| Friday,
December 20, 2002 
We are inevitably moving toward war, and Trent Lott has resigned as
Senate leader. Given that he was becoming a distraction that was
inevitable: this was not the time to start a political war over who shall
control the agenda of debate.
That political war will happen, but other things come first.
Lott made a silly remark in a context of congratulations to an old man
from a different century. No one was offended at the time or for a day or
so afterwards; eventually the professionals got in the act, and told
everyone they ought to have been offended, and lo! everyone was.
It's probably just as well: we really don't need to start a national
debate on just what might have happened had the Dixiecrat movement been
more successful. But it's ironic that Eisenhower and the GOP were
instrumental in breaking State's Rights as an issue.
As late as 1960 professors of Political Science could and did say that
the Democrats were the only truly National Party in the US. The
Republicans were excluded from the Old South and thus weren't a national
party at all, merely a regional one. Of course the professorate had a
preference... In any event, I see no reason to change the views I
expressed last week. And perhaps we can stop talking about Trent Lott
and get on to important matters.
One of those is the Internet: An Australian Court holds that Americans
can be sued in Australia under Australian Law for views expressed in the
United States and published on the Internet. Australian libel law is
stricter (and possibly saner) that US libel law. I say possibly saner
because US law does permit one to say some pretty outrageous things,
skirting right up to the edge of reckless disregard for the truth --
indeed, crossing that line with the right legal weaseling -- and I have
long thought that a bit much. On the other hand, the English and I presume
Australian restrictions are too severe: surely I ought to be able to say
that the Mayor of Los Angeles seems like a politician and the governor of
California is ruthless in his money raising without being afraid that my
house will be attached in a libel suit. And of course both those
statements, while true enough, would be expensive to "prove" in
court.
I doubt much will come of this. One thing Empires are good at is
protection of Imperial citizens in their homes, and the notion of an
Australian court trying to enforce jurisdiction on a US Citizen at home is
pretty weird. The case has been good for some whines by obscure US
columnists and bloggers -- please, whatever you call me, don't call me a
blogger! -- hoping for attention, but not a lot else. Still, it seems more
interesting than Trent Lott.
And see mail for details.
I thought we would be in Baghdad by July 4, 2002. I am pretty sure
we'll be there -- or a client force with CIA officers attached will be
there -- by this July 4. I'd think the war will begin by Valentine's
Day...
While we are on things more interesting than Trent Lott, note that the
Clinton/Reno assault on the CIA, allowing the post-Waco FBI to dismantle
the Agency and take over counter-intelligence, looks to be the major cause
for our not preventing the 911 disaster. The recent Congressional hearings
developed the information nicely : Bureau agents knew much but by
Presidential directive (not public law) couldn't act on information
provided by the Agency, and thus couldn't do much.
That mess has to be straightened out. The Homeland Security Act has
within it some means for doing that, but it probably won't. And the notion
that Justice Department lawyers are responsible for counter intelligence
is, well, frightening. There was a lot of talk of closing the overseas
Stations in favor of Bureau liaison officers: just the wrong people for
the job. And all the analysis was supposed to be done at Justice, by
people who never did that -- law enforcement is NOT counter intelligence
-- but who could be trusted to know who the boss was.
Thank you President Clinton.
When you destroy an institution, you generally cause the best people to
get out; the result is to leave behind the mediocre and incompetent. The
story is easily told.
And now we have the crackerjack airport security system.
One wonders if we will once again get serious about counter
intelligence? Or has too much damage been done?
I've run behind on mail. I will try to get more up later today.
REGARDING that Worm
Warning that applied to Windows XP!!
Well, the vulnerability applies to ANY Windows user
from 98 on up if they use Winamp, which is distributed with Netscape and
also a free download elsewhere. Fortunately, a fix is available free:
http://www.winamp.com/news.jhtml;?articleid=9680
-- John Bartley, K7AAY, telcom admin, USBC/DO,
Portland OR - Views are mine.
On the INS matter, see mail.
TOP
Current Mail
|
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
First,
our thanks to Robert Bruce Thompson 