Update from the Heartland
No.344
7.7.08 – 13.7.08
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
No.344
7.7.08 – 13.7.08
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- Another example of the idiocy of Boumediene {v. Bush [552 U.S. ___ (2008)]} [340] and now Parhat {v. Gates [DC CCA no. 06-1397 (2008)]} [343], and beyond the general examples offered in Antonin the Impaler’s Boumediene dissent, I offer the case of Kuwati Army deserter Abdullah Saleh Ali Al Ajmi . . . armed with an AK-47 assault rifle when he was captured in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in 2002. He was subsequently incarcerated at Guantánamo. His diligent lawyers gained his release in 2005. On 26.April.2008, Al-Ajmi blew himself up and took seven (7) innocent people with him in Mosul, Iraq. I hope the uber-Left feels really good and justified in letting enemy combatants go free, to kill more people – kinda like the Free Willy syndrome, I suppose. Of course, the uber-Left has nary a whit of regret in hounding the administration to release the killers and close Guantánamo, as they are obviously just innocent tourists, illegally detained by the evil American administration. I feel safer already.
-- The President signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008 [PL 110-261; HR 6304], AKA the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, [342]. The final Senate vote was 69-28-3. The most controversial provision of the revised law is the immunization of the telecommunications companies that assisted the government in the electronic surveillance process. The law also clarifies elements of the original law – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 [PL 95-511]. The reform of the internal mechanics of FISA remains beyond public scrutiny, as it should be. The President needs the FISA tools to wage war successfully in the War on Islamic Fascism, yet I have acquired the apprehension of our youngest son. I am not confident in the current administration’s respect for these powerful tools that can be and are abused .
-- Secretaries of State James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher declared the War Powers Act of 1973 [PL 93-148] out-dated, and recommended even closer coordination between the President and Congress by law when committing U.S. armed forces to hostilities. I have mixed views of the notion. One of the President’s many responsibilities in wartime or as war approaches is coalescing national focus on wage war successfully. Because one particular President fails in that task does not translate into more laws constraining future Presidents. But, who am I but a lowly common citizen!
-- On Sunday, 13.July.2008, Taliban fighters executed a coordinated attack on a small, U.S. base in Wanat, Konar Province, Afghanistan, (a province bordering Pakistan’s tribal region) killing nine (9) American soldiers and wounding 15, in a quick, violent engagement. Please review the first item above.
The under secretary of defense for policy from 2001 to 2005, Douglas Jay Feith, offered up a snippet of his view of the reasons for the Battle for Iraq.
“Why We Went to War in Iraq”
by Douglas J. Feith
Wall Street Journal
Published: July 3, 2008; page A11
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121504452359324921.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
While Feith’s views are important to read, they are disappointingly lame from the larger context of the War on Islamic Fascism. We should pay attention to the opinions of citizens who occupy high governmental positions, especially in wartime. However, Feith falls far short of a rational argument. Perhaps he was just presenting a teaser to sell his book. I will not bite.
A series of articles for your discriminating cogitation:
-- “Female U.S. Casualties More Common in Iraq War”
by Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com
Published: July 02, 2008
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200807/NAT20080702a.html
-- “‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Hits Women Much More”
by Thom Shanker
New York Times
Published: June 23, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/washington/23pentagon.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
-- “Justice for Gays – The Bush administration rules that children of same-sex couples can receive their Social Security benefits”
Editorial
Washington Post
Published: Saturday, July 5, 2008; page A14
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/04/AR2008070402140.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Despite the Press gurgitation of the Supreme Court’s recent capital punishment case, I was not particularly moved to read the case as my Inbox of ‘Reading to do’ remained quite full. Then, I read the following article:
“In Court Ruling on Executions, a Factual Flaw”
by Linda Greenhouse
New York Times
Published: July 2, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/washington/02scotus.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
My curiosity was peaked. Greenhouse claimed the Court had erred in its factual information, supporting the ruling . . . for a capital punishment case, that was a significant accusation. The case in question was: Kennedy v. Louisiana [552 U.S. ___ (2008); no. 07-343] – another close 5-4 decision. What struck me at the outset was an introductory statement by Associate Justice Anthony McLeod Kennedy, writing the Court’s opinion. He observed, “Petitioner's crime was one that cannot be recounted in these pages in a way sufficient to capture in full the hurt and horror inflicted on his victim or to convey the revulsion society, and the jury that represents it, sought to express by sentencing petitioner to death.” While I cannot and will not claim an exhaustive search of Supreme Court decisions, to my knowledge, such a statement is extraordinarily rare, if not unprecedented. Just the basic, public facts are sufficient to substantiate the veracity of Justice Kennedy’s statement. Patrick Kennedy, then 43 – Petitioner in this case – was convicted of savagely raping his then 8-year-old step-daughter, and sentenced to death under Louisiana law. Eight years old! Let it sufficient say that Justice Kennedy’s reluctance to recount the factual details is reflective of my use of the adverb ‘savagely.’ The Court decided that a death sentence for child rape short of murder was unconstitutional. Justice Kennedy went on to say, “When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency and restraint.” He also used the term “evolving standards of decency” several times in his rationalization of the Court’s decision. And, the more I read his attempt to justify the ruling, the more I asked myself, where is the bloody decency for that poor little, hapless girl who suffered the brutal rape by a man in a position of trust in her life? Further, I was repeatedly reminded of and would shout at Justice Kennedy, the admonition of Army counsel Joseph N. Welch to Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” I invoke Welch’s words in the same vein; ‘evolving standards of decency’ . . . my patooty. Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissenting opinion and noted, “The Eighth Amendment [against cruel and unusual punishment] protects the right of an accused. It does not authorize this Court to strike down federal or state criminal laws on the ground that they are not in the best interests of crime victims or the broader society.” In this one, I am with the ‘strict constructionists;’ the Court exceeded its place in our government. If the death penalty for such heinous, non-murder crimes is no longer applicable, then I respectfully suggest a more appropriate penalty . . . that Patrick Kennedy be taken to an appropriate common area in Angola Prison, stripped naked, bent over a barrel, strapped down tight, and then let loose the prison population to have their way with him as he did with his innocent, 8-year-old, step-daughter . . . and even then, his punishment will NOT match his crime. For Kennedy to live the remainder of his life at State expense, even in solitary confinement, is a disproportionate punishment in the other direction – far too liberal and lenient, compared to the violence, cruelty, premeditation and barbarity of the crime. We are NOT talking about an act of passion, but rather a premeditated, purposeful, deliberate act of violence for which there can be no excuse, no mitigation. In many respects, death by lethal injection is far too kind a punishment for such an evil, degenerate man.
Comments and contributions from Update no.343:
“It is now 7:30 a.m., July 8, '08. I have been kinda watching ‘Good Morning America,’ I think. Anyway, the moderator was interviewing T Boone Pickens, a Texas Billionaire, with a lot of interests in the oil industry. The discussion was on ridding ourselves from dependence on foreign oil for energy. Pickens, an Extremely astute business man said, ‘Two things. First, for the short term, Natural gas. We have a LOT of it and we need to start using it in transportation, heating, making electricity, etc, etc, etc.
“‘Then, in the longer term, wind! We have maybe more wind available for use to generate power than any developed country on earth.’ HE said that. Not me. He said we need to be developing wind farms----and he said HE is developing one, I guess in Texas, which will lead the world in wind produced energy.
“He talked about a lot of things concerning energy production and ridding ourselves of foreign dependence, which he said is Easily doable, though not by tomorrow. He said the impetus has to come from the top, (POTUS), in order to get the populace to accept, believe in, and then Demand the needed changes. The politicians will do the rest to create laws, if for no other reason than to ensure their own re-election. Then private enterprise, funded and fueled by public interest, will figure out how to do it and then DO it!
“Then Pickens said something which I took to obliquely refer to our present POTUS, GWB, and yet not TOTALLY in a bad way. I like what he said!!
“He said, ‘A fool with a plan is better than a genius with No plan.’”
My response:
I saw the first of the T. Boone Pickens advertisements this morning. While some of his details are not as ambitious as I am proposing, Pickens has gone quite a bit farther than any of the presidential candidates. I like his wind power proposal as well as the short term utilization of natural gas and clean coal, but all of them need dramatic infrastructure investment . . . to me like seed money – the Federal government investing in our future. Where I think the Federales can have the greatest amplification is in the new energy source technology research like fuel cells or high capacity batteries, but more importantly, technologies not yet identified.
. . . a follow-up comment:
“I totally agree with you, Cap. It will cost a bunch of $$$ over time, to get the infrastructure in place, but we do have to be Building towards energy independence Even as that is happening, because this is a long term thing, though it's doable I think! Once companies believe in the Government doing IT'S part, then they WILL start investing in new sources of energy, as well as research into perhaps even as yet unknown sources. And soon, possibly even before some new thing or current but as yet not really exploited thing is sort of on-line, it will mean Many more jobs, so more taxes coming in to the Government without raising tax rates, etc, etc.
“I always find it very hard to Believe that the Democrats, particularly those most to the left, can be taken in by the idea that Government, and more of it, plus more taxes on the rich is the answer. In NO way can that be, so WHY cannot these usually very bright and educated citizens who are representing us not see that? The rich pay at LEAST their fair share of taxes already! And They are in many cases the very people who can fund the starting of new businesses in the Energy Exploration field, thereby making more jobs available, thus more taxes coming in to the Government without raising taxes, etc.
“I believe in free enterprise as the way to prosperity. Americans of all races, religions, and ethnic groups have always been ingenuous when it comes to exploiting new technologies by starting new businesses, or expanding existing ones into new fields. And when we are in a really truly bad bind/situation, we can muster the effort, people, facilities, and $$$ to quickly start doing and keep doing the most amazing things.
“For instance---look back to WW2, now over 60 years behind us, and take a peek at airplane Bomber production, fighter production, liberty ship production, baby aircraft carrier (such as my Dad was on) production, to name but a few things. It literally took only days to float a new ship from the beginning! And way more than one bomber was rolled out every single day, 24/7, by the several huge companies making them----often with over half their employees women. Same for ship building. The men went to war. The women went to work to support them.
“All we need is a very explicitly obvious national emergency, and then an immediate call to arms by a national leader the people have come to trust and so will follow him/her. In 24 hours we will be damn near up to speed, unless we de-fund and reduce our military's capability as we did following WW2-----and shortly found ourselves almost being pushed out of South Korea in 1950. That should have been a BIG lesson about not maintaining the best equipped, finest trained, and most adequately manned force in the world. Also, we should Never go to war unless we Fully intend to win it, and win decidedly as fast as we can in order to help, in the end, reduce casualties on both sides.
“Government has to provide or help provide national infrastructure, I think, and perhaps see to money, or tax incentives for awhile in order that companies can get their business off the ground and growing, but Government itself is in NO way responsible for picking up every citizen and totally or almost totally caring for them for life. Plus---once companies are up and running, any [subsidies] should be phased out. How to do that I don't know. But I bet it can be done.”
. . . and my follow-up response:
I think we have the national emergency of which you speak. The explosive price of crude oil, for whatever reason, has already caused damage and will continued to corrode our national economy, and as such our tragically imbalanced dependence upon foreign oil sources represents a ‘grave and present danger.’ The sooner we recognize the threat, the sooner we shall rise to the conflict before us.
. . . a last round on this thread:
“You are so very right, Cap. But will we recognize the threat? Hell, it's here NOW!! The leadership of this country is about to change, and in MY opinion, either way it goes now, since the two Parties have selected their candidates, it is not going to be a great next 4 and maybe even 8 next years.
“I am almost 72 right now! Will I live to see the end of this next reign? Don't know, but I think our country will somehow survive whatever comes. We are pretty tough, pretty smart and pretty able, when the push really gets to the shove. I might not be around, but I have absolute confidence in our country to survive anything that threatens it, be it an elected official, an attack, an economic crisis----anything!”
. . . and my closing comment:
We have been in a war for at least 30 years. Even after the trauma of 9/11, we have a substantial part of our citizenry who still do not recognize the war around us. The last five presidents, including the present version, have failed to focus national will on the enemy we face and the War on Islamic Fascism. If we can ignore a war of killing, I doubt the citizenry is capable of seeing the economic threat represented by our dependence on foreign oil, or at least oil from countries not so friendly or dependable to us. Barack Obama has the rhetorical skill to help us understand and focus; I doubt he has the interest in doing so; he is not looking outward, only inward. Sir Winston remains the ultimate political orator. Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan approached Sir Winston’s skill. All the others fall well short of the mark. We need Sir Winston Churchill.
Another contribution more directly from Update no.343:
“God HASN"T given all of mankind ‘Freedom.’ MY opinion. HE has given us ‘Choices.’ If THAT (choices) is freedom, then you are correct. Unfortunately some of the choices made by those in command, control, high elected or appointed position, or whatever, do not follow those God wished for tenants of True freedom. So----Too often, for whatever reasons, the ‘people’ really affected by that are too uneducated, too poor, too weak, too hungry, too un-organized, too much in a purely basic survival type of living, etc, to do anything about it.
“They ARE in that purely ‘Survival’ mode, and ANY real ‘Pied Piper’ who promises reform and better times, is likely to be followed. Though that usually turns out to be Further down the tubes for the people. While the leaders get rich and tighten their grip on their own ‘Goldmine.’
“Unfortunately, again in MY opinion, what happens is that IF those people in that country are no military threat to us, we begin sending MANY MANY $$$$ worth of various kinds of aid to the country, ostensibly to agencies which will properly distribute it, but Much or Most of which actually gets appropriated by the very people we are against, the leadership-----who then sell it off for huge profits, Giving for free and in a highly publicized way, a Token amount, Maybe, to a few of the people, while making themselves rich, and while continuing, Really, to suppress the people.
“Will we never learn? God!!! It seems like 1st Grade stuff to me!
“To be a ‘Democracy,’ as we like to think of ourselves, though I believe technically we are a Republic, does NOT mean we have to be the Savior for every group, country, nation, or group of nations on this planet, even though we are the Only, at present, Big Dog on the block. They need to save themselves.
“Hell-------we need to save OURSELVES, and that is Not going to be with more Government programs Giving us this or that just because some current majority of Congress says it shall be, when what Their REAL aim is to get re-elected, ostensibly so they can Continue to serve their constituency, but knowing that they can get rich very legally, if they do it right. BUT----they have to stay in office to do that. And they have to entertain a few Very quiet voices who only Rarely get heard out loud; then voting on issues in a way which benefits those voices.
“If a country, or any national friend's people are Truly making an effort to fight for their freedom and are threatened by a neighbor or other entity, including internal bad guys, then we should, As that Big Dog on the block, let that bad neighbor or entity know right away and in NO uncertain terms that such actions on their part will Not be tolerated! As of Tomorrow at midnight, their time. If they ignore us even ONCE, and I mean ONCE, we then hit them as hard as we can-----take them Out----notice I did not say hit them as hard as we hope they may then get the idea about----NO. Hit them as hard as we have the capability to do accurately! Take them out! No increased sanctions we have to debate about in Congress. No. Bamn! Gone.
“Of course we have to have an Intel community trained and staffed and funded well enough to do that. With authorization to do what is necessary to gain intelligence. We can have such an Intel community. IF we as a people and our leadership really believe it necessary. I believe it is! Now!
“We also have to have a well trained, well equipped with the latest ‘stuff,’ and well funded military of more than barely sufficient size to counter a threat here and there. It needs to be able to Overwhelmingly take on ANY, and if need be ALL at one time, threats.
“It can do this Very well if our Government allows it to have the resources it needs in people, training, weapons, and support material. Again----go back to our response to Japan and then to Germany after Pearl Harbor. NO one but us on this planet could do it then, and none can do it now. NO one but US!
“But as always, the leadership FIRST has to recognize that the threat IS a dire threat. Then it Has to get the people behind the effort needed to counter that threat in as quick and as decisive way as possible. No holds barred and none given. Right now!
“Not 6 months down the pike after all the hearings in Congress have stalled due to politics. NOW! Otherwise it will not work. And That could lead to our ultimate downfall.
“To do that takes a True LEADER of immense knowledge, perception, worldly experience, character, integrity, unselfishness, willingness to buck the tide, and actually, I personally believe, experience in war would be a big plus. For if one has never been to war, one Cannot know what it is all about and what it is like. Cannot! Cannot! My opinion obviously---but based on Some knowledge of my own.
“What was it Bush Jr's initial strike on Iraq was called in 2003? ‘Shock and Awe?’ ALL folks understand THAT Very well!! The Iraqis found out very quickly. That is how to take on any known threat when threatened.
“Sorry about them! They Should have listened! We meant it. I think we'd have to do that only once or twice before the bad guys kinda get the hint. Though some, maybe like Iran and North Korea, after ‘Shock and Awe,’ didn't quite get the message because of our lack of a plan to proceed after we'd kicked Saddam's ass, I expect there would be collateral damage in any attack. But-----was there no collateral damage in say, for instance, WW2 or any Other war? Who complained about THAT?
“Yes, any other war Could mean Korea or Vietnam, where we didn't win, and so people DID complain and get frustrated and finally fought against further involvement. Who the Hell wants to fight a war you do not even intend to win as soon as possible and as decisively as possible? No one!
“We should ALWAYS do, as a country, what has to be done, and we need Leaders who recognize that and are willing and able to express that need to all the people in a way they will get behind and then DO IT! Not in a week or month or year, after debating it, or negotiating, or sanctioning. DO IT!
“That should perhaps at least discourage Other predators from interfering with the protected country, nation, entity's fight to save itself. Or give them pause for thought.
“Note to the protected country-----Save itself! Not have US save it all FOR them. Yes we will hold off would be enemies, giving our friend time, but we cannot be their savior in the end. They have to do that themselves.
“MASSIVE widespread and basically Indiscriminative Aid to Any country, people, ethnic group, (to include so called African Americans ---I believe we are Americans period or are not---American Indians, and Eskimos, etc), religious group, any entity, etc, whether out in the world or here at home, ONLY, in MY mind anyway, first promotes acceptance of that aid, then dependence on that aid, then a belief that the aid is deserved, with no payback, due to the bad and not their fault situations----no matter HOW many years ago, and Finally a belief that the aid is their RIGHT. Or the Reparations are their right.
“In the end there is NO sense of any responsibility for their OWN survival; their OWN ability to get ahead and succeed! They stop, if they ever even started, pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. No need to. They are taken care of with no effort on their part. It's a warm and fuzzy, and comfortable way to live.
“Now Very specifically and well thought out ‘TARGETED’ aid to Truly needy people Anywhere, who are really trying, Themselves, to recover from disaster, or rise up against oppression, can be beneficial for both us and them if done knowledgeably, and not just quickly and helter-skelter in order to show the world how great and beneficent we are.
“Unfortunately, the agencies within the Government who most likely would be tasked as responsible for administering any such program probably have neither the real experts, funds, or true desire to work hard enough, (well beyond the 8 to 5 normal workday on Civil Service pay), to get anything done right the first time, or even the second. And/or, multiple agencies would be involved, ALL fighting for jurisdiction, or trying to work out the administrative problems with taking on such a task.
“Meanwhile the affected people go further down the tubes in a very REAL way while the Washington bureaucrats who are debating/arguing/discussing in committee meetings the ‘problem’-------go home every night to their 3-4 bedroom, 2-3 bath, 3 car garage, house on the beltway, eat a good meal, watch TV, play briefly with their kids, and later sleep between clean sheets in a centrally heated/air-conditioned home. And feel good about the fact that they are helping some unfortunates out there Somewhere in the world-----though they forget just where. They missed that part of the last committee meeting. It's sad, but too often true.
“I welcome Every July 4th! It seems to me to re-affirm in a way, each passing year, what our country stands for. I hope we have the wisdom to elect officials who will uphold all that. I hope any President elected sends Truly qualified judges to our Supreme Court who believe in the constitution and interpret it in a way which promotes Our (the people's) rights and not the rights of acknowledged and known bad guys. And I hope our people continue to stand up for and always defend the principles so well thought out by our forefathers. God bless America----‘The land of the free and the home of the brave.’
“As far as Roe vs Wade decisions by the Supreme Court?
“I have extremely mixed feelings about that. Though I do believe basically that a woman has the right to choose-----at least up to some point, everything else being equal.
“For argument's sake, let's say that That is the beginning of the 3rd trimester, when the fetus is MUCH more than just an unrecognizable "thing" inside her. It's by then an identifiable child! Unborn yet, but an identifiable child in the making.
“So----unless, in some extreme circumstance, and I do not pretend to have ANY Clue just what That would be, it is necessary to abort the woman to save Her life, I think it Could be justifiable. BUT----I'd have to leave it to the judgment of the woman's doctors and her wishes and judgment. I'd hope God directs their meditations and decisions! And I would not want to be in their shoes.
“I DO think, however, that IF an abortion is decided on and agreed upon by both appropriate medical personnel AND the woman, if she is capable of participating in such decision, (and the medical staff alone if she is not), then neither the woman nor any medical staff involved should be held liable! By Law! It is, in my opinion, a decision for the woman and her doctors to make---Not the Supreme Court.
“I know that what I've said about it still has likely a Ton of ‘holes’ in it, exploitable by the ambulance chaser lawyers, wrongful death lawyers, and probably others, all out to make Themselves rich. The majority of THOSE kinds of lawyers, in MY opinion, do not really give a damn about either the woman OR the fetus. They see $$$$ signs.
“Obviously there are always a few very specific exceptions. But they should be far apart, and if frivolous, thrown out immediately by Any Judge who has any sense of responsibility for His position in the judicial system.
“There was a time, even during My life, when folks pretty much trusted the decisions made by competent and caring Professionals and Officials, and only challenged decisions when they were Obviously way out of whack. No more. Those days are gone! If there is a way to make a buck from someone's action or decision, no matter How ridiculous it might be, here are a Raft of greedy lawyers ready to take it on. How much money, eventually coming out of the ‘People's’ pockets, does it take to defend against such lawsuits? I bet a LOT!!!
“Zimbabwe? Stay the hell out of there! Period! Enough said!
“I too congratulate LtGen Dunwoody's recommendation for promotion to General, and hope confirmation comes soon. It's about time. Another step in the right direction! And this opinion is coming from a hard-core retired senior Marine Officer who had a goodly amount of experience with women Officers and Enlisted in his several commands, plus before he commanded.
“I'd like to know more about the details of the Columbian hostage rescue operation. Though perhaps Those will need to be under wraps for an indefinite time due to true security reasons. I'd hate to think some Future rescue mission of hostages or POWs might be jeopardized because the details of a previous mission became known, so thus prepared for by the bad guy detainers.
“The problem of how, within the constraints of our Constitution, to effectively deal with known, perceived, or possible terrorist threats, as determined by our intelligence,, police, FBI, and like agencies, is a juggling act. I think sometimes, especially when a terrorist act, or an act determined Very quickly, without a lot of this and that procrastinations and what ifs, Does occur despite our best efforts, then all bets are off! The President should have the authority to just say, ‘Go get em!’ Dead or alive! ‘Go get em!’ ‘Whatever that takes!’ HE/SHE IS our elected leader after all. I for one Expect and demand HIM/HER to Lead!! They took an oath to ‘protect and defend.’ I would follow to Hell a leader who took that oath seriously, and not in a ‘Well maybe we can negotiate with, or put sanctions on, or cut our foreign aid to’ type President. Bullshit!! Go get em!!!
“I believe that truly ‘secret’ moves against an enemy or suspected enemy, be that man, beast, group, country, or aliens from far off in the universe, should remain secret, and ANY leaks be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Then, if the fullest extent of the law is not much more than a slap on the wrist with full government retirement benefits still intact, etc, etc, (that small fact unknown to Most folks), then change the F___ing law! Make it VERY dangerous to ‘leak’ ANY info of ANY kind, to the media/press/whoever, until the President himself/herself authorizes it publicly.”
My reply:
What I meant in my God & Freedom remarks was that people inherently desire peace and freedom to live their lives as they choose, not as someone else (or group of someones) dictates how they should live. Yet, by their birth circumstances, affiliation choices or surrounding societal structure (e.g., government), they suffer oppression and compromise of their inherent desire, as the Founders so eloquently stated, “[M]ankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms [of government] to which they are accustomed.”
Religion has a long history of advocating ignorance and teaching blind obedience. The Renaissance – some might call it the Age of Reasoning and Thought – reformed the Christian religion. The Islamic religion has not reached their Renaissance, yet. Too many Islamic clerics demand blind obedience, which leaves the believers easily susceptible to the Sirens call of martyrdom. The present War on Islamic Fascism may well provide the necessary stimulus for Islamic enlightenment. We shall see.
Yes, precisely, Freedom is not free. And, indeed, we are not the World’s policeman. However, in this instance, the oppression of Muslims has led to the radicalization of the Islamo-fascists, who in turn chose to kill innocent Americans to further their political objectives. When their violence is exported to our shores and our citizenry, their violence becomes our problem. Four successive administrations did everything they could to deny the war and avoid the fight. The fifth president said enough, and chose to stand and fight the enemy around us. I am not advocating that we use American military might to depose every two-bit dictator or free all oppressed people; but, when their violence spills into our lap, I say we use all available force to squash the threat as quickly and efficiently as possible. Thus, we are in agreement on Zimbabwe.
We have contracted a societal disease, perhaps even a fatal cancer, of looking to the Federal government to solve our problems. We created this bloated and obese Federal government that has become the very evil the Founders sought so mightily to avoid. We, the People, must stop the excesses and contract the government to a more proper place in our society. We have wandered too far off course from the path the Founders illuminated for us, and the path is so distant we may not find our way back.
We are also a long way from the Intelligence Community I think we deserve, need, and should have. And, the more we constrain the Intelligence Community with bureaucracy, procedures, gates, rules and red-tape, the less likely we are to obtain a proper Intelligence Community.
As you noted, and I have stated before, I believe we have a grossly undersized military to wage war successfully on our Islamo-fascist enemies. We need the combat arms segment of our military in the 3-5 times the size they are today. If we cannot get there with volunteers, then I am for the involuntary draft. We are at war, whether we choose to believe it or not. I imagine the citizens and Senate of Rome did not believe they were at war in the days of Emperor Valens.
The problem with appointing judges is they are all truly qualified, and they believe in the Constitution and the law, but they interpret the law from their perspective, which all too often means reinforcing Federalism and diminishing the Liberty our forefathers risked so much for and sacrificed beyond comprehension. I would like to see judges who truly understand and appreciate the boundary between public and private, and the notion that the government exists to serve We, the People, not a small fraction but all the People, and not the other way around.
Re: Roe v. Wade [410 U.S. 113 (1973)] [U-319]. Likewise, I have strongly mixed and diverse views of the abortion issue. First and foremost, I see abortion as a barbaric procedure akin to bleeding, amputation and leeching to solve common medical situations. I look forward to the day when abortion is relegated to the antiquity of medical history. On the other hand, the privacy, sanctity and autonomy of our bodies and private property should be inviolate, short of injury to others. Abortion presents a unique intersection of private and public interests. Some claim life begins at conception, while others insist upon birth. I see the wisdom in Justice Blackmun’s extra-uterine viability as an interim means of resolution of the conflict between the diametrically opposed forces. I could support a governmental initiative to eliminate abortion, IF we do so by recognizing that every child deserves to be loved, wanted and nurtured, that sex is a normal, healthy, pleasurable human activity, and that we have equally respectful means to resolve situations that enter the intersection. I think we agree . . . the State does not belong in the intimate biology and physiology of a citizen.
We are in absolute agreement on the leaking of State secrets, especially during wartime. There will be time in peace to investigate, to refine, and to correct mistakes. Doing so in wartime is suicidal.
Another contribution:
“[H]ere you said:
“We have welcomed foreigners into our midst who are intent upon the destruction or at least immobilization of the United States.”
“Although I have plucked this a little out of context for my purposes- I feel it represents a kind of narrow view that implies a carelessness, or unawareness that isn't real. You suggest that we open our arms to ravagers fecklessly, as if we are too innocent, naive or silly to know better. I think you may have been implying the 9/11 hijackers, as a specific example of this since they all came in legally-you could say we welcomed them into our midst, and they learned the ropes etc. The sense is that we were blindsided by our hospitality and innocence. Actually, we knew who they were, many were under surveillance, and we have shut down any investigations (Able Danger, specifically), gagged whistleblowers, (Sybil Edmunds), and fired and reprimanded gov't lawyers who tried to protect the Constitution (Jessalyn Radack), in order to hide just how much we did know about welcoming these foreigners into our midst. If we could investigate properly, above board, and thoroughly, at least approximating a kind of Church Committee hearing, not that it was perfect by any means, then we might realize that the rules in place did work and that we just were witnessing operations that were results of , say, approved policy. Now did they get out of hand, or did they work pretty much according to plan?- Can we handle the truth? If you acknowledged this lack of substance around your general comment then maybe you could join me in calling for a real investigation of Able Danger. You might consider it even disregarding my comments.”
My response:
Extending a plural reference to a general population is not appropriate. Further, I was not constraining my observations to the 9/11 attackers, but rather those attackers not yet activated.
Yes, we knew the identities of most of the 9/11 attackers, and at least one FBI agent suspected something bad was afoot prior to the attack. However, our then law-enforcement configured domestic intelligence processes were not oriented toward wartime intelligence but rather legal prosecution – two fundamentally different activities.
To the best of my knowledge, “Able Danger” was a Defense Department, data-mining operation focused on national security rather than criminal prosecution, which is the reason the program was dismantled. Able Danger represents the failure of our governmental system to orient for the war we have been in rather than some peacetime stable state. I would not advocate for a public investigation during wartime of any intelligence means or methods including Able Danger; to me, doing so would be like investigating ULTRA (Enigma) and MAGIC (Purple) in 1942.
. . . round two:
“Thanks for your comments. I totally disagree with you on investigating every aspect of the tragedy of 9/11, including every nook and corner of Able Danger, as well as open testimony of Sybil Edmunds, and public restitution for Jessalyn Radack, etc. I also respect your attitude that we are in a war, but absolutely disagree because this invasion of a sovereign nation was illegal and wrong- and we are seeing the results of this catastrophe on so many levels- But, I know this is an argument not accepted by many, especially those who put some faith in this administration. From a military standpoint control is tantamount and in the history of police states we have seen this demonstrated over and over throughout history, have we not? Are we a police state? I am not a conspiracy buff nor un-American, nor anti Republican, nor a flaming liberal. We may be one, and the attitude that we should not investigate in order to protect secrets encourages that perception. I cannot think of any time when truth was not the best option. Can you? In the course of human events that have resulted in wars, we have established rules of conduct. Name rank and serial number- not lies nor deception. Outside that real war-time circumstance, civilian jurisdiction has its rules as well- Due Process- open investigations, tell the truth or nothing but the truth, or face consequences. I can't think of anything the American people should not know about 9/11. Granted it appears that much of the hidden information would tarnish if not indict many people in charge today. At least that is my opinion. I could send you links to the other points of view- but I sense either you are already aware, or don't want to take the time to look at it from a non-militaristic vantage.”
. . . my response to round two:
The only difference between us on this issue is wartime versus peacetime. The New York Times, Sy Hersh and other well-intentioned myopic do-good’ers have done far more damage to our wartime national security than they have ever done to help preserve our Liberty. To conduct such a public investigation in wartime is comparable telling our enemy exactly what we know and how we know it – the positives and negatives. In wartime, such disclosure to our enemies is unacceptable and unconscionable to me. Sir Winston Churchill succinctly stated, "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies." There are real, bona-fide, time-tested reasons behind his wisdom. We are not in some innocuous match on the futball pitch; we are at war! I am quite comfortable waiting until our enemy is vanquished to eviscerate the transgressors.
. . . round three:
“Gotta respectfully disagree with you here- especially with your final, open-ended war-forever sentence. And especially since you have identified the enemy in previous posts as essentially the world of Islam. This seems illogical and disastrous, to me. We are not in a declared war, like WW2 where the evidence of what happened on 9/11 would have any national security effect on us- except to embarrass or maybe indict some people now in power.”
. . . and my response to round three:
Islamic Fascism is most definitely NOT all of Islam. In fact, I truly believe the Islamo-fascists and jihadistanis within the religion of Islam are a mere fraction of the whole . . . a smaller percentage than there were Nazis in Germany in 1939. We are NOT at war with Islam. I have enormous respect and I must confess admiration for the religion of Islam, as I do Christianity, Judaism and the other major religions. We have been at war with Islamo-fascists since at least 1979, with or without the proper, formal, Article I, Section 8, congressional action. I have stated repeatedly that President Bush made a grave, if not fatal, mistake asking for the Authorization rather than a Declaration, but the Authorization is adequate under Article I, Section 8.
It would appear the common point of our disagreement directly and indirectly related to the present War on Islamic Fascism rests squarely upon the question of, are we at war? I believe we are and have been for 30 years. Apparently, you believe the contrary, which is your choice entirely. My prior remarks stand.
Another contribution:
“How these got on the books is anybody’s idea….
“1. Oral sex is illegal in 18 states, including Arizona.
“2. In Virginia, it is illegal to have sex with the lights on.
“3. It is illegal for husbands in Willowdale, Oregon, to talk dirty during intercourse.
“4. Sexual intercourse between unmarried couples is illegal in Georgia.
“5. Engaging in any sexual position other than missionary is illegal in Washington, DC.
“6. In Connorsville, Wisconsin, it is illegal for a man to shoot off a gun when his female partner is having an orgasm.
“7. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, it is illegal to have sex with a truck driver inside a toll booth.
“8. Having sexual relations with a porcupine is illegal in Florida.
“9. It is illegal in Utah to marry your first cousin before the age of 65.
“10. Sex with animals is perfectly legal for men in Washington state, as long as the animal weighs less than 40 pounds.”
My reply:
Some of these may be a liberal interpretation of some of the laws, but I suspect not too far off the mark. These examples are inappropriate “moral projection” into the private domain at its worst. One of these days, I hope we can help enlightenment return to the freedom envisioned by our Founders and confine government to the public domain, and only to those issues where a proper State interest exists.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
The follow-up news items:
-- Another example of the idiocy of Boumediene {v. Bush [552 U.S. ___ (2008)]} [340] and now Parhat {v. Gates [DC CCA no. 06-1397 (2008)]} [343], and beyond the general examples offered in Antonin the Impaler’s Boumediene dissent, I offer the case of Kuwati Army deserter Abdullah Saleh Ali Al Ajmi . . . armed with an AK-47 assault rifle when he was captured in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in 2002. He was subsequently incarcerated at Guantánamo. His diligent lawyers gained his release in 2005. On 26.April.2008, Al-Ajmi blew himself up and took seven (7) innocent people with him in Mosul, Iraq. I hope the uber-Left feels really good and justified in letting enemy combatants go free, to kill more people – kinda like the Free Willy syndrome, I suppose. Of course, the uber-Left has nary a whit of regret in hounding the administration to release the killers and close Guantánamo, as they are obviously just innocent tourists, illegally detained by the evil American administration. I feel safer already.
-- The President signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008 [PL 110-261; HR 6304], AKA the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, [342]. The final Senate vote was 69-28-3. The most controversial provision of the revised law is the immunization of the telecommunications companies that assisted the government in the electronic surveillance process. The law also clarifies elements of the original law – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 [PL 95-511]. The reform of the internal mechanics of FISA remains beyond public scrutiny, as it should be. The President needs the FISA tools to wage war successfully in the War on Islamic Fascism, yet I have acquired the apprehension of our youngest son. I am not confident in the current administration’s respect for these powerful tools that can be and are abused .
-- Secretaries of State James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher declared the War Powers Act of 1973 [PL 93-148] out-dated, and recommended even closer coordination between the President and Congress by law when committing U.S. armed forces to hostilities. I have mixed views of the notion. One of the President’s many responsibilities in wartime or as war approaches is coalescing national focus on wage war successfully. Because one particular President fails in that task does not translate into more laws constraining future Presidents. But, who am I but a lowly common citizen!
-- On Sunday, 13.July.2008, Taliban fighters executed a coordinated attack on a small, U.S. base in Wanat, Konar Province, Afghanistan, (a province bordering Pakistan’s tribal region) killing nine (9) American soldiers and wounding 15, in a quick, violent engagement. Please review the first item above.
The under secretary of defense for policy from 2001 to 2005, Douglas Jay Feith, offered up a snippet of his view of the reasons for the Battle for Iraq.
“Why We Went to War in Iraq”
by Douglas J. Feith
Wall Street Journal
Published: July 3, 2008; page A11
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121504452359324921.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
While Feith’s views are important to read, they are disappointingly lame from the larger context of the War on Islamic Fascism. We should pay attention to the opinions of citizens who occupy high governmental positions, especially in wartime. However, Feith falls far short of a rational argument. Perhaps he was just presenting a teaser to sell his book. I will not bite.
A series of articles for your discriminating cogitation:
-- “Female U.S. Casualties More Common in Iraq War”
by Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com
Published: July 02, 2008
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200807/NAT20080702a.html
-- “‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Hits Women Much More”
by Thom Shanker
New York Times
Published: June 23, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/washington/23pentagon.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
-- “Justice for Gays – The Bush administration rules that children of same-sex couples can receive their Social Security benefits”
Editorial
Washington Post
Published: Saturday, July 5, 2008; page A14
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/04/AR2008070402140.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Despite the Press gurgitation of the Supreme Court’s recent capital punishment case, I was not particularly moved to read the case as my Inbox of ‘Reading to do’ remained quite full. Then, I read the following article:
“In Court Ruling on Executions, a Factual Flaw”
by Linda Greenhouse
New York Times
Published: July 2, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/washington/02scotus.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
My curiosity was peaked. Greenhouse claimed the Court had erred in its factual information, supporting the ruling . . . for a capital punishment case, that was a significant accusation. The case in question was: Kennedy v. Louisiana [552 U.S. ___ (2008); no. 07-343] – another close 5-4 decision. What struck me at the outset was an introductory statement by Associate Justice Anthony McLeod Kennedy, writing the Court’s opinion. He observed, “Petitioner's crime was one that cannot be recounted in these pages in a way sufficient to capture in full the hurt and horror inflicted on his victim or to convey the revulsion society, and the jury that represents it, sought to express by sentencing petitioner to death.” While I cannot and will not claim an exhaustive search of Supreme Court decisions, to my knowledge, such a statement is extraordinarily rare, if not unprecedented. Just the basic, public facts are sufficient to substantiate the veracity of Justice Kennedy’s statement. Patrick Kennedy, then 43 – Petitioner in this case – was convicted of savagely raping his then 8-year-old step-daughter, and sentenced to death under Louisiana law. Eight years old! Let it sufficient say that Justice Kennedy’s reluctance to recount the factual details is reflective of my use of the adverb ‘savagely.’ The Court decided that a death sentence for child rape short of murder was unconstitutional. Justice Kennedy went on to say, “When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency and restraint.” He also used the term “evolving standards of decency” several times in his rationalization of the Court’s decision. And, the more I read his attempt to justify the ruling, the more I asked myself, where is the bloody decency for that poor little, hapless girl who suffered the brutal rape by a man in a position of trust in her life? Further, I was repeatedly reminded of and would shout at Justice Kennedy, the admonition of Army counsel Joseph N. Welch to Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” I invoke Welch’s words in the same vein; ‘evolving standards of decency’ . . . my patooty. Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissenting opinion and noted, “The Eighth Amendment [against cruel and unusual punishment] protects the right of an accused. It does not authorize this Court to strike down federal or state criminal laws on the ground that they are not in the best interests of crime victims or the broader society.” In this one, I am with the ‘strict constructionists;’ the Court exceeded its place in our government. If the death penalty for such heinous, non-murder crimes is no longer applicable, then I respectfully suggest a more appropriate penalty . . . that Patrick Kennedy be taken to an appropriate common area in Angola Prison, stripped naked, bent over a barrel, strapped down tight, and then let loose the prison population to have their way with him as he did with his innocent, 8-year-old, step-daughter . . . and even then, his punishment will NOT match his crime. For Kennedy to live the remainder of his life at State expense, even in solitary confinement, is a disproportionate punishment in the other direction – far too liberal and lenient, compared to the violence, cruelty, premeditation and barbarity of the crime. We are NOT talking about an act of passion, but rather a premeditated, purposeful, deliberate act of violence for which there can be no excuse, no mitigation. In many respects, death by lethal injection is far too kind a punishment for such an evil, degenerate man.
Comments and contributions from Update no.343:
“It is now 7:30 a.m., July 8, '08. I have been kinda watching ‘Good Morning America,’ I think. Anyway, the moderator was interviewing T Boone Pickens, a Texas Billionaire, with a lot of interests in the oil industry. The discussion was on ridding ourselves from dependence on foreign oil for energy. Pickens, an Extremely astute business man said, ‘Two things. First, for the short term, Natural gas. We have a LOT of it and we need to start using it in transportation, heating, making electricity, etc, etc, etc.
“‘Then, in the longer term, wind! We have maybe more wind available for use to generate power than any developed country on earth.’ HE said that. Not me. He said we need to be developing wind farms----and he said HE is developing one, I guess in Texas, which will lead the world in wind produced energy.
“He talked about a lot of things concerning energy production and ridding ourselves of foreign dependence, which he said is Easily doable, though not by tomorrow. He said the impetus has to come from the top, (POTUS), in order to get the populace to accept, believe in, and then Demand the needed changes. The politicians will do the rest to create laws, if for no other reason than to ensure their own re-election. Then private enterprise, funded and fueled by public interest, will figure out how to do it and then DO it!
“Then Pickens said something which I took to obliquely refer to our present POTUS, GWB, and yet not TOTALLY in a bad way. I like what he said!!
“He said, ‘A fool with a plan is better than a genius with No plan.’”
My response:
I saw the first of the T. Boone Pickens advertisements this morning. While some of his details are not as ambitious as I am proposing, Pickens has gone quite a bit farther than any of the presidential candidates. I like his wind power proposal as well as the short term utilization of natural gas and clean coal, but all of them need dramatic infrastructure investment . . . to me like seed money – the Federal government investing in our future. Where I think the Federales can have the greatest amplification is in the new energy source technology research like fuel cells or high capacity batteries, but more importantly, technologies not yet identified.
. . . a follow-up comment:
“I totally agree with you, Cap. It will cost a bunch of $$$ over time, to get the infrastructure in place, but we do have to be Building towards energy independence Even as that is happening, because this is a long term thing, though it's doable I think! Once companies believe in the Government doing IT'S part, then they WILL start investing in new sources of energy, as well as research into perhaps even as yet unknown sources. And soon, possibly even before some new thing or current but as yet not really exploited thing is sort of on-line, it will mean Many more jobs, so more taxes coming in to the Government without raising tax rates, etc, etc.
“I always find it very hard to Believe that the Democrats, particularly those most to the left, can be taken in by the idea that Government, and more of it, plus more taxes on the rich is the answer. In NO way can that be, so WHY cannot these usually very bright and educated citizens who are representing us not see that? The rich pay at LEAST their fair share of taxes already! And They are in many cases the very people who can fund the starting of new businesses in the Energy Exploration field, thereby making more jobs available, thus more taxes coming in to the Government without raising taxes, etc.
“I believe in free enterprise as the way to prosperity. Americans of all races, religions, and ethnic groups have always been ingenuous when it comes to exploiting new technologies by starting new businesses, or expanding existing ones into new fields. And when we are in a really truly bad bind/situation, we can muster the effort, people, facilities, and $$$ to quickly start doing and keep doing the most amazing things.
“For instance---look back to WW2, now over 60 years behind us, and take a peek at airplane Bomber production, fighter production, liberty ship production, baby aircraft carrier (such as my Dad was on) production, to name but a few things. It literally took only days to float a new ship from the beginning! And way more than one bomber was rolled out every single day, 24/7, by the several huge companies making them----often with over half their employees women. Same for ship building. The men went to war. The women went to work to support them.
“All we need is a very explicitly obvious national emergency, and then an immediate call to arms by a national leader the people have come to trust and so will follow him/her. In 24 hours we will be damn near up to speed, unless we de-fund and reduce our military's capability as we did following WW2-----and shortly found ourselves almost being pushed out of South Korea in 1950. That should have been a BIG lesson about not maintaining the best equipped, finest trained, and most adequately manned force in the world. Also, we should Never go to war unless we Fully intend to win it, and win decidedly as fast as we can in order to help, in the end, reduce casualties on both sides.
“Government has to provide or help provide national infrastructure, I think, and perhaps see to money, or tax incentives for awhile in order that companies can get their business off the ground and growing, but Government itself is in NO way responsible for picking up every citizen and totally or almost totally caring for them for life. Plus---once companies are up and running, any [subsidies] should be phased out. How to do that I don't know. But I bet it can be done.”
. . . and my follow-up response:
I think we have the national emergency of which you speak. The explosive price of crude oil, for whatever reason, has already caused damage and will continued to corrode our national economy, and as such our tragically imbalanced dependence upon foreign oil sources represents a ‘grave and present danger.’ The sooner we recognize the threat, the sooner we shall rise to the conflict before us.
. . . a last round on this thread:
“You are so very right, Cap. But will we recognize the threat? Hell, it's here NOW!! The leadership of this country is about to change, and in MY opinion, either way it goes now, since the two Parties have selected their candidates, it is not going to be a great next 4 and maybe even 8 next years.
“I am almost 72 right now! Will I live to see the end of this next reign? Don't know, but I think our country will somehow survive whatever comes. We are pretty tough, pretty smart and pretty able, when the push really gets to the shove. I might not be around, but I have absolute confidence in our country to survive anything that threatens it, be it an elected official, an attack, an economic crisis----anything!”
. . . and my closing comment:
We have been in a war for at least 30 years. Even after the trauma of 9/11, we have a substantial part of our citizenry who still do not recognize the war around us. The last five presidents, including the present version, have failed to focus national will on the enemy we face and the War on Islamic Fascism. If we can ignore a war of killing, I doubt the citizenry is capable of seeing the economic threat represented by our dependence on foreign oil, or at least oil from countries not so friendly or dependable to us. Barack Obama has the rhetorical skill to help us understand and focus; I doubt he has the interest in doing so; he is not looking outward, only inward. Sir Winston remains the ultimate political orator. Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan approached Sir Winston’s skill. All the others fall well short of the mark. We need Sir Winston Churchill.
Another contribution more directly from Update no.343:
“God HASN"T given all of mankind ‘Freedom.’ MY opinion. HE has given us ‘Choices.’ If THAT (choices) is freedom, then you are correct. Unfortunately some of the choices made by those in command, control, high elected or appointed position, or whatever, do not follow those God wished for tenants of True freedom. So----Too often, for whatever reasons, the ‘people’ really affected by that are too uneducated, too poor, too weak, too hungry, too un-organized, too much in a purely basic survival type of living, etc, to do anything about it.
“They ARE in that purely ‘Survival’ mode, and ANY real ‘Pied Piper’ who promises reform and better times, is likely to be followed. Though that usually turns out to be Further down the tubes for the people. While the leaders get rich and tighten their grip on their own ‘Goldmine.’
“Unfortunately, again in MY opinion, what happens is that IF those people in that country are no military threat to us, we begin sending MANY MANY $$$$ worth of various kinds of aid to the country, ostensibly to agencies which will properly distribute it, but Much or Most of which actually gets appropriated by the very people we are against, the leadership-----who then sell it off for huge profits, Giving for free and in a highly publicized way, a Token amount, Maybe, to a few of the people, while making themselves rich, and while continuing, Really, to suppress the people.
“Will we never learn? God!!! It seems like 1st Grade stuff to me!
“To be a ‘Democracy,’ as we like to think of ourselves, though I believe technically we are a Republic, does NOT mean we have to be the Savior for every group, country, nation, or group of nations on this planet, even though we are the Only, at present, Big Dog on the block. They need to save themselves.
“Hell-------we need to save OURSELVES, and that is Not going to be with more Government programs Giving us this or that just because some current majority of Congress says it shall be, when what Their REAL aim is to get re-elected, ostensibly so they can Continue to serve their constituency, but knowing that they can get rich very legally, if they do it right. BUT----they have to stay in office to do that. And they have to entertain a few Very quiet voices who only Rarely get heard out loud; then voting on issues in a way which benefits those voices.
“If a country, or any national friend's people are Truly making an effort to fight for their freedom and are threatened by a neighbor or other entity, including internal bad guys, then we should, As that Big Dog on the block, let that bad neighbor or entity know right away and in NO uncertain terms that such actions on their part will Not be tolerated! As of Tomorrow at midnight, their time. If they ignore us even ONCE, and I mean ONCE, we then hit them as hard as we can-----take them Out----notice I did not say hit them as hard as we hope they may then get the idea about----NO. Hit them as hard as we have the capability to do accurately! Take them out! No increased sanctions we have to debate about in Congress. No. Bamn! Gone.
“Of course we have to have an Intel community trained and staffed and funded well enough to do that. With authorization to do what is necessary to gain intelligence. We can have such an Intel community. IF we as a people and our leadership really believe it necessary. I believe it is! Now!
“We also have to have a well trained, well equipped with the latest ‘stuff,’ and well funded military of more than barely sufficient size to counter a threat here and there. It needs to be able to Overwhelmingly take on ANY, and if need be ALL at one time, threats.
“It can do this Very well if our Government allows it to have the resources it needs in people, training, weapons, and support material. Again----go back to our response to Japan and then to Germany after Pearl Harbor. NO one but us on this planet could do it then, and none can do it now. NO one but US!
“But as always, the leadership FIRST has to recognize that the threat IS a dire threat. Then it Has to get the people behind the effort needed to counter that threat in as quick and as decisive way as possible. No holds barred and none given. Right now!
“Not 6 months down the pike after all the hearings in Congress have stalled due to politics. NOW! Otherwise it will not work. And That could lead to our ultimate downfall.
“To do that takes a True LEADER of immense knowledge, perception, worldly experience, character, integrity, unselfishness, willingness to buck the tide, and actually, I personally believe, experience in war would be a big plus. For if one has never been to war, one Cannot know what it is all about and what it is like. Cannot! Cannot! My opinion obviously---but based on Some knowledge of my own.
“What was it Bush Jr's initial strike on Iraq was called in 2003? ‘Shock and Awe?’ ALL folks understand THAT Very well!! The Iraqis found out very quickly. That is how to take on any known threat when threatened.
“Sorry about them! They Should have listened! We meant it. I think we'd have to do that only once or twice before the bad guys kinda get the hint. Though some, maybe like Iran and North Korea, after ‘Shock and Awe,’ didn't quite get the message because of our lack of a plan to proceed after we'd kicked Saddam's ass, I expect there would be collateral damage in any attack. But-----was there no collateral damage in say, for instance, WW2 or any Other war? Who complained about THAT?
“Yes, any other war Could mean Korea or Vietnam, where we didn't win, and so people DID complain and get frustrated and finally fought against further involvement. Who the Hell wants to fight a war you do not even intend to win as soon as possible and as decisively as possible? No one!
“We should ALWAYS do, as a country, what has to be done, and we need Leaders who recognize that and are willing and able to express that need to all the people in a way they will get behind and then DO IT! Not in a week or month or year, after debating it, or negotiating, or sanctioning. DO IT!
“That should perhaps at least discourage Other predators from interfering with the protected country, nation, entity's fight to save itself. Or give them pause for thought.
“Note to the protected country-----Save itself! Not have US save it all FOR them. Yes we will hold off would be enemies, giving our friend time, but we cannot be their savior in the end. They have to do that themselves.
“MASSIVE widespread and basically Indiscriminative Aid to Any country, people, ethnic group, (to include so called African Americans ---I believe we are Americans period or are not---American Indians, and Eskimos, etc), religious group, any entity, etc, whether out in the world or here at home, ONLY, in MY mind anyway, first promotes acceptance of that aid, then dependence on that aid, then a belief that the aid is deserved, with no payback, due to the bad and not their fault situations----no matter HOW many years ago, and Finally a belief that the aid is their RIGHT. Or the Reparations are their right.
“In the end there is NO sense of any responsibility for their OWN survival; their OWN ability to get ahead and succeed! They stop, if they ever even started, pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. No need to. They are taken care of with no effort on their part. It's a warm and fuzzy, and comfortable way to live.
“Now Very specifically and well thought out ‘TARGETED’ aid to Truly needy people Anywhere, who are really trying, Themselves, to recover from disaster, or rise up against oppression, can be beneficial for both us and them if done knowledgeably, and not just quickly and helter-skelter in order to show the world how great and beneficent we are.
“Unfortunately, the agencies within the Government who most likely would be tasked as responsible for administering any such program probably have neither the real experts, funds, or true desire to work hard enough, (well beyond the 8 to 5 normal workday on Civil Service pay), to get anything done right the first time, or even the second. And/or, multiple agencies would be involved, ALL fighting for jurisdiction, or trying to work out the administrative problems with taking on such a task.
“Meanwhile the affected people go further down the tubes in a very REAL way while the Washington bureaucrats who are debating/arguing/discussing in committee meetings the ‘problem’-------go home every night to their 3-4 bedroom, 2-3 bath, 3 car garage, house on the beltway, eat a good meal, watch TV, play briefly with their kids, and later sleep between clean sheets in a centrally heated/air-conditioned home. And feel good about the fact that they are helping some unfortunates out there Somewhere in the world-----though they forget just where. They missed that part of the last committee meeting. It's sad, but too often true.
“I welcome Every July 4th! It seems to me to re-affirm in a way, each passing year, what our country stands for. I hope we have the wisdom to elect officials who will uphold all that. I hope any President elected sends Truly qualified judges to our Supreme Court who believe in the constitution and interpret it in a way which promotes Our (the people's) rights and not the rights of acknowledged and known bad guys. And I hope our people continue to stand up for and always defend the principles so well thought out by our forefathers. God bless America----‘The land of the free and the home of the brave.’
“As far as Roe vs Wade decisions by the Supreme Court?
“I have extremely mixed feelings about that. Though I do believe basically that a woman has the right to choose-----at least up to some point, everything else being equal.
“For argument's sake, let's say that That is the beginning of the 3rd trimester, when the fetus is MUCH more than just an unrecognizable "thing" inside her. It's by then an identifiable child! Unborn yet, but an identifiable child in the making.
“So----unless, in some extreme circumstance, and I do not pretend to have ANY Clue just what That would be, it is necessary to abort the woman to save Her life, I think it Could be justifiable. BUT----I'd have to leave it to the judgment of the woman's doctors and her wishes and judgment. I'd hope God directs their meditations and decisions! And I would not want to be in their shoes.
“I DO think, however, that IF an abortion is decided on and agreed upon by both appropriate medical personnel AND the woman, if she is capable of participating in such decision, (and the medical staff alone if she is not), then neither the woman nor any medical staff involved should be held liable! By Law! It is, in my opinion, a decision for the woman and her doctors to make---Not the Supreme Court.
“I know that what I've said about it still has likely a Ton of ‘holes’ in it, exploitable by the ambulance chaser lawyers, wrongful death lawyers, and probably others, all out to make Themselves rich. The majority of THOSE kinds of lawyers, in MY opinion, do not really give a damn about either the woman OR the fetus. They see $$$$ signs.
“Obviously there are always a few very specific exceptions. But they should be far apart, and if frivolous, thrown out immediately by Any Judge who has any sense of responsibility for His position in the judicial system.
“There was a time, even during My life, when folks pretty much trusted the decisions made by competent and caring Professionals and Officials, and only challenged decisions when they were Obviously way out of whack. No more. Those days are gone! If there is a way to make a buck from someone's action or decision, no matter How ridiculous it might be, here are a Raft of greedy lawyers ready to take it on. How much money, eventually coming out of the ‘People's’ pockets, does it take to defend against such lawsuits? I bet a LOT!!!
“Zimbabwe? Stay the hell out of there! Period! Enough said!
“I too congratulate LtGen Dunwoody's recommendation for promotion to General, and hope confirmation comes soon. It's about time. Another step in the right direction! And this opinion is coming from a hard-core retired senior Marine Officer who had a goodly amount of experience with women Officers and Enlisted in his several commands, plus before he commanded.
“I'd like to know more about the details of the Columbian hostage rescue operation. Though perhaps Those will need to be under wraps for an indefinite time due to true security reasons. I'd hate to think some Future rescue mission of hostages or POWs might be jeopardized because the details of a previous mission became known, so thus prepared for by the bad guy detainers.
“The problem of how, within the constraints of our Constitution, to effectively deal with known, perceived, or possible terrorist threats, as determined by our intelligence,, police, FBI, and like agencies, is a juggling act. I think sometimes, especially when a terrorist act, or an act determined Very quickly, without a lot of this and that procrastinations and what ifs, Does occur despite our best efforts, then all bets are off! The President should have the authority to just say, ‘Go get em!’ Dead or alive! ‘Go get em!’ ‘Whatever that takes!’ HE/SHE IS our elected leader after all. I for one Expect and demand HIM/HER to Lead!! They took an oath to ‘protect and defend.’ I would follow to Hell a leader who took that oath seriously, and not in a ‘Well maybe we can negotiate with, or put sanctions on, or cut our foreign aid to’ type President. Bullshit!! Go get em!!!
“I believe that truly ‘secret’ moves against an enemy or suspected enemy, be that man, beast, group, country, or aliens from far off in the universe, should remain secret, and ANY leaks be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Then, if the fullest extent of the law is not much more than a slap on the wrist with full government retirement benefits still intact, etc, etc, (that small fact unknown to Most folks), then change the F___ing law! Make it VERY dangerous to ‘leak’ ANY info of ANY kind, to the media/press/whoever, until the President himself/herself authorizes it publicly.”
My reply:
What I meant in my God & Freedom remarks was that people inherently desire peace and freedom to live their lives as they choose, not as someone else (or group of someones) dictates how they should live. Yet, by their birth circumstances, affiliation choices or surrounding societal structure (e.g., government), they suffer oppression and compromise of their inherent desire, as the Founders so eloquently stated, “[M]ankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms [of government] to which they are accustomed.”
Religion has a long history of advocating ignorance and teaching blind obedience. The Renaissance – some might call it the Age of Reasoning and Thought – reformed the Christian religion. The Islamic religion has not reached their Renaissance, yet. Too many Islamic clerics demand blind obedience, which leaves the believers easily susceptible to the Sirens call of martyrdom. The present War on Islamic Fascism may well provide the necessary stimulus for Islamic enlightenment. We shall see.
Yes, precisely, Freedom is not free. And, indeed, we are not the World’s policeman. However, in this instance, the oppression of Muslims has led to the radicalization of the Islamo-fascists, who in turn chose to kill innocent Americans to further their political objectives. When their violence is exported to our shores and our citizenry, their violence becomes our problem. Four successive administrations did everything they could to deny the war and avoid the fight. The fifth president said enough, and chose to stand and fight the enemy around us. I am not advocating that we use American military might to depose every two-bit dictator or free all oppressed people; but, when their violence spills into our lap, I say we use all available force to squash the threat as quickly and efficiently as possible. Thus, we are in agreement on Zimbabwe.
We have contracted a societal disease, perhaps even a fatal cancer, of looking to the Federal government to solve our problems. We created this bloated and obese Federal government that has become the very evil the Founders sought so mightily to avoid. We, the People, must stop the excesses and contract the government to a more proper place in our society. We have wandered too far off course from the path the Founders illuminated for us, and the path is so distant we may not find our way back.
We are also a long way from the Intelligence Community I think we deserve, need, and should have. And, the more we constrain the Intelligence Community with bureaucracy, procedures, gates, rules and red-tape, the less likely we are to obtain a proper Intelligence Community.
As you noted, and I have stated before, I believe we have a grossly undersized military to wage war successfully on our Islamo-fascist enemies. We need the combat arms segment of our military in the 3-5 times the size they are today. If we cannot get there with volunteers, then I am for the involuntary draft. We are at war, whether we choose to believe it or not. I imagine the citizens and Senate of Rome did not believe they were at war in the days of Emperor Valens.
The problem with appointing judges is they are all truly qualified, and they believe in the Constitution and the law, but they interpret the law from their perspective, which all too often means reinforcing Federalism and diminishing the Liberty our forefathers risked so much for and sacrificed beyond comprehension. I would like to see judges who truly understand and appreciate the boundary between public and private, and the notion that the government exists to serve We, the People, not a small fraction but all the People, and not the other way around.
Re: Roe v. Wade [410 U.S. 113 (1973)] [U-319]. Likewise, I have strongly mixed and diverse views of the abortion issue. First and foremost, I see abortion as a barbaric procedure akin to bleeding, amputation and leeching to solve common medical situations. I look forward to the day when abortion is relegated to the antiquity of medical history. On the other hand, the privacy, sanctity and autonomy of our bodies and private property should be inviolate, short of injury to others. Abortion presents a unique intersection of private and public interests. Some claim life begins at conception, while others insist upon birth. I see the wisdom in Justice Blackmun’s extra-uterine viability as an interim means of resolution of the conflict between the diametrically opposed forces. I could support a governmental initiative to eliminate abortion, IF we do so by recognizing that every child deserves to be loved, wanted and nurtured, that sex is a normal, healthy, pleasurable human activity, and that we have equally respectful means to resolve situations that enter the intersection. I think we agree . . . the State does not belong in the intimate biology and physiology of a citizen.
We are in absolute agreement on the leaking of State secrets, especially during wartime. There will be time in peace to investigate, to refine, and to correct mistakes. Doing so in wartime is suicidal.
Another contribution:
“[H]ere you said:
“We have welcomed foreigners into our midst who are intent upon the destruction or at least immobilization of the United States.”
“Although I have plucked this a little out of context for my purposes- I feel it represents a kind of narrow view that implies a carelessness, or unawareness that isn't real. You suggest that we open our arms to ravagers fecklessly, as if we are too innocent, naive or silly to know better. I think you may have been implying the 9/11 hijackers, as a specific example of this since they all came in legally-you could say we welcomed them into our midst, and they learned the ropes etc. The sense is that we were blindsided by our hospitality and innocence. Actually, we knew who they were, many were under surveillance, and we have shut down any investigations (Able Danger, specifically), gagged whistleblowers, (Sybil Edmunds), and fired and reprimanded gov't lawyers who tried to protect the Constitution (Jessalyn Radack), in order to hide just how much we did know about welcoming these foreigners into our midst. If we could investigate properly, above board, and thoroughly, at least approximating a kind of Church Committee hearing, not that it was perfect by any means, then we might realize that the rules in place did work and that we just were witnessing operations that were results of , say, approved policy. Now did they get out of hand, or did they work pretty much according to plan?- Can we handle the truth? If you acknowledged this lack of substance around your general comment then maybe you could join me in calling for a real investigation of Able Danger. You might consider it even disregarding my comments.”
My response:
Extending a plural reference to a general population is not appropriate. Further, I was not constraining my observations to the 9/11 attackers, but rather those attackers not yet activated.
Yes, we knew the identities of most of the 9/11 attackers, and at least one FBI agent suspected something bad was afoot prior to the attack. However, our then law-enforcement configured domestic intelligence processes were not oriented toward wartime intelligence but rather legal prosecution – two fundamentally different activities.
To the best of my knowledge, “Able Danger” was a Defense Department, data-mining operation focused on national security rather than criminal prosecution, which is the reason the program was dismantled. Able Danger represents the failure of our governmental system to orient for the war we have been in rather than some peacetime stable state. I would not advocate for a public investigation during wartime of any intelligence means or methods including Able Danger; to me, doing so would be like investigating ULTRA (Enigma) and MAGIC (Purple) in 1942.
. . . round two:
“Thanks for your comments. I totally disagree with you on investigating every aspect of the tragedy of 9/11, including every nook and corner of Able Danger, as well as open testimony of Sybil Edmunds, and public restitution for Jessalyn Radack, etc. I also respect your attitude that we are in a war, but absolutely disagree because this invasion of a sovereign nation was illegal and wrong- and we are seeing the results of this catastrophe on so many levels- But, I know this is an argument not accepted by many, especially those who put some faith in this administration. From a military standpoint control is tantamount and in the history of police states we have seen this demonstrated over and over throughout history, have we not? Are we a police state? I am not a conspiracy buff nor un-American, nor anti Republican, nor a flaming liberal. We may be one, and the attitude that we should not investigate in order to protect secrets encourages that perception. I cannot think of any time when truth was not the best option. Can you? In the course of human events that have resulted in wars, we have established rules of conduct. Name rank and serial number- not lies nor deception. Outside that real war-time circumstance, civilian jurisdiction has its rules as well- Due Process- open investigations, tell the truth or nothing but the truth, or face consequences. I can't think of anything the American people should not know about 9/11. Granted it appears that much of the hidden information would tarnish if not indict many people in charge today. At least that is my opinion. I could send you links to the other points of view- but I sense either you are already aware, or don't want to take the time to look at it from a non-militaristic vantage.”
. . . my response to round two:
The only difference between us on this issue is wartime versus peacetime. The New York Times, Sy Hersh and other well-intentioned myopic do-good’ers have done far more damage to our wartime national security than they have ever done to help preserve our Liberty. To conduct such a public investigation in wartime is comparable telling our enemy exactly what we know and how we know it – the positives and negatives. In wartime, such disclosure to our enemies is unacceptable and unconscionable to me. Sir Winston Churchill succinctly stated, "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies." There are real, bona-fide, time-tested reasons behind his wisdom. We are not in some innocuous match on the futball pitch; we are at war! I am quite comfortable waiting until our enemy is vanquished to eviscerate the transgressors.
. . . round three:
“Gotta respectfully disagree with you here- especially with your final, open-ended war-forever sentence. And especially since you have identified the enemy in previous posts as essentially the world of Islam. This seems illogical and disastrous, to me. We are not in a declared war, like WW2 where the evidence of what happened on 9/11 would have any national security effect on us- except to embarrass or maybe indict some people now in power.”
. . . and my response to round three:
Islamic Fascism is most definitely NOT all of Islam. In fact, I truly believe the Islamo-fascists and jihadistanis within the religion of Islam are a mere fraction of the whole . . . a smaller percentage than there were Nazis in Germany in 1939. We are NOT at war with Islam. I have enormous respect and I must confess admiration for the religion of Islam, as I do Christianity, Judaism and the other major religions. We have been at war with Islamo-fascists since at least 1979, with or without the proper, formal, Article I, Section 8, congressional action. I have stated repeatedly that President Bush made a grave, if not fatal, mistake asking for the Authorization rather than a Declaration, but the Authorization is adequate under Article I, Section 8.
It would appear the common point of our disagreement directly and indirectly related to the present War on Islamic Fascism rests squarely upon the question of, are we at war? I believe we are and have been for 30 years. Apparently, you believe the contrary, which is your choice entirely. My prior remarks stand.
Another contribution:
“How these got on the books is anybody’s idea….
“1. Oral sex is illegal in 18 states, including Arizona.
“2. In Virginia, it is illegal to have sex with the lights on.
“3. It is illegal for husbands in Willowdale, Oregon, to talk dirty during intercourse.
“4. Sexual intercourse between unmarried couples is illegal in Georgia.
“5. Engaging in any sexual position other than missionary is illegal in Washington, DC.
“6. In Connorsville, Wisconsin, it is illegal for a man to shoot off a gun when his female partner is having an orgasm.
“7. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, it is illegal to have sex with a truck driver inside a toll booth.
“8. Having sexual relations with a porcupine is illegal in Florida.
“9. It is illegal in Utah to marry your first cousin before the age of 65.
“10. Sex with animals is perfectly legal for men in Washington state, as long as the animal weighs less than 40 pounds.”
My reply:
Some of these may be a liberal interpretation of some of the laws, but I suspect not too far off the mark. These examples are inappropriate “moral projection” into the private domain at its worst. One of these days, I hope we can help enlightenment return to the freedom envisioned by our Founders and confine government to the public domain, and only to those issues where a proper State interest exists.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment