WikiLeaks on Stephen Colbert

Ok, I have to admit I love Stephen Colbert. He is so funny ... well, at least 50% of the time. Now, I know this is old, but I was a little behind on my DVR, so I just saw it yesterday, but I have to share this, because it is just too funny.

Background: Aaron Barr (of HB Gary) reportedly suggested to BofA (who reportedly got in contact with Barr at the suggestion of the Law Firm of Hunton & Williams, who was recommended to them [BofA] by the US Justice Department) that they should hire him (Barr) to hack WikiLeaks and plant false information to discredit them (WikiLeaks). Confused? Read it again ... it'll make sense.

So Barr tells BofA he can hack WikiLeaks and ruin them, but WikiLeaks has a self-appointed cyber guard called Anonymous, a group of independent hackers dedicated to, among other things, protecting WikiLeaks. I have to transcribe this next part directly from Stephen Colbert, because it is just too funny exactly the way Stephen and his writers created it:

_quote:

But first, he had to take out WikiLeaks Guard Dog, Anonymous. Barr threatened Anonymous by telling the Financial Times he had collected information on their core leaders, including many of their real names. Now, to put that in hacker terms, Anonymous is a hornets' nest, and Barr said, I'm going to stick my penis in that thing...

Because, faster than you could say, "Get these hornets off my penis!" Anonymous took down Barr's website, stole his emails, deleted the company's backup data, trashed his twitter account and remotely wiped his iPad.

And he had just reached the Ham 'em High level on Angry Birds. Anonymous then published all of Barr's emails, including one from his wife saying, "I will file for divorce," AND Barr's World of Warcraft name, "sevrynsten." That's right, they ruined BOTH his lives!

_end quote.

I don't really have a comment here, other than, "um...yeah...people gotta watch what they say they can do. Don't piss off the wrong people. We all need to play nice in the sandbox."

Maybe Charlie Sheen should have extrapolated this lesson to his situation ... The broadcast was from before he started really pissing people off, I think.

Guns on Amtrak

Ok, what the hell? All the news programs I've seen in the last two days have been talking about this, and in my opinion, this is the biggest non-news item ever.

Amtrak.

Is allowing passengers.

To take guns onto their trains.

What???

Oh ... it has to be an unloaded gun, checked into the baggage compartment, and you have to call the train station in advance to let them know you'll be checking the gun!

That's basically like shipping the gun. You're not allowing the passengers to take guns on the train ... you're allowing them to transport their property!

I don't care what the hell you check into the baggage compartment, to be honest. I like to ride the train between cities in Southern California (great way to travel without the headache of having to drive or go through airport security). I can get on an Amtrak train by walking up to an Amtrak pseudo-ATM, stick in my credit card, and tell it where I want to go. If I'm not checking bags, the first Amtrak person I see is the conductor who takes my ticket once I'm on the train!

So does it matter what bags are checked? No. I am not afraid that an honest, law abiding citizen who lets Amtrak know, "Hey, I'm going to bring an unloaded gun to check into the baggage compartment," is going to go get the gun mid-trip and rob the train Jesse James style. And it's not like they're going to get it, hijack the train, and ram it into a building.

The person who is going to try something stupid and illegal is the one to takes a loaded gun in his carry-on. And if they're planning on doing something, they're not going to call in advance. AND since there's no security check at train stations, by the time the weapon is detected, it will be too late.

So why the heck are do many news agencies have their undies in a knot over the 'new' Amtrak rules?