happened, I happened to see Michelle’s comments in real time.  Didn’t view as much more than  common sense , and I suspect  that Michelle merely said in the ebb and flow of the discussion.  Yet no matador ever waved a red cape in front of sword any better than Michelle.   

The last time I checked, Michelle had not posted a response.  Suspect she will not.   I think that Rico et al ought to take pause before they jump at  Michelle.  She clearly out their league.

Addendum III:  (David L)  Ok, my suspicions were wrong.   Michelle has responded, “Not all liberals are stupid:”   I add, but some clearly are.

Socialist counties have a chronic history of shortages.    There is a reason, socialsits criminiize providing commodiites.   Socialists make providing commodies illegal then profess bewilderment when shortages result.

The former Soviet Union had long lines from everything from meat to toilet paper.   Not to be outdone, Venezuela’s dictator, Hugo Chavez has threatened to jail grocers.  Simon Romero, New York Times, has the sordid details:

CARACAS, Venezuela, Feb. 16 — Faced with an accelerating inflation rate and shortages of basic foods like beef, chicken and milk, President Hugo Chávez has threatened to jail grocery store owners and nationalize their businesses if they violate the country’s expanding price controls.

Rememer HillaryCare?  Mrs. Clinton wanted to criminallize providing  health care?  Chavez’s criminalization of the grocery business, is not putting food on anybody’s table.  Mrs. Clinton’s criminization of health care was not going make anybody healthy and her proposed pseudo-criminalization of oil business would not put any fuel in your gas tank.

Give the long and sorry history of sociialism, what explains the continued obession with it?   I suggest that socialists, like Hugo Chavez and Hillary Clinton, crave the personal power and are willing to spite the people to get it.   That is they rather have the personal power than for you to have a full belly  or full tank of gas.

Once again, Jimmy Carter has shrunk from debate. Despite having written a book whose purpose he claims was to promote dialogue and discussion, he has consistently dodged appearing with anyone who could challenge him on the numerous factual errors that fill the pages of his slim book.

That’s an op-ed in “The Emory Wheel” today. Emory was one of the places Carter wanted to speak, in support of his book. But as for conversation… well.. that’s something else, again.

When it became known that Carter was anxious to speak at Emory, the administration consulted a group of faculty and was advised that the most fair and academically valuable format would be to have Carter appear with someone who could engage in a productive interchange and discussion on the topic. This clearly would be the only way for the event to meet the educational standard of a leading university.

Everyone agreed that the best person for this interchange was Ambassador Dennis Ross, who was the main negotiator on the Arab-Israeli situation in both the first Bush administration and the Clinton administration. He was responsible for organizing Camp David II, Clinton’s last-ditch effort to find a resolution to the situation. Ross agreed to appear, but Carter pointedly refused to appear with him or with any other expert. No explanation was given.

Is this the behavior of a man who wants to promote dialogue? What precisely is Carter afraid of?

Carter is afraid of precisely the same thing that those who have always pushed the “fairness doctrine” are afraid of; actual discussion, based on actual facts.

Here’s a few more pics taken in the same load as the last set I posted, this morning.

It may seem perverse to suggest that, at the very moment the House of Representatives is repudiating his policy in Iraq, President Bush is poised for a political comeback. But don’t be astonished if that is the case.

That’s David Broder, in today’s column. I’ve said before that I can take Broder or leave him, mostly the latter. In this case, however, Broder seems to have a fairly firm grip on the obvious…. and he’s not telling us the half of it… the large victories we’re currently winning in Iraq, even pre-Surge, provide a stark counter to the anti-war posturing going on in the Democrat Congress.

Personally, I can’t think of a timing for this, more politically devistating for the Democrats, than to have all these breakthroughs show up, in serial, after several weeks of posturing wails from the Democrats that such combacks were not possible.

 Mind, I’m not suggesting an intentional tming, here, but still, the timing of this situation is particualrly sweet.

 Oh… I should note that Broder as usual, tows the leftie line in at least one respect…an error so glaring it can only be rooted in politics…

 But Bush, unlike Clinton, is in the middle of a bloody civil war, which can be ended only by the Iraqis themselves.

I dunno about this guy, sometimes. I mean, if Bosnia wasn’t a civil war, it was a good imitation of it.

Mrs. Pelosi promised the most most honest, ethical, and open Congress ever.  Paul Kane, in the Washington Post, details Mrs. Pelosi’s latest broken promise:

Rep. William Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat who’s facing an ongoing federal corruption probe, is being granted a spot on the Homeland Security Committee, according to Democratic aides.

The appointment will be announced Friday, according to one aide who requested anonymity because the decision isn’t yet official.

Jefferson was removed from his seat on the Ways and Means Committee, one of the most important panels in Congress, by Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) last summer in an attempt to show how seriously Democrats viewed the allegations of corruption.

(H/T:  Ace, Ace of Spades HQ; Greg Tinti, Poltical Pit Bull.

These are pics I’ve taken in the last 24 hours around my home town as I ran errands.

Yes I know I’m sounding like an old broken vinyl, but the ‘rats really are this bad:

WASHINGTON (AP) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that President Bush lacks the authority to invade Iran without specific approval from Congress, a fresh challenge to the commander in chief on the eve of a symbolic vote critical of his troop buildup in Iraq.Pelosi, D-Calif., noted that Bush consistently said he supports a diplomatic resolution to differences with Iran “and I take him at his word.”

In the Senate, Mrs. Clinton made the exact same arguement as Mrs. Pelosi.   Eli Lake, in the New York Sun, disposes of Mrs. Clinton’s, and Mrs. Pelosi’s, arguement:

That position is at odds with President Clinton’s unilateral decision to bomb Serb military targets beginning on March 26, 1999, when America and NATO launched a war to stop Slobodan Milosevic from cleansing the province of Kosovo of ethnic Albanians.

 And:

Mrs. Clinton defended the Kosovo campaign in a speech on October 10, 2002, before casting her vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq. “We and our NATO allies did not depose Mr. Milosevic, who was responsible for more than a quarter of a million people being killed in the 1990s. Instead, by stopping his aggression in Bosnia and Kosovo, and keeping on the tough sanctions, we created the conditions in which his own people threw him out and led to his being in the dock being tried for war crimes as we speak,” she said in the 2002 speech. Milosevic died in prison in the Hague in 2006.

More, Andrew McCarthy, NRO.

Senator Clinton now claims President Bush needs to get Congress’s permission to react to Iran’s killing American troops and making war on the United States in Iraq.  She didn’t always feel that way — especially when her husband ignored Congress in using force in the Balkans (where, of course, no one was murdering American forces or making war on the United States).

Mrs Pelosi had better learn to read the Constitution and the War Powers Act.

Yesterday Bit wrote:

* John Mellencamp is a five star idiot.  To think I actually had some respect for that fool. (Shudder)

Well it appears that Bit is was not the only one conflicted between John Mellencamp’s musical talent and his Cindy Sheehan mentality.  Dean Barnett, on Hugh Hewitt, has a great essay the “American Fool:”

Confession time: I’m a huge John Mellencamp fan. I’ve been one since I was in high school and “Jack and Diane” ruled the charts. His music, especially his 1987 album “The Lonesome Jubilee,” meant a lot to me. I’ve seen him in concert probably 20 times, although not once in the past decade since I started being an adult and found the spectacle of middle aged men cavorting around the stage like teenagers to be sad, pathetic and undignified.

Barnett adds:

I decided a long time ago to overlook Mellencamp’s moronic worldview. I’m a fan because I like his music. Period. My fondness for his work has nothing to do with an admiration for his geo-political analyses. It’s this same paradigm that has allowed me to enjoy the Dixie Chicks’ music (which I like immensely) even though their lead singer appears to be an obnoxious troll.

Entertainers make a career out dealing with and expressing emotions.   To expert a person from deep inside the realm of emotions, to deal with a world based on facts, in most cases is asking way too much.

I am curious as to exactly what Charlie Rose was expecting from the interview.  It certainly wasn’t  reason or insight.

Appendum:  Just when ready to declare the entire entertainment world idiots, Michelle Malkin  links up with  Glenn and Helen’s podcast  with John Ondrasik, better known as Five for Fightng.   Ondrasik is everything Mellencamp is not.  Best sounding podcast of the day.

RALEIGH -(Charlotte Observer)  Former House Speaker Jim Black resigned his seat in the General Assembly on Wednesday, a day before he is expected to plead guilty to public corruption.

Black, six weeks into his 11th term in the House, did not appear there with colleagues. His front-row seat was empty. Instead, he sent a letter to new House Speaker Joe Hackney, Gov. Mike Easley and the clerk of the House, Denise Weeks.

Note that at no point in the quote does it mention the man’s a Democrat. Indeed, it’s five paras in before that salient point DOES get mentioned. Go ahead, and tell me again how Democrats don’t get a free pass from the press…

I see John Hawkins is consulting for Duncan Hunter.

 John’s a blogging freind, and I’m glad to see he’s got the gig.

I must admit that thusfar, of the current field, Hunter is really the one I like best, but I wonder about his chances on the national stage.  Joyner doesn’t seem to think he has much of a chance, and a few months ago, I might have agreed.  But at the moment, I’m thinknig that Hunter will if nothing else, benefit from the lack of quality in the rest of the field. The likes of Hawkins in his corner won’t hurt him, either.

I’m mildly interested in the fine line Hawkins draws here:

 While I was hired to work specifically on the Duncan Hunter campaign, I want to emphasize that I was recruited and hired as an independent contractor by TCV Media, not by the Hunter campaign. Additionally, I am not a blogger or public spokesperson for the Hunter campaign.

This would seem to be a prudent response to the Amanda Marcottes of the world, and their followers; As I think I mentioned last night, there’s a lot of leftieloons out for blood.

The Associated (with Terror) Press has been drinking the Kool-Aid yet again.

EL PASO, Texas Feb 15, 2007 (AP)— Border Patrol officials are investigating a shooting at the Mexican border that involved one of their agents.

Doug Mosier, a spokesman for the Border Patrol’s El Paso Sector, said an agent fired at least one shot at a group of would-be immigrants Tuesday night during a confrontation along the border near downtown El Paso.

The agent fired at least one shot after some of the immigrants began throwing rocks at him, narrowly missing the agent’s head, Mosier said.

The AP fails to mention the illegal status of the would be immigrants.   The AP established that  the group was armed and attacking the United States.   An an armed group waging an attack is a mob.

The agent protected his  life and broke up the mob with only a single shot.  Good job! Give the border agent a citation, and a  promotion.  If you see the agent, buy him a beer.?