Update no.609

Update from the Heartland

No.609

12.8.13 – 18.8.13

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

To all,

Our 7^th grandchild was born on Monday, 12.August.2013, to Sherri and Taylor – Wyatt Stephen Parlier, boy, 9 lbs. – 1.6 oz., 20.6 inches long, 10 fingers, 10 toes.  Mother & Son are in good health and recovering nicely from the birthing ordeal.  Another beautiful grandchild.  We are so blessed.

The news cannot always be good.  I have had three consecutive rising PSA readings since surgery.  Since I have no prostate, the data are disappointing and a smidgen disconcerting.  I have begun a series of diagnostic scans to see what we can find, so no treatment path, if any, as yet.  I am still collecting information and evaluating options.  Life goes on.

Just another personal side note of coincidence . . . this is the 609^th edition of the Update from the Heartland.  The number happened to strike me as I am working on the page proofs for Book I [In the Beginning] and Book II [The Prelude] of my To So Few series of historical novels.  One of the main characters, Brian Arthur Drummond, was assigned to No.609 Squadron, Royal Air Force, at RAF Middle Wallop during the Battle of Britain, where he became a decorated ace and sprouted a reputation beyond his imagination.  I hope to make an announcement soon, once the books are available on-line in all electronic formats.  Perhaps this is a teaser.  ;-)

In the category of too bizarre and not widely reported in this Grand Republic, the government of Spain has apparently decided to contest the sovereignty of the British Overseas Territory of Gibraltar.  The spark igniting this latest confrontation appears to be a dispute over fishing rights and an artificial reef in Gibraltar waters.  The Spanish have clamped down on the sole border crossing station, imposing upon the free transit of traffic between Spain and Gibraltar.  The complete reason for the border tiff is not clear, but the signs are not good.  Also, reportedly, Spain has joined with Argentina to contest the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.  The British are rightly not going to be intimidated as they have deployed the Royal Navy Type 23 Frigate HMS Westminster to Gibraltar.

            The sovereignty of Gibraltar is clear and unambiguous.  Spain ceded sovereignty by the Treaty of Utrecht, ending the War of Spanish Succession [11.April.1713].  For the Spanish government to take these actions, they are defying the European Union itself and 300 years of history.  The sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is less clear from a legal perspective.  Argentina and the United Kingdom fought a war that ended on 14.June.1982, when Argentine forces surrendered to Her Majesty’s forces.  I suspect the Spanish must have some unspecified ulterior motive, but the wisdom of such blatant action if highly questionable and will not likely end well for the Spanish.  We are not going to unravel centuries of history because someone might not like the result.  Gibraltar is sovereign British territory and should & will remain so for centuries to come.

An extract from an exchange of opinions from another forum:

Contributor 2:

“Cap just flunked Constitutional Law 101. Again.

“The powers of the President are proscribed by the Constitution.  Just because every President since Lyndon Baines Johnson has taken dictatorial powers to wherever and whenever in the world to kill whomever (man, woman, and child) he feels he ought to kill, that doesn’t mean that each of them shouldn’t have been impeached by the House, and tried in the Senate, then sentenced to death for mass murder.

“And, no I’m no sniveling wimp. I’m a former officer (service from Vietnam through Desert Storm) in the United States Army who is sick and tired of seeing his brother/sister soldiers, sailors airmen, and Marines used as cheerfully disposable cannon fodder for the benefit of like likes of Boeing, Rockwell, Hughes, Honeywell, Haliburton, General Atomic, Standard Oil, Shell/British Petroleum, the Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families, et al.

“If Cap is so afraid of A-hab he A-rab murdering him in his sleep he should carry a gun (I recommend the M1911A1 from personal experience – shoot A-hab square between the eyes with a 230 grain slug at 850 feet per second, and it will leave a hole in the back of A-hab’s head the size of a tea cup saucer). People who talk bravely about national defense ought to be put in the front lines on the ground where they can be the first to feel the sting of battle.

“That way they can be the first to die so people like me can make up pretty posthumous lies about their dumb asses and pin nice medals to the flags covering their coffins. Not that they deserve such honors due the decent service members routinely killed in or out of action. But the irony should bring laughter in Valhalla.”

My response:

Darren (Jim),

            Since we seem to need bona fide’s, I am a retired, former Marine [infantry (recon), aviator].  I am neither a constitutional scholar nor attorney.  I am only and simply a concerned and curious citizen, who tries to maintain a balanced approach to all things political.

            FYI: if you must know, I’ve owned an M1911 for decades, along with assorted firearms for short and long range.  I know how to use them and I have sufficient ammunition for each.

            The Constitution offers considerable latitude to the President.  Congress passed the War Powers Act (resolution) [PL 93-148; 87 Stat. 555] over President Nixon’s veto on 7.November.1973.  [NOTE: A read-through of that document might be useful in this debate.]  The President’s authority as commander-in-chief has been challenged numerous times since 1973, and to my knowledge, the Judiciary (from the district to the Supreme Court) has repeatedly called the question a political one and refused to intercede.  The latest attempt being H.RES.292 – challenge to the President’s authority in Libya under the War Powers Act of 1973 [House: 268-145-1-18(3); 3.June.2011] [496] that failed to pass the Senate and thus died in Congress.  If the three branches of government cannot agree, I doubt we will.  I only offer my opinion for debate without expectation of acceptance.  You (or any other citizen) are entitled to your opinion as well.

            As with the interpretation of any set of words, so much depends upon definitions, perspective, context and bias.  So, if we wish to parse up the words of the law, let slip the dogs of war.

            Likewise, I am not happy with how the military has been utilized since 1945.  The military must be the choice of last resort after all other options have been depleted, kinda like a nuclear weapon or unholstering a pistol.  The history of my lifetime demonstrates less than optimal deployment by presidents on both sides of the aisle.

            “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

Contributor 1:

“Thank you Cap, for your references and time to reply.  I won't speak for [Contributor 2], but tend to think he was directing his disgust in general at many, but not targeting you, though it read that way.”

Contributor 2:

“My apologies to the Marine in honor of his service.

“The War Powers Act was an abomination, and violates the Constitutional limitations placed on the Presidency to make war – war without a formal declaration by Congress subsequent to debate.

“Vietnam started this, with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (in reaction to an alleged attack on two U.S. destroyers which never actually occurred). Libya was another abomination, a civil war which we instigated for the sake of the Moslem Brotherhood. In like manner we pulled the props out from under Mubarak to place Morsi in power in Egypt. Concurrent with that we almost went to war against Syria (Cap’s brother Marines are still in Jordan). We went to war with Iraq, which is now more sympathetic to it’s sister Shia state, Iran, than it is to us.  Likewise we are bogged down in a war amongst the sweepings of central Asia which calls itself Afghanistan. All the treasure of this world is not worth the bleached bones of a single airborne ranger.

“We encourage our enemies not just to live amongst us, but we rob from the mouths of our own children to feed them. Just look at the upcoming September 11 Million Muslim March of Washington.

“Peace, brotherhood, democracy? Under the direction of a President who personally despises truth, justice, and the American way?

“Do we need a Forever War in pursuit of an Empire? Do we need to fancy ourselves the new Rome? Do we need a federal CEO, which has evolved into an Emperor?

“When, bankrupt and devoid of what’s left of our industrial base, we finally stumble – who will be there to pick us up out of the fire?  Nobody.”

Contributor 1:

“Thank you [Contributor 2] for your reply to Cap Parlier. Thanks to both of you for your service.

“Sometimes I think many of these current wars are simply by proxy, driven between USA/Russia-China and Saudi Arabia/Iran (with those respective polarities, if you shall.  Seems we are doing much of the enforcement for Saudi Arabia (and some say         Israel).  Though this is not any new model, but follows a long tradition.

“What is very disturbing is that we're not getting traction and while we might have achieved short-term objectives and blown up a bunch of things, and killed many people, and lost all our own, what have we really achieved given the current condition/trend-vectors?  I think leaving some of those dictators in place in our allied countries (sure, payoffs and $elling them arms helped keep peace), brought our world much more stability than we now see.  As though the Muslim Brotherhood is gonna bring any stability in those place that will descend into theocratic dictatorships where you get no         options, only a binary choice, and the result of picking the wrong one is death (or the burning of Christian churches as we now see in Egypt). 

“I am also concerned of the blowback debt we've incurred, from those wars you mention.

“A big travesty too, is that now we have Afghan & Iraq War vets living homeless on the streets, joining the older Vietnam guys.”

My further response:

Darren (Jim),

            Perhaps his comment was general; however, it is difficult to make that jump given the first sentence.  Nonetheless, I shall take you at your word.

            I have a long history of resentment toward various administrations’ premature, inappropriate or just flat wrong employment of our military forces from Truman’s half measures in Korea, to Bush 43’s naïve, grossly inadequate plan (if we wan to call it that) in Iraq, including numerous in-between’s like Johnson’s shackles that cost so many lives in Vietnam, Carter’s abominable interference during EAGLE CLAW, Reagan’s terrible rules of engagement in Beirut, and Clinton’s Somalia incursion.  There are good presidential actions as well.  We do concur on the long list of inappropriate uses of military forces.

            I believe we are in agreement on the inappropriate use of military forces by various presidents.  I will argue it goes back beyond Vietnam.  This thread started with the law.  We can agree the law is ambiguous.  I will argue the law must be rather loose to allow the president latitude to do what must be done in confusing situations.  The best we can hope for is our public debate & criticism of past events to help shape the policies of the future.  As I have said before, if the trigger is pulled for use of military forces, it should be considered like pulling the trigger on a pistol . . . once fired we are all in.  Yet, the Constitution gives the President considerable latitude.  We can argue whether legislation like AUMF are legally adequate.  Regardless, the Judiciary has maintained the liberal interpretation of the Constitution.

News from the economic front:

-- The European Union's official statistics agency Eurostat reported the combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the 17 currency members rose 0.3% in 2Q2013 from the previous quarter, but the GDP was down 0.7% from 2Q2012. The EU appears to be emerging from its longest postwar contraction, but a resolution to its banking and fiscal crises remains a distant prospect.

-- U.S. prosecutors in New York charged Javier Martin-Artajo and Julien Grout, former J.P. Morgan Chase traders, with wire fraud, making false filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as conspiracy to falsify books and records, to commit wire fraud and to falsify filings.  The two traders were at the center of a series of bad gambles that cost the bank more than US$6B in losses early last year.

Continuing comments from Update no.607:

 . . . round four:

“I think you know about the big ones I've heard of, Chicago and Cleveland, supposedly having growing very close knit conclaves in which there are Sharia Law courts openly operating.  There are several other cities whose names I have forgotten where concentrated Muslim presence is growing rapidly, to include separate private Islamic schooling but conspicuously no noticeable voicing of protest against Islamic terrorism.  Surely you have heard of the stories from Great Britain and France, where political correctness has won over majority rights.  I recently heard The Netherlands made some progress against the demands of their huge Muslim population to have women wear identity-hiding clothing, or something like that, but I may have that wrong.  As usual, I am impressed by stories and quickly forget the details.”

 . . . my reply to round four:

            Yes, I am aware of some of those observations; however, these are hardly “takeovers” of our cities and towns.  There have been enclaves of immigrants for as long as this Grand Republic has existed.  I think it is natural to have familiar customs and language around you, to congregate with familiar influences and support, as you adjust to a new culture.  Most immigrants assimilate quite well.  Some do not.  I think the naturalization process is intended to filter out those who do not wish to or will not make an effort to assimilate.

            Re: Sharia Law.  I am not aware of any attempt for local supremacy.  I do not see such efforts as different from Christian communities who sought to impose their beliefs and values – the Salem Witch Trials being a classic case on point.  The first time someone tries to claim Sharia supremacy, they will get a good lesson in constitutional law.

            I have far more confidence in this Grand Republic than I have concern about the imposition of Sharia Law or Islamic custom.

 . . . round five . . . expanded to a wider group:

“Cap, longtime good friend of my brother and predictable admirer of truth and goodness, I hope you are as right as you are optimistic, but I disagree with your uncharacteristically simple comparisons on the subject of growing Islamic influence.

“What I have inadequately pointed out is, indeed, not yet ‘takeover,’ at least apparently not more than several united city blocks at a time here and there in this country and larger areas in Europe. However, what some optimists overlook is the avowed and unwavering purpose of Islamic fundamentalists, who hold unusual sway over passive Muslims as they adhere to controversial declarations from the Koran, to eventually not only "take over" but eliminate or subjugate all other religions and non-religious governments.

“In my opinion it is a naive and shortsighted mistake to compare the international trend to which I have been referring with either

“(1) historic American "enclaves of immigrants" who for maybe one or two generations for the reasons you cite were slow to assimilate but whose leaders never intended an overthrow of the system they came to enjoy, 

“(2) simple and understandable congregating of new residents of this country with familiar influences and support while adjusting to a new culture without plans to radically change it, or

“(3) the Salem Connecticut phenomena or similar short-lived religious extremism, perhaps equally evil but because of the lack of global intent nowhere nearly as historically dangerous.

“I agree that what you refer to as the naturalization process being "intended to filter out those who do not wish to or will not make an effort to assimilate," but the phenomena I refer to is the antithesis of such naturalization process and has the directly opposite intent.

“What to do, besides have 'confidence in our Grand Republic'?

“For starters, let's have a constitutional amendment establishing English as our unifying national language and forbidding use of taxpayer funds to accommodate those who do not learn our language.  We had better hurry up with this before there is no hope of outvoting growing minorities who, with Obama's calculated class warfare assistance, together already constitute a collective majority subject to easy taxpayer-subsidized political manipulation by the left.

“You are, of course, to be commended for your confidence and optimism, Cap, but I hope you will take a closer look at this matter and comment on it in the future.  Thinkers like you can make a difference, in a constructive and non-vindictive way.”

 . . . my reply to round five:

Roger,

            Indeed!  Thx for yr generous words.

            We can respectfully disagree.

            I cannot speak for Europe.  Nonetheless, I think we are witness to the beginnings of backlash to the dilution of their cultures in Germany and France.  Time shall tell the tale.

            I do not overlook Islamic fundamentalism.  What I said was, Islamic fundamentalism is no different from Christian fundamentalism – both have the same parochial objective – domination of all by their religious ideology.  Further, just as Christian fundamentalist do NOT represent all Christians, neither do Islamic fundamentalists reflect all Muslims.  Lastly, the misguided or extreme interpretation of the Qu’ran is again no different from the extreme interpretations of the Bible – old & new testaments.

            To your points:

(1) Chinatown enclaves in San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York City have existed for more than a century.  South Boston has been notoriously Irish for almost two centuries.  Lastly, if we define Usama bin Ladin (or now Ayman al-Zawahiri) as the leader of ALL Muslims, then perhaps you are correct.  Personally, I think such definition grossly exaggerates their sliver of Islam.  Yes, al-Qa’ida has that objective as does the IRI, but both combined are a very long way from representing all Muslims.

(2) Again, I believe you are exaggerating the influence of radical, fundamentalist Islam.  They have every right under the Constitution to believe whatever they wish to believe as long as no one is injured and they do not impose their beliefs on others.  I am not aware of any violation of either condition, other than criminal acts by individuals and those are dealt with quite handily by our criminal justice system.

(3) I did not intend my example to be expansive or all-inclusive; it was simply an early, graphic, representative episode.  The constitutions of several states required citizens to believe, attend and support a specific Christian sect; it took several decades after the Constitution was ratified to amend those state charters.  To believe Christian fundamentalism was not enormously powerful and dictatorial early in our history is to ignore that history.  We are not the pure-of-soul we like to claim we are.

            I certainly appreciate your opinion regarding English-only.  I can argue either side of that one.  For the record, I am not in favor of multilingual ballots, signage, legal documents including legislation, et cetera.  I am a practical English-only person.  Our system is and should be a subtle process, which albeit is lumbering.  You learn English or you will naturally be marginalized in our society.  I do believe our naturalization tests are only in English.  That said, I do not support a constitutional amendment to enforce English only.

Comments and contributions from Update no.608:

“Ha! I think you meant to write  'emasculate' instead of ‘immaculate.’

“Regarding POTUS' reforms on NSA activities, others (such as FT) have suggested that ‘rather than reducing NSA eavesdropping... in reality, Mr. Obama is trying to entrench the programme by gaining stronger political legitimacy for them.’  According to the article, ‘Mr. Obama was insistent that the bulk collection be retained.’  Observers are all over the charts on this, some saying he is stepping back, others the opposite. We'll just have to see.”

My reply:

Jan,

            LMFAO.  How bloody embarrassing is that!!  Must’ve been a Freudian slip.  You know, no matter how many times you look at words, sometimes you just do not see the word as written.  Thx for the catch.

            Re: NSA reform.  I am a firm believer these are necessary and legitimate tools to wage war successfully in contemporary times.  That said, I am immensely disturbed by reports about collateral use by the DEA of collected raw data as well as derived information to prosecute drug offenders.  Such collateral law enforcement usage is far more troubling and much closer to our rights as citizens than the use of such data in the War on Islamic Fascism.  This is why I am in favor of proper firewalls or filters to allow the collection & analysis for intelligence purposes as long as it is not used for domestic political (Spitzer) or law enforcement (DEA) endeavors.  Indeed, we shall see.

Comment to the Blog:

“Your first paragraph is not your best work. You surprised the grammarian in me by saying ‘immaculate our national defense apparatus.’ It took a moment to decide you meant “emasculate” the defense apparatus. Then I went on to dispute both that and the prior statement. First, if Mr. Snowden has achieved power, the pundits are recognizing it, not causing it. Secondly, the U.S. national defense apparatus is a multiple of the second largest.  It is far from being emasculated.

“I wish Mr. Soobzokov well in his quest.

“We have had no flooding in the immediate area here. Even the farmers, however, have had quite enough rain. It has begun to impede harvesting, and the wheat crop cannot wait long. For those of us with breathing issues and/or allergies, this has become an exceptionally difficult season.

“This one is subject to correction by someone who is more of a medical person than I, but I believe the correct phrase is ‘double radical mastectomies.’ That is, they are getting ‘radical mastectomies,” in which all breast tissue is removed, of both breasts (“double”) rather than ‘partial’ mastectomies (lumpectomies). I sympathize with those who must make those agonizing decisions, and I hope that medical research will come up with a cure or effective treatment for those cancers soon.

“I believe I wrote a ‘second round’ of last week’s reply, but I think I failed to send it. I wished to state that I never felt the Ayn Rand attitudes were held by all of the wealthy. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet provide examples of very wealthy people who have more insight and foresight than Ayn Rand. I will stand by my statement that some of the wealthy do indeed hold those self-serving and short-sighted attitudes, and they are doing a great deal of damage. Their lack of long-term vision will eventually bring them down, but they will do the entire nation still more damage in the meantime.”

My response to the Blog:

Calvin,

            Re: typo.  Good catch.  That was a test to see if anyone would catch it.  Naw, my bad, actually.  Yes, indeed, I did in fact mean emasculate rather than immaculate.  Sometimes, no matter how many times you read it, the word you see is not the word you wrote.

            Re: Snowden.  I have not heard any official attributive action to Snowden.  It is the Press, media & talking heads who have attributed the President’s initiatives to Snowden’s disclosures.  As Hitler and Goebbels said, if you tell a lie often enough, sooner or later people will believe it.  And, if other wannabees believe Snowden’s actions made the President do what he was not otherwise disposed to do, then there will be further, perhaps greater, compromises of our national security.

            Re: emasculate.  Good, timely intelligence is vital to a strong military.  No matter how big or how powerful our military is, without good, sound intelligence, they will lack focus and will be a mere fraction of their potential.  I do not want the Intelligence Community hobbled.  I want them insulated from politics and the temptation to use intelligence data for political or prosecutorial purposes.

            I will pass along your well wishes to Aslan Soobzokov.  It has been a long, arduous road for him in his quest to vindicate his father and find justice for the assassins.

            I hope you can find some relief for your breathing issues.

            Re: “double radical mastectomies.”  “Double” means what it says, i.e., both breasts.  You can remove one breast, or a portion of the tissue in one breast, as you noted; but, that is not the case in my paragraph.  “Radical” means removal of all associated tissue and often adjacent lymph-nodes.  Yes, it is a huge decision, especially when done for prophylactic reasons based on the BRCA1 test, which at best is probabilistic and distant.  

            I clearly share your hope for the advancement of medical research to find a cure for cancer.  It has become personal for me.  I have my 21-month check up tomorrow, so I anxiously await the latest results.

            If you have your second round, please send it.  We have extended discussions across multiple Updates . . . as we have done this week, as a matter of fact.

            Re: wealthy.  With the qualifier “some,” I readily concur.  Sometimes wealth occurs by more luck or fate, rather than intelligence, ingenuity or perseverance.  Yes, wealth is an amplifier for good or evil.

Cheers,

Cap

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)