Update from the
Heartland
No.712
3.8.15 – 9.8.15
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- On Wednesday, Prime Minister Haji Mohammad Najib bin Tun Haji
Abdul Razak of Malaysia publicly proclaimed, “It is with a very heavy
heart that I must tell you that an international team of experts have
conclusively confirmed that the aircraft debris found on Reunion Island is
indeed from MH370.” [638, 691] Not so fast, Mister Prime Minister!
I cannot
and will not make any linkage until a competent, independent, professional,
investigation organization presents the physical evidence of a direct
connection to MH370, i.e., serial numbers or some other unique identifier.
I have seen none of that data to date. So, we have only one errant B777 flaperon, period. I urge caution to allow the methodical
investigation process to play itself out by design. The minister was inappropriately premature.
-- On Friday, a Colorado jury failed to reach a unanimous
decision to impose the death penalty on the Aurora theater shooter [554/55], after his conviction for
capital murder [709]. As a consequence, by default, he was
sentenced life in prison without the possibility of parole. The sentence does not seem worthy of
crime – taking 12 innocent lives and wounded 70 others. I suspect there will be no appeal. This should be the end of him and this
tragic episode . . . unless some future governor decides to pardon him.
I was going to offer my opinion of the JV & Varsity
Republican “debates,” but frankly, I am rather disgusted and disappointed with
the profound distraction imbedded in their lot at the moment. The last thing this country needs is
another egocentric, narcissistic blowhard in a leadership role.
Below,
I have attempted to convey extracts from a rather lengthy, multi-faceted
exchange in a parallel forum. This
was a complicated exchange that I have had to edit and hope I have done it
justice for the sake of public debate.
The
exchange began with Person 1 sending this news clip / link:
“Planned Parenthood official: Abortion procedures, prices
altered to meet demand”
FoxNews.com
Published August 04, 2015
. . . to which
the contributor added:
“Amazing how Satanic practices can be disguised as a WOMAN'S
CHOICE. Then, they make money on
baby parts.” [Emphasis is the author’s as sent.]
I offered a one-word reply:
Really?
. . . Round two
(Person 1):
“Hello Cap, for me, and as I believe it should be for all of us
regarding the murder of babies, this is very binary! It is black/white or yes/no, with no 50 Shades of Grey, no
fancy and happy rainbow flags, and no creative rational justification for what
is just what I called it--MURDER.
There is no debate, no reconciling, no expensive lawyers to argue this,
no Supreme Court justices to decide in their corrupted ways, Cap. I call upon GOD to make all of U.S.
more DISCERNING as to this issue that has snuffed millions of babies just in
America.” [Emphasis is the author’s as sent.]
. . . my
response to round two:
Oh,
I understand quite well the binary aspect of this issue, but that neither
intimidates nor dissuades me.
Truth
be told, as I have written many times, I have long believed abortion is as
archaic as bloodletting to treat influenza, or amputation to treat a compound
fractured limb. I will cheer the
day no one feels the need to resort to the procedure. That said, I believe more strongly in the sanctity of the
individual. The decision to abort
a pregnancy is a moral one, and thus between the pregnant individual and
God. I do not want anyone making
my moral judgments, and I must respect that same right in everyone else,
including a woman who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy.
I
also acknowledge, respect and understand the argument – who defends the
unwanted embryo / fetus in her womb.
Scientifically, I cannot ascribe humanity to a cell that has divided
once. Those cells growing within a
woman’s uterus are no different from any other cells that grow or might grow
within a woman’s body. What
happens within her body is hers to deal with, and as I said, a moral decision
she must make, and thus between her consciousness, her soul and God. We have no right to enter into or
impose our moral values and choices upon her body.
Now,
I also agree with the Supreme Court.
There comes a time in the gestation cycle where a fetus can survive
outside the womb, without the mother (host). We can argue whether that threshold point is the 3rd
trimester, or some other sustainment point given today’s medical ability, but
it certainly cannot be the instant of conception. I understand it makes the moral argument very clean and
binary, as you say, but convenience does not make it correct.
Lastly,
I truly wish the moral outrage your opinion represents could offer even a mere
fraction of that energy to the welfare of living, breathing children as it does
a single, microscopic cell about to divide itself for the first time. It is long past time to grow out of the
Victorian morality that has so controlled our society. It is time to grow up.
“That’s
just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
. . . Round
three (Person 1):
“Hi Cap, as you know, I am opinionated on this issue. It is a topic/procedure that has long
divided America. I agree with you
that the woman who chooses abortion, will have to live with that decision both
consciously and subconsciously, and may be affected by it in many subtle ways
we are not even aware of.
“I got out of the air ambulance business, partly, because I no
longer witnessed the desire to provide a needed service to those who needed
acute medical care, but instead saw mostly only profit motivation attached to
our service. We were also flying ‘harvest
teams’ for organ transplants, which meant our pilots needed to mark their Igloo
coolers so they did not reach in for a soft drink, in a team's Igloo that
contained parts.
“To see that Planned Parenthood (which name is such a oxymoron)
may be putting baby parts on the market, where we'll be told the dead ones help
make for healthy ones, is more than 1984.
“Some may believe our culture/world is making progress, when in
fact I see it often as devolution.”
. . . Person 2’s
contribution to round three:
“Being a decent fellow at heart, you assume that women who kill
their unborn babies even HAVE some sort of conscience. Lots of ‘soulless’ people in this world
who’d rather make cold-cuts out of dead kids than cuddle living ones. [Emphasis
is the author’s as sent.]
. . . Round four
(Person 1):
“‘But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will
fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines
of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as
with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from
foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and
know the truth.…’
“~1 Timothy 4:2”
. . . Person 2
response to round four:
“Ritual child sacrifice. Our civilization has collapsed.”
. . . Person 1
response to Person 2 in round four:
Thank you [Person
2], glad you see it for what it really is, instead of writing it off or
rationalizing it as a WOMAN's CHOICE. You are one of the discerners amongst the
blind. [Emphasis is the author’s
as sent.]
. . . Person
2’s response:
“In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is hunted down
without mercy for being a deadly menace to the "natural" order of
things.
“You better believe it!”
. . . to which
Person 3 added:
“I don’t care how abortion is presented, in modern society it has
no place. Modern medicine is slow
in providing an inexpensive way of birth control to prevent unwanted
pregnancy. But Planned Parenthood
figured out a way of maximizing profits off helpless humans. The practice is barbaric made even
worse by the body parts and organs that are sold to the highest bidder.
“By and large the supporters of these gruesome procedures are
support by the same political party that gave us slavery and Jim
Crow…Democrats!”
. . . Person 1
replied to Person 3:
“Thanks for your contribution. I have felt for a long time that the practice of abortion is
a mass form of Satanic rituals, that satisfies the fallen souls of our world,
those in higher order brotherhoods.
How else could it be explained? [Person
2] has referred to this as well.
“Man's problem is we put science and technology before God,
humanity, kindness, morality and our hearts. Hillary's hero, Margret Sanger, was far more into
eugenics, than saving a woman's life through abortion.”
. . . along
with my response to round four:
The
series of this exchange represents the fundamental issue. It is not abortion or personhood for a
zygote. Further, we need no
further demonstrations of the intensity of emotions associated with abortion. I respect both the polarity and
intensity of opinions. What I
cannot support is the belief we have the right to intrude upon a woman’s bodily
functions and her moral decisions.
Condemn the procedure . . . fine; that is our right to speak out. Leave the woman alone with her private,
moral choices. Neither the State
nor the majority have a right to intrude upon a citizen’s fundamental right to
privacy. I want my privacy
respected, as each of us does, so we must protect everyone’s fundamental right
to privacy.
“That’s
just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
. . . Person 4
added:
“Or called infantile by those who think maturity and
sophistication is attained by exhibiting a laissez-faire moral doctrine.
“You can't legislate morality, but you can legislate against
immorality as long as you have a yardstick to measure it by. Once you blur the lines so you can
longer evaluate the difference then you have Sodom, Gomorrah and Babylon.”
. . . I
responded to Person 1 and Person 4:
Morality
is what we do when no one is looking. Morality is taught and learned in childhood. Morality is between the individual and
God. Injecting the State into a
citizen’s fundamental right to privacy . . . the essence of freedom itself . .
. is wrong in the worst possible way, and not what the Founders intended. The State is a blunt instrument with enormous
unintended consequences, as we have multitudinous examples. It is wrong to violate / punish /
penalize a 100 innocent people to find the one true wrongdoer. The State does not belong in our
private affairs, period. I don’t
think you want the State in your private life, and I imagine [Person 4] does not want the
State is his private affairs. I
can guarantee I do not want the State (nor you, nor [Person 4]) in my private life.
. . . Round
five:
“Not to dilute the core of the discussion, or distract, but isn't
Obamacare very much the State in my private life as to the
regulatory/enforcement aspects for those without signing-up, and as to the loss
of patient confidentiality or at least risk of, by health providers sharing data
with BIG GOV? [Emphasis is the author’s as sent.]
“‘If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have
to do a thing. You keep your plan. You keep your doctor.’ ~ Obama's statement
some 37 times prior to the ACA being passed. Thanks Obama for letting me keep my own plan/doctor.”
. . . my
response to round five:
Excellent
segue, I must say . . . a smooth, effortless transition. As such, I changed the subject line to
PPACA . . . since I refuse to use the term you offered.
I
do not see the intrusion you imply.
PPACA, with all its complexity, is about every citizen having health
insurance. All forms of insurance
– life, house, automobile, whatnot – are about paying a reasonable amount for
all the time you don’t need it, for the few times or when you do need it – cost
leveling, if you will. PPACA is no
different from state laws requiring every automobile owner to have a minimal
level of insurance. You know quite
well aircraft insurance providers are far more “involved” in who can fly an
aircraft than PPACA is in who you choose as your health insurance provider and
your family physician / general practitioner. I have written many times over many years that I would be OK
with an opt-out provision as long as an individual has some permanent notice
attached to their person that the individual is not covered and must pay cash
up front for treatment, including emergency services. We were all paying for the uninsured by exorbitant overhead
charges for uncollectible medical services. So, let’s call it what it is and not try to make it
something it is not.
News from the economic
front:
-- The U.S. Labor Department reported nonfarm payrolls rose
a seasonally adjusted 215,000 in July. They also revised the May and June estimated employment
numbers upward by 14,000 more jobs. The unemployment rate held steady at 5.3%
in July.
London
Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) Debacle [552]:
-- A London jury found Tom Hayes, a former trader at UBS and
Citigroup, guilty of fraud for his part in trying to rig the LIBOR – the first
criminal conviction of an individual for manipulating the widely used
benchmark. The judge sentenced
Hayes to 14 years in prison. He
started serving the sentence immediately – one down many more to go.
-- So we don’t lose focus . . . the infamous 16, involved,
international banks are:
- · Barclays [UK] – US$454M fine [550, 701]; Singapore sanctions [600]; three charged {Johnson, Mathew, Contogoulas} [636]
- · Bank of America [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · BTMU [Japan] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Citigroup [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600] [701]
- · Credit Suisse [Switzerland] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Deutsche Bank [Germany] – US$654M LIBOR profit [578]; set aside €500M (US$641M) for LIBOR liability [589]; Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Lloyds TSB [UK] – fined US$370M [659]
- · HSBC [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · HBOS [UK]
- · JPMorgan Chase [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600][701]
- · Norinchuckin [Japan]
- · Rabobank [Netherlands] – fined €774M (£663M, US$1.06B); CEO resigned; 30 others censured [620]; three charged {Robson, Thompson, Motomura} [631]
- · RBC [Canada]
- · RBS [UK] – £390M (US$612.6M) in fines, 21 employees involved [582, 701]; Singapore sanctions [600]
- · UBS [Switzerland] – US$1.5B fine, two charged {Hayes, Darin} [575, 701]; Singapore sanctions [600]
- · West LB [Germany]
Added to the list by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [600]:
- · ING [Netherlands] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · BNP Paribas [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Crédit Agricole [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · DBS [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Standard Chartered [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · United Overseas Bank [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Macquarie [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
- · Commerzbank [Germany] – Singapore sanctions [600]
Others involved:
- · R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd. [UK] – two charged {Farr, Gilmour} [583]
- · ICAP [UK] – fined US$87M + three executives charged {Read, Wilkinson, Goodman} [615]
I trust none of us will lose sight of what these banks have
done. Lest we forget!
Comments and contributions from Update no.711:
“Great place to visit indeed. Last year, I visited my son
who was posted at Fort Leavenworth, and we both went to the Museum.
“A couple of interesting pieces from today’s Post- one is about
the teachers leaving Kansas due to the policies of the Governor and the
legislature. Not good
“And one about Senator Graham’s getting special treatment as a
USAF Reservist…he made colonel in the Reserves, despite not putting in the
requisite time or getting the required PME. He essentially admits it when
he says that he got promoted to O-5 and O-6 due to the work he did as a junior
officer- ridiculous. And remember that he claimed to be a Gulf War
Veteran, when he never deployed overseas- he was activated and wrote wills in
Dover AFB.”
My response:
Yeah,
in fact, you told me about the museum.
Thank you for that.
Indeed
. . . I think Brownback would love to return us to the way things were back in
the Victorian era . . . when men were men and ships were made of wood.
Lindsey
was not the first and certainly will not be the last to benefit from political
patronage. So, I guess another
example that we have our own form of royalty . . . divine right of kings. I am not a fan of such behavior.
. . . a follow-up comment:
“Remember Lyndon Johnson, during WWII, had a short tour in the
Naval Reserve as a LCDR (direct commission). He went on a flight in the
Pacific Theatre in a Navy patrol plane as an ‘observor’- the plane was attacked
by Japanese fighters and the patrol plane evaded the fighter and fought it
off. Johnson got the Silver Star- for not really doing anything on the
flight. The crew might have gotten air medals – eps the pilots. But
nothing remotely rating the Silver Star.”
Johnson’s Silver Star citation:
“For
gallantry in action in the vicinity of Port Moresby and Salamaua, New Guinea,
on June 9, 1942. While on a mission of obtaining information in the Southwest
Pacific area, Lieutenant Commander Johnson, in order to obtain personal
knowledge of combat conditions, volunteered as an observer on a hazardous
aerial combat mission over hostile positions in New Guinea. As our planes
neared the target area they were intercepted by eight hostile fighters. When,
at this time, the plane in which Lieutenant Commander Johnson was an observer,
developed mechanical trouble and was forced to turn back alone, presenting a
favorable target to the enemy fighters, he evidenced marked coolness in spite
of the hazards involved. His gallant actions enabled him to obtain and return
with valuable information.”
. . . to which was added:
“More on this…of course when you see that MacArthur awarded the
medal, one can readily see what was going on…it was a ‘deal.’
“Actually, the plane may not have even come under attack.”
. . . my follow-up response:
Thank
you for the information. Actually,
I must admit, I did not know that aspect of history – quite an interesting
contrast with MacArthur’s actions with the case of LtJG. John F. Kennedy,
USNR. Ambassador Kennedy sought a
Medal of Honor for his son, while MacArthur wanted to court martial JFK for
disobedience of a direct order – disengaging his engines while on patrol. They compromised with a Navy – Marine
Corps Medal.
I’m
sure there are many other examples of undeserved awards through history until
this very day, e.g., Lindsey Graham.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment