Security Theater Vs. Security

Bruce Schneier describes the difference:

Unfortunately for politicians, the security measures that work are largely invisible. Such measures include enhancing the intelligence-gathering abilities of the secret services, hiring cultural experts and Arabic translators, building bridges with Islamic communities both nationally and internationally, funding police capabilities — both investigative arms to prevent terrorist attacks, and emergency communications systems for after attacks occur — and arresting terrorist plotters without media fanfare. They do not include expansive new police or spying laws. Our police don't need any new laws to deal with terrorism; rather, they need apolitical funding. These security measures don't make good television, and they don't help, come re-election time. But they work, addressing the reality of security instead of the feeling.

Kill Them With Due Process

Paul Cruickshank thinks that if Osama is ever captured we should put him on trial:

It would be nothing short of a watershed moment, doing much to restore the public's confidence in American institutions and the rule of law after years of being told that they were too quaint for the challenges of a new era. And it would go a long way, too, in restoring the moral high ground for the United States in the court of global opinion.

The Daily Wrap

Today on the Dish we followed Palin on the beginning of her publicity tour. Andrew live-blogged her Oprah interview, Max Blumenthal profiled her ghost-writer, Hitchens hacked away at her other hagiography, and Ambinder tackled her view of creationism. Andrew prodded Levi to fight back and pressed the networks to release raw footage from Palin's interviews. Some readers shook their heads at the Dish's coverage, but others cheered it on. Another examined Palin's post-modern poison. We tallied another "odd lie."

Another story the Dish started tracking is Eli Lake's expose on NIAC's Trita Parsi. Andrew addressed the controversy at length and Larison put in two cents. Andrew also reaffirmed his support of Israel and examined in two parts Johann Hari's piece on reformed Jihadists.

In other assorted coverage, Fallows featured Obama's China trip, Friedersdorf tackled jingoistic bloggers, Ezra and others talked cost controls, Douthat returned to blogging, and Cartman performed "Poker Face."

— C.B.

The Odd Lies Of Sarah Palin XI, Ctd: Asking The Girls

This topic has come up before, and is, in fact, Odd Lie XI. But in the unedited version of the Oprah love-fest, we get yet another version of the story about her asking her children if she should run for vice-president. Here's her latest statement broadcast today:

"This time, there wasn't a family vote. Other steps in my political life, I've polled the kids, and I have abided by some of the results of the polls that the kids have partaken in. This time, no."

This is what she said last fall:

"It was a time of asking the girls to vote on it, anyway. And they voted unanimously, yes. Didn't bother asking my son because, you know, he's going to be off doing his thing anyway, so he wouldn't be so impacted by, at least, the campaign period here. So ask the girls what they thought and they're like, absolutely. Let's do this, mom."

I just want to reiterate the details of the first story. We even find the result of the girls' vote: it was unanimous. And we discover that Track was not polled. But none of this happened at all.

This is not a faulty memory, since the event took place very soon before her first lie about it. And a year later, her memory remembers the truth. So it was a delusional fantasy, or something she thought sounded cool, and had done on previous occasions, so she said it because she figured no one would ever know the truth, so why not make it up?

It was demonstrably untrue at the time, mind you, because we had a contemporaneous document giving a full history of events which proved that logically she had to be lying. And no one in the media, apart from the Dish, ever called her on it.

This is why I will not relent. A person who could have been president told lie after lie after lie in a campaign and the media simply let the fantasies stand. We have no way of knowing what is true or false in her series of statements, and she is never questioned by the media to get at these endless inconsistencies and untruths. Since when does a politician get away with this? And what does it say about our democracy if she can?

Face Of The Day

PalestiniansSaidKhatibAFPGetty

Palestinians smuggle sheep into the Gaza Strip through a tunnel under the Egypt-Gaza border in Rafah on November 15, 2009. Residents of the poverty-stricken Gaza Strip fear a shortage of sacrificial cattle ahead of a major Muslim holiday due to Israel's blockade. Eid al-Adha or Feast of Sacrifice marks the end of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca and is celebrated in remembrance of Abraham's readiness to sacrifice his son to God. By Said Khatib/AFP/Getty.

C’mon, Levi. Fight Back! Ctd

Apparently this "Ricky Hollywood" thing is not a Palin invention (although it is not a porn name, as she suggests). Renata Espinosa goes shopping with Levi and his bodyguard, Tank:

“What we did was, we came up with an alter ego, Ricky Hollywood,” explains Tank. “Ricky Hollywood would iron his shirt.” Levi looks at Tank and raises his eyebrows. “Yeah, right!” he says. “OK, well, I’d iron it. He doesn’t know how to iron.”

“We’re not going to find my style out here,” says Levi rather contentiously.

“Oh, yes, we will,” says Tank. “We’re going to find Ricky’s style!”

So Sarah Palin reads Gawker as well as the Dish! Of course she does.

On Covering Palin: Why It Still Matters

A reader writes:

Please don't kowtow to the readers (I think new readers, in my opinion) who are telling you to drop the Palin Inquiry. Those of us who have read you 5-6 times a day for years know what they don't – that is, the trajectory of your questioning, from the very onset in '08, and your utter frustration with the MSM. They do not get that this is not sensationalistic at all, it is elementally important and absolutely imperative that you never back down and do not stop the pressure. Please. Please.

She can not get NEAR the White House and it is our and your job to stop her, and stop her early.

Whatever it takes, the truth must come out and you are the guy to get to it.

My reader certainly reflects my own motivation. Yes, some of this is funny, some weird, a lot tabloidy … but the fact that a person of no credentials and no transparency and no knowledge came that close to being president of this country, and that the system had no real way to expose it, and indeed enabled it and continues to enable it, is a deadly, deadly serious issue in a democratic republic. 

That's why I'm doing what I do. I want the truth about this farce fully exposed so it never, ever happens again.

What If We Fail In Afghanistan?

Afghanistangetty

Steve Coll asks:

[T]he question requires a definition of failure. As I’ve argued, in my view, a purpose of American policy in Afghanistan ought to be to prevent a second coercive Taliban revolution in that country, not only because it would bring misery to Afghans (and, not incidentally, Afghan women) but because it would jeopardize American interests, such as our security against Al Qaeda’s ambitions and our (understandable) desire to see nuclear-armed Pakistan free itself from the threat of revolutionary Islamist insurgents.

So, then, a definition of failure would be a redux of Taliban revolution in Afghanistan—a revolution that took control of traditional Taliban strongholds such as Kandahar and Khost, and that perhaps succeeded in Kabul as well. Such an outcome is conceivable if the Obama Administration does not discover the will and intelligence to craft a successful political-military strategy to prevent the Afghan Taliban from achieving its announced goals, which essentially involve the restoration of the Afghan state they presided over during the nineteen-nineties, which was formally known as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

(Photo: David Furst/AFP/Getty.)