Monday, May 19, 2008

You have to be kidding..right?

Two idiots had an altercation with Tasers over a parking spot in Boulder, Colorado according to AP. The "duel" involved a restaurant co-owner and security supervisor over a boot that was placed by the supervisor's subordinates on the restaurant co-owner. Harvey Epstein, co-owner of Mamacitas restaurant, was arrested on suspicion of felony menacing and using a stun gun. Casey M. Dane told police he was afraid Epstein was going to hit him with a 2-foot-long pair of bolt cutters. Epstein and Dane both draw down on each other. I'm a proponent of Tasers for potential victims of violent crimes not for two grown men like this. Absolutely hillarious!

WIFI Hotspots not secure?!?!



Who would have thunk it? I had to chuckle when I saw this article jump across my screen. I don't know what's funnier - the FBI catching on to how insecure airport "hot spots" are or that this was even news. The FBI released a statement this week warning citizens who use the WIFI connections at airports to be careful as the connections were suseptible to being hacked. According to the article,
"While many of these hot spots have secure networks, some do not, according to Supervisory Special Agent Donna Peterson of FBI's Cyber Division. And connecting to an insecure network can leave one vulnerable to attacks from hackers.

Agent Peterson said one of the most common types of attack is this: a bogus but legitimate-looking Wi-Fi network with a strong signal is strategically set up in a known hot spot...and the hacker waits for nearby laptops to connect to it.

At that point, your computer and all your sensitive information, including user ID, passwords, credit card numbers, basically belongs to the hacker, Peterson said.

The intruder can mine your computer for valuable data, direct you to phony webpages that look like ones you frequent, and record your every keystroke."
I'll accept this is news to most people who are unaware of the risks but most serious web users as well professionals have known this for years. This could have been an attempt by the FBI to curb a trend of online thefts from WIFI connections which would certainly under their jurisdiction. As you can tell from the article, there isn't much detail regarding why this is suddenly newsworthy.

The Benefits of Talking....

There's been a lot of news in the press lately regarding criticism Senator Obama has faced regarding his suggestion that the United States begin dialogue with certain rogue states like Iran. Most of his critics point out the US government has an official policy that we do not negotiate with terrorists or their sponsors. They say it creates a certain degree of legitimacy to a government which engages in terrorism and oppresses its people. While I agree with this to a small extent, I'm beginning to ask myself the very same questions Senator Obama faced when preparing this a talking point in his campaign.
  • Has this ever been pursued by other presidents when faced with like-minded regimes?
  • Are we not doing the same with a nuclear North Korea?
  • What's the harm in trying?
This has been tried by numerous other heads of states. People within President Reagan's administration conjured up a plan to begin talks with moderate Iranian officials who wanted to depose the Ayatollah. The idea was to ship weapons to the Iranians who promised to do whatever they could to free the American hostages in Tehran at the time. The proceeds of those sales would then be funneled to Israel and the rest is history.

Bush administration officials are negotiating right now with North Korea. One could argue North Korea has a worse track record in regards to the inhumane treatment of its citizens and an equal standing when it comes to preferred sponsor status with certain terrorist organizations. We could even look at other regimes who also advocate terrorism and go to more overt means to legitimize it such as Lebanon or Palestine. The PLO and Hamas have political parties and hold government posts throughout their respective territories. Their stance in regards to terrorist activity is notorious and dare I say just as lethal as Tehran. Yet, we honored Yasar Arafat with official White House visits and a seat at major negotiations with Israel.


I'm no friend of Tehran and I am completely against the tactics the current regime supports. But I'm beginning to wonder how much longer can we afford to wait for this current homicidal ideology which exist there to die. Nothing we've done to Tehran seems to be working. Sanctions only increase the rhetoric and support inside the regime. Military strikes would only inflame the Muslim world and bring us to a major regional conflict in a place where all of our friends are dying off like that monkey from Outbreak. Maybe, it is time for something different. I'm not proposing opening up embassies in Tehran but let's at least sit down and lay the groundwork for a "peaceful" future. "Peaceful" should not imply "harmonious". Even I'm not that optimistic.

Does anyone remember who we fought in the Korean War other than the North Koreans? We fought Chinese soldiers. Some 50 years later, China is becoming the world's largest economy. This didn't come about through military strikes or sanctions, but through a quiet dialogue through diplomatic back-channels and trade negotiations. Slowly, our two governments could build to a dialogue like this and "peace" could be acheived. What I'm proposing takes courage and a will to see "peace" acheived. This is something all warriors should want.

About Us