Saturday, November 5, 2022

Funny Thing About High-End Residential Security
















You can see that funny thing in the photo above. A multimillion-dollar residence, this one happens to be owned by the high government official who is third in line of Presidential sucession, something which has brought unwanted attention to the place, that is equipped with CCTV cameras and various alarm systems, presumably also with some kind of access control devices on the exterior doors, and even occasional security presence outside, but for which nobody thought to provide any kind of barrier against forcible entry. I find that odd. 

See the broken glazings in those french doors at the rear of the house? The fact that some shattered glass is still hanging in the frame is a big clue that the glazings are of laminated safety glass - the same thing you have in your car's windshield - and that material is tough enough to require a few good whacks of a tool to break through, although it is still, obviously, not a forced-entry barrier that would keep even the dumbest intruder outside until police can respond. 

What accounts for that oversight? The homeowners no doubt employ expensive help of all kinds to design, build, and maintain that very nice house in San Francisco. Possibly a security consultant as well? At least, we may be sure they get home security advice from the U.S. Capitol Police. And yet when an intruder came with a hammer, the only things he faced were cameras and alarms, none of which hindered him in the least.

It's as if all the people who gave security advice or sold services to the Pelosis have a repertoire that runs the gamut from A to B - cameras to alarms - and they have no idea what to do about a nut case who brings a hammer.  

Actually, judging by my own experience, that's exactly the way it is for all private sector security contractors and 90 percent of their government sector counterparts. 

At least the incident in San Francisco has reportedly raised questions about home security for Congress.
“Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger sent a memo to House offices on Saturday calling the attack “a somber reminder of the threats elected officials and families face in 2022” and outlining existing security resources that lawmakers have, including residential security assessments and law enforcement coordination.” 
-- snip -- 
“Congress has doled out money to help fortify the Capitol complex in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack. And, in response to pressure from lawmakers, members were informed earlier this year that the House sergeant-at-arms would cover up to $10,000 for security equipment at their homes.”

$10K is enough to pay for consumer grade home alarms, but once again it seems no one is thinking about actual physical barriers of the kind that can keep an attacker outside the house while alarms do their thing to get a police response started. 

The Capitol Police would be well advised to consult with their government partners a little more broadly and find some who have expertise in hard physical barriers - that is, with walls, doors, and windows - that delay forced-entry attacks. 

I'll get them started by pointing to a supplier of French doors that can resist tool attacks. There! As a public service, you can have that advice at no cost.

Wednesday, November 2, 2022

Somebody Just Woke Up After a Long Deep Sleep


The ACLU must have set its alarm clock for one week before the mid-term elections, because just yesterday they opened their eyes and tweeted out that old bromide about what the First Amendment is for. 

Well, quite a bit has changed while they were asleep the past two years. Maybe they'll catch up on all that's gone on between DHS and the IT industry if and when control of the House and Senate flips to the Republicans.


  

She Used Her Personal Phone and Email For Official Business to Avoid Openness and Accountability?


Well, well, well. What's all this then? 

High government officials doing their official business over personal phones and personal email to avoid freedom of information laws, that's what. And in the case of fleeting PM Liz Truss - the Queen Slayer - that evasion may come back to bite her. 

Truss evidently lacks Hillary's willingness to simply lie and deny when caught breaking the law

It seems they have a lot to learn about modern democracy over there.

State Magazine Notes the Cost in Lives For 75 Years of Diplomacy in Pakistan














It's quite a good article, which you can read here:
One sobering statistic is that 19 U.S. civilian and military personnel have lost their lives in the line of duty, from terrorist attacks and in an airplane crash in Pakistan. Four died in a single day in 1979 when a mob attacked the old U.S. Embassy, trapping nearly 140 American and Pakistani employees and a journalist in a secure suite of rooms for hours as violent vandals ransacked and burned the compound in Islamabad. A Marine corporal died of a gunshot wound while observing the mob from a roof, an Army warrant officer perished in a fire in a residence building, and two Pakistani staff members died of asphyxiation elsewhere on the compound. 
Two Embassy employees died in a terrorist attack in 2002, two in 2006, three in 2008, one in 2009, three in 2010, and two as recently as 2016. Additionally, Ambassador Arnold Raphel and Army Brig. Gen. Herbert Wassom died in a plane explosion that also killed then-President Mohammad Zia ul-Haq in 1988.
That's quite a toll for maintaining a diplomatic presence and advancing our national interests in a country that is not currently having a war or revolution.

Requiescat in pace

Thursday, October 20, 2022

Sentence in Harry Dunn Case to Depend Upon Display of Remorse


















Here's the best of today's news reports on the Harry Dunn trial, US citizen Anne Sacoolas urged to prove ‘genuine remorse’ over Harry Dunn death, in which the judge urged the defendant to return to the UK for sentencing about one month from now as a display of remorse, with the implication that she will calibrate the sentence in accordance with the requisite remorse.
Adjourning sentencing until next month, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb told Sacoolas that although she could not compel her to face justice in person, it would provide “weighty evidence” of “genuine remorse”. 
Speaking outside court, Mr Dunn’s mother Charlotte Charles said that “of course” she wants Sacoolas to return to the UK to be sentenced. 
Mrs Charles told the PA news agency: “I do very much hope that she listens to the judge’s words and makes the effort to come back because that will truly show us all how remorseful she is.
Of course, the judge also acknowledged that she has no power to compel a return, or anything else, frankly, since the U.S. will not extradite someone with diplomatic immunity. 

What will the judge do, you may wonder, if the defendant remains outside the UK on sentencing day? Impose a longer suspended sentence? Because that's just the kind of futile gesture she has available to her. 

As for the prosecutor, he'd made peace with his surrender on the Crown Prosecution Service's preferred charge of dangerous driving, and noted that the defendant's plea to a lesser offense had been negotiated with both the family and his higher-ups.
“The plea that has been entered was one indicated at magistrates’ court and indicated indeed before that as being offered by the defendant. 
“It has been considered at the very highest level and with the very greatest care and with close consultation with Harry’s family.”

We'll see if that close consultation survives when the defendant does not return.  

 

Plea Accepted in Harry Dunn Trial, Sentencing to Follow, Judge Concedes Powerless to Compel Return to UK


That's one more step to a conclusion of this long drawn-out affair. Not the last step, though, since we've still got to get a sentence that can be served in the U.S. and presumably consisting of nothing more than a fine and community service, just as the defendant has offered to do all along. 

The big deal today was that the Dunn family has evidently lowered its expectations to accept a conviction on the lesser charge of careless driving. That's a climb-down from what they've apparently been insisting on until now, and thus tying the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service.  

So, first we'll have the sentencing, then the public humiliation of the defendant - at least, we will if the UK tabloids have anything to say about it - as she does whatever that community service consists of. Followed by the coroner's inquest that the family has been calling for, which in the UK must come after any criminal proceeding despite the evident pointlessness of that sequencing. 

And after that, what happens? At best, the UK public loses interest in the matter, with a consequent loss of its political utility. At worst, the family takes offense at a piddling sentence and spends the rest of their lives the same way they're spent the last three years. 

Since I'm an optimist, I hold onto the crazy hope that the mum will finally see through her charlatan 'advisor' and denounce him for the three years of wrong information, alienating bombast, and malignant narcissism that he's subjected her to. (Most unlikely, but I can hope.)