Baby Bush will be Closing Airports in California to VFR Flight Again

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:37:22 GMT, "John T" wrote in
Message-Id: om:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


Security by obscurity isn't.

That's not necessarily true, but I'm curious why you'd say that when you
seemed to be making the argument that you didn't think Presidential TFR's
are warranted.

Ask any Unix system administrator.

Are you now saying they are?

No.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


Ask any Unix system administrator.

Sure, OS security has so much in common with physical security of a mobile
target.

Obscurity *can* help security. If you can blind or confuse the enemies
intelligence efforts (e.g., prevent them from finding the target), you have
taken a big step in disrupting any plans they may be making. In particular,
advertising the existence of Presidential TFR's tells the world where and
when the President will be.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

John T wrote:


Obscurity *can* help security. If you can blind or confuse the enemies
intelligence efforts (e.g., prevent them from finding the target), you have
taken a big step in disrupting any plans they may be making. In particular,
advertising the existence of Presidential TFR's tells the world where and
when the President will be.



It's irrelavant. Every local newspaper announces a week or more in
advance that the President will be in town.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:mWn3c.160463$4o.208479@attbi_s52...


John T wrote:


Obscurity *can* help security. If you can blind or confuse the enemies
intelligence efforts (e.g., prevent them from finding the target), you
have
taken a big step in disrupting any plans they may be making. In
particular,
advertising the existence of Presidential TFR's tells the world where
and
when the President will be.



It's irrelavant. Every local newspaper announces a week or more in
advance that the President will be in town.


But, at least, if we left it to local newspapers, the bad guys would have to
go
read them all. This way, there's just one place to look, no?

"Henry Bibb" wrote in message
k.net...

"Newps" wrote in message
news:mWn3c.160463$4o.208479@attbi_s52...


It's irrelavant. Every local newspaper announces a week or more in
advance that the President will be in town.


But, at least, if we left it to local newspapers, the bad guys would have
to
go
read them all. This way, there's just one place to look, no?

In the old Soviet Union they used to do precisely that; damn near everything
from the NY Times to the Podunk Reporter.

Seal Team Six creator Richard Marcinko related in his biography how he got a
write-up in an obscure magazine called "MALE", about the Seals in Vietnam.
Within weeks the VC were posting leaflets offering a reward of 50,000
piasters for his head.

Jay Honeck wrote:

snip

What's that old saying? "A Conservative is a Liberal who has been
mugged."

"...and a Liberal is a Conservative who just got arrested."

(Maybe even more true today in light of the "Patriot Act".)

--
Frank....H

What's that old saying? "A Conservative is a Liberal who has been
mugged."

"...and a Liberal is a Conservative who just got arrested."


A cynic is an optomist that has met reality unexpectedly.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

When was ANY party fiscally conservative after about 1820?


If you mean major party, Cleveland (Grover, not Ohio) Democrats in 1890s.
If you mean any party at all, there are fiscally conservative parties today,
they just can't get their candidates elected.



Because they're not "mainstream", I guess. Of course, if libertarians
were mainstream, we wouldn't have these problems in the first place,
regardless of who was in power.


If Congress and the President adhered to the Constitution it wouldn't make a
lot of difference which party was in power.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

When was ANY party fiscally conservative after about 1820?


If you mean major party, Cleveland (Grover, not Ohio) Democrats in 1890s.
If you mean any party at all, there are fiscally conservative parties
today,
they just can't get their candidates elected.

Grover had just about as much trouble with his party and the populace as
anyone would in modern times. In the late 1890's there was just about as
much today. The campaigns of William Jennings Bryant are a good example.




Because they're not "mainstream", I guess. Of course, if libertarians
were mainstream, we wouldn't have these problems in the first place,
regardless of who was in power.


If Congress and the President adhered to the Constitution it wouldn't make
a
lot of difference which party was in power.

Not quite the right angle -- if the PEOPLE held them to the Constitution, it
wouldn't make a lot of difference. First, most people have zero clue what's
in the Constitution, and secondly, they like getting the goodies.

"One must remember that in a democracy, the _whores_ are us." -- P.J.
O'Rourke, 'Parliament of Whores'.

"Frank" wrote in message ...
Jay Honeck wrote:

snip

What's that old saying? "A Conservative is a Liberal who has been
mugged."

"...and a Liberal is a Conservative who just got arrested."

And the "liberals" are now saying the Patriot Act doesn't go far enough.
Where were they when all the rest of the legislation was coming down over
the past fifty years?


(Maybe even more true today in light of the "Patriot Act".)

Want to be a little more specific than just the four second sound bites from
the media?