Uncommon good sense

Why airport security was right to stop four year old Isabella?

The incident strikes at the very heart of the issue of profiling at airports and border crossings. We know from history that when terrorist profiling is used (the deliberate selection of people who resemble most closely the profile of a probable terrorist) that terrorists adapt. During the Battle of Algiers, the French pursued a policy of stopping and screening native Algerians at checkpoints, but allowed European settlers through with little or no monitoring. The terrorists responded by planting their bombs and other weapons on European looking women, who were easily able to infiltrate across the checkpoints, moving weapons across at will. In recent years, the Chechen insurgents have attempted to adopt similar practices through their use of ‘black widows’: women suicide bombers (usually the grieving relatives of Chechens killed by the Russians) who they believe are less likely to seem suspicious to Russian officials.

Related:

The Folly of Heather MacDonald

Good article on the perils of profiling

We need better press critics

It is bad enough that reporters still use Wendy Murphy as an "expert" source. It is more disappointing still to see press "watch dogs" and "ethicists" try to justify it.

KC Johnson

The effects of this non-accountability: those who engaged in misconduct (or worse) in the lacrosse case are free to offer repeat performances. Take, for instance, so-called sex crimes expert Wendy Murphy. Fresh from being deemed not merely an expert but an appropriate instructor for a Poynter seminar—even after a Poynter representative was informed of Murphy’s fabrications—Murphy was interviewed by AP education writer Justin Pope, who labeled her a “victims’ advocate who has filed numerous Title IX complaints on behalf of victims.”

Related:

What is the true function of a public editor

Media criticism and corralled rebellion

The long shadow of the low, dishonest decade

How One Left-wing Academic Star Portrays Lillian Hellman as a Role Model for Today

When she concludes that we should celebrate Hellman because she was proud of opposing only the opponents of Communism and rationalizing the Communists as well-meaning individuals, Kessler-Harris reveals that rather than being an impartial, above-the fray scholar, she is simply another member of left-wing academia whose members talk to themselves, bemoan the American victory in the Cold War, and eulogize apologists for Communism like Lillian Hellman as heroic.

Trayvon Martin

Maybe it isn't impossible that the facts support George Zimmerman's version of events.

Clarice Feldman

'A Struggle Ensued': Lynch Mob Justice In Florida

The affidavit she has filed in support of this claim reveals she has no new evidence of a dispositive, persuasive nature to justify overruling Wolfinger's action.

Jeralyn Merritt

Reaction to the George Zimmerman Bail Hearing

"What stood out to me was the number of disclosures that suggest the state's evidence is speculative, at best."

"Gilbreath acknowledges he has no evidence Zimmerman "confronted" Trayvon as opposed to that the two just met up"

"The state has no evidence contradicting that Zimmerman started to walk back to his car after the dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow Martin."

"He never claims Zimmerman attacked Trayvon or Trayvon didn't attack Zimmerman."

Why is this impossible?

Rob Dreher writes:

Unless forensics comes back with some smoking-gun evidence, it’s hard to see at this moment that Zimmerman’s guilt could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

This case may turn on poor police forensics work on the night of the shooting. But that’s not George Zimmerman’s fault.

What evidence do we have (evidence, not the self-serving statements of lawyers) that the forensics work is poor? Or that the police investigation was slipshod?

Why is it inconceivable that the police work and the forensics evidence confirm the basics of Zimmerman's story?

I'm not saying that is the case, but isn't it possibile that Zimmerman is telling the truth?

NBC News makes Joseph Goebbels proud

Daily Caller:

NBC: We deeply regret our error that made George Zimmerman sound like a racist, and now you should leave us alone

Ann Althouse:

"That is the most outrageous, truly evil editing I've ever seen."

UPDATE:

Ace:

NBC Calls Its Deliberate, Frame-Up Editing of George Zimmerman an "Error;" Washington Post Then Calls It A "Screw-Up"

Malpractice or malfeasance?

Just a couple of guys doing the work that press critics won't (can't?) do.

Trayvon Martin - Is Everything You Think You Know Just Media BS?

How Can We Trust the Media?

Matt Gutman and the mainstream media’s anti-Zimmerman bias

A new low for David Frum

Given his history that's very, very low.

David Frum: Trayvon Martin, and the backlash against the backlash

 It is bad enough that Frum's "analysis mixes facts that are flat out wrong ("He was 100 pounds lighter than his killer.") and wild conclusions that are unsupported by real evidence ("Martin was hunted down by a trigger-happy bully").

What's especially interesting is how Frum-- rich, white, Canadian-born-- plays the race card to attack America's gun laws and Jacksonian culture.

He finds Florida's gun laws "peculiar" He implies that a majority of the states passed shall issue concealed carry laws as part of a post-Obama "backlash" by "fearful elderly whites in the South."

Is Frum lazy and ill-informed or is he dishonest? It is one or the other because anyone who spends 10 minutes with Google knows that the shall-issue movement has been active and successful for twenty years. It has nothing to do with Obama's election nor is it only a Southern phenomenon.

Tom Wolfe: Prophet

So says Steve Sailer:

Trayvon: How the Case Was Spun

I have to agree since i wrote this back in 2006

Wolfe does not win literary prizes and is despised by many of the biggest names in the literary pantheon. (Check out "My Three Stooges" in Hooking Up). But Wolfe has this going for him: if the mark of greatness is having something to say about "where we are and where we are going", he trumps everybody on the list. Does anyone is Denver look up from her Sunday paper and say "this sounds just like a John Updike novel"? How many people turn on the cable news programs and think "Is Philip Roth scripting this"? Yet from Tawana Brawley to the Duke Lacrosse case, Tom Wolfe scouted the territory before anyone else.

Seymour Hersh

Good read:

The Deceits of Seymour Hersh

Related:

Seymour Hersh

Nanny Mike in the news

Mayor Warns of the Pitfalls in Social Media

“We are basically having a referendum on every single thing that we do every day,” he said. “And it’s very hard for people to stand up to that and say, ‘No, no, this is what we’re going to do,’ when there’s constant criticism, and an election process that you have to look forward to and face periodically.”

Those elections are so annoying for philosopher kings like Mike Bloomberg. Also, Bloomberg stood up for poor, abused Goldman Sachs.

Mayor Bloomberg, who didn’t throw his support behind the Occupy Wall Street protesters last year, visited Goldman’s headquarters to give the firm a pat on the back after Smith’s manifesto hit.


“The mayor stopped by to make clear that the company is a vital part the city’s economy, and the kind of unfair attacks that we’re seeing can eventually hurt all New Yorkers,” Stu Loeser, a spokesman for hizzoner, pointed out.

As Jon Friedman points out, Goldman might be good for the New york economy, but it is very, very good for Bloomberg's private fortune:

Loeser failed to mention that Goldman is a prominent part of the financial community which pays dearly to use the trademark Bloomberg terminals. These are coveted machines which offer finance-industry professionals and others a dizzying array of data and information about all kinds of financial instruments.

What did Fidel know and when did he know it?

The Kennedy assassination: Did Castro know in advance?

A new book by former CIA analyst Brian Latell details evidence that Cuban intelligence knew beforehand of JFK’s assassination.

Howie Kurtz goes in the tank for "Game Change"

In other news, I saw the sun rise in the east this morning.

On Reliable Sources, Kurtz did his best to help out the makers of HBO's docudrama. In his signature powder-puff style, he let them make their case that the movie was the real story of the 2008 campaign.

Roach[director]: I make a deal with the audience when we say it's a true story. I know the audience is expecting that. It would be not a very good story if it was deliberately one-sided. The best stories are layered and complex.


In this story, there are no real heroes and no real villains and - because it's all told within one campaign. And our commitment was only to the truth.
- - - - -


Strong [screenwriter] I also want to respond, though, to the allegations that the film is based on a false narrative of a couple of people. That's totally inaccurate. The film is based on, you know, not only the book "Game Change," but interviews that I and Jay conducted with 25 people, and, you know, the stories that we heard were corroborated by 10, 12, 15 people.

Kurtz never pressed the issue with them. He ignores the numerous cases where key figures in the McCain campaign emphatically deny that the events portrayed in the movie really happened. For instance, Steve Schmidt flatly states that John McCain never told him "find me a woman" during the VP search. A.B. Culvahouse, who managed the vetting process, insists, and has insisted for years, that Palin was vetted in the same thorough way as all other potential nominees.


Most importantly, Randy Scheunemann, the man who ran the foreign policy briefings for the campaign, disputes every aspect of the movie's portrayal of Gov. Palin as an ignorant dunce who is unsure of Germany's location or its role in World War II.

The idea that at any point that Gov. Palin expressed any uncertainty as to who were the various sides in World War I or World War II, or any other war, is absolutely untrue. She was incredibly intelligent. She asked very informed questions. She was very interested and she wanted to understand John McCain's view of foreign policy because she wanted to be the best possible vice presidential nominee.

See: Top 10 Lies of HBO's 'Game Change'

Kurtz gave the filmmakers a pass and let their self-endorsement stand without serious contradiction. Nor did he confront them with a telling point made by Jim Geraghty:

Each change from the book (presuming, of course, Heilemann and Halperin's reporting is accurate) moves the story in a particular direction. Palin becomes dumber. McCain becomes more craven, cynical, and desperate to win. McCain's campaign aides are sloppier, more panicky, a mess. What director Roach and screenwriter Strong are portraying is recent history as they wish it had been.

All in all, it was a typical day's work for Howie. He avoided the tough issues that make his buddies in the MSM look bad and, instead, gave them plenty of air time to brag about their devotion to the truth and their empathy toward Sarah Palin.


There was funny note that Kurtz missed completely. Jay Roach misspoke (Freudian slip or Kinsey gaffe) when confronted by the question of his ability to be even-handed in light of his contributions to the Obama campaign:

Kurtz: But, look, Jay and Danny, you both know that you are seen as liberal Hollywood guys. You both contributed to Obama's campaign last time around, as did Julianne Moore. Does that not create a perception problem for you, and were you aware of that going in?


STRONG: Yes. Now, look, I understand how there would be that perception. I think it's completely fair to talk about, and I think it's good for the audience to know those sorts of -- that contributions like that have been made. But that doesn't enable us to be fair, and it doesn't enable us to portrait the events as accurately as possible.

 

MSM finds out that twitter is not so fun when audience argues back

Last fall i asked this question:

Why do journalists love twitter and hate blogging?

My tentative answer was:

Blogging was a direct attack on MSM hegemony at both the micro (fisking) and macro levels (explanation space). I just don't see Twitter as the same threat. It is a flood of unmermorable chatter that is easy to ignore. Blogging had the potential to break the power of the MSM guild. Bloggers, at their best, presented arguments. Arguments can both change minds on the immediate subject and undermine the credibilty of those establishment pundts who present weak cases on a regular basis. (Yes, i'm looking at you Brooks and Frum).


At a minimum, blogging brought a lot of outsiders to the pundit/editor game. Twitter seems more useful as a way for insiders like Kurtz to extent their brand and magnify their voice.

Soledad (D-CNN) now provides evidence that this theory is true. Tweeting was once all well and good for the news reader but she is out of patience now that listeners are arguing back about her attempt to obfuscate on Critical Race Theory. Ace has the details:

Stop Tweeting Soledad_OBrien

Look whose still fighting the Cold War

Left avoids minute of silence to communist victims

Andrew Breitbart, RIP

I think this Kaus tribute is the best I've seen

An important new book on Watergate

Jack Shafer's review:

What made Deep Throat leak?

Leak overturns once and for all the romantic, popular interpretation of the Watergate saga of one inside source risking it all to save democracy. “Nixon’s downfall was an entirely unanticipated result of Felt’s true and only aim,” Holland writes. Although Holland never disparages the enterprise of Woodward and Bernstein, acknowledging the impact their reports had on Judge John J. Sirica and the senators who formed an investigative committee, neither does he bow to them. “Contrary to the widely held perception that the Washington Post ‘uncovered’ Watergate, the newspaper essentially tracked the progress of the FBI’s investigation, with a time delay ranging from weeks to days, and published elements of the prosecutors’ case well in advance of the trial.”


Leak, to be published Mar. 6, vindicates journalist Edward Jay Epstein, one of the earliest critics of Woodsteinmania. In a Commentary piece published in July 1974, about a month after the Woodstein book came out, Epstein eviscerates what he calls the “sustaining myth of journalism.” Naïve readers believe that intrepid reporters expose government scandals by doggedly working their confidential sources. Of course such scoops do occur, but the more conventional route to a prize-winning series is well-placed leaks from well-oiled government investigations, which Holland maintains was the case with Watergate.

Related:

Howie the Weasel never disappoints

The high utility of myth and ignorance

On leaks, bias and truth

Woodstein gets played: Deep Throat, Gray, and Hunt's notebooks

Deep Throat: The irreconcilable differences between image and fact

Duke lacrosse: Custom, interest, and the pursuit of truth

Pre-Venona minds at work

Historians and the press still refuse to face the facts of the Red Decade and the "Red Scare".

J. Robert Oppenheimer: A Spy? No. But a Communist Once? Yes.

That only one of these eight biographies of Oppenheimer accurately assessed his relationship to the CPUSA reinforces the themes we discussed in our 2003 book In Denial: Historians, Communism and Espionage. By and large, American scholars and historians cannot bring themselves to write dispassionately about the elephant in the room, domestic communism, anticommunism, and Soviet espionage

In Denial: Round 11

[I. F.] Stone, however, is an icon in certain journalistic precincts, and to his devotees those six pages are the only ones in Spies that matter. Their responses match in distortion, whitewashing, spinning, and ad hominem viciousness any that we have received over the years and give us a better understanding of what Weinstein and Radosh had to put up with. The history of communism and Soviet espionage have never been fields for those seeking the scholarly quiet life, but the displays of rage (real and faux) in regard to Stone have been impressive.

Related:

A herd of independent minds

Jennifer Rubin earns her paycheck

The WaPo's resident resercon acts, well, like a resercon.

James Taranto, David Limbaugh Draw Jennifer Rubin's Wrath

Related:

Why Letterman matters (Part I)

David Frum had no comment

Question for the anti-Delay Republicans

Playing nice is not a strategy (at least not a winning strategy)

Emperor Romney has no clothes

Why Is Romney Seen as Electable?

RINO Romney Is the Least Electable

Previously:

Numbers that should scare Mitt Romney and the tools at Fox News