Update no.1015

 Update from the Sunland

No.1015

21.6.21 – 27.6.21

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

 

            To all,

 

I eagerly announce the publication of my 19^th book and the 9^th book of my To So Few series of historical novels. This book takes Captain Brian Drummond, USA, and his brethren and family through the pivotal year of 1943.

To So Few – Struggle cover

[image attached]

Against the advice of others, Brian chooses to return to combat after the successful National War Bond Drive as well as to Charlotte and their growing son.  The Western Allies have finally taken the offensive against the Germans and begun the process of creating a genuine Second Front, as the Russians finally turn the corner and stop the German advance at Stalingrad, encircling and capturing the entire German Sixth Army.  The 8^th Air Force concentrates on the strategic bombing campaign, while the 8^th Fighter Command struggles to support the bombers as a consequence of their inadequate range.  The 334^th Fighter Squadron transitions from their beloved Spitfire Mark V to new P-47D Thunderbolts.  Trevor ‘Diamond’ Andersen enters Germany to encourage and support the White Rose Resistance Group, only to narrowly escape capture by the Gestapo.  The White Rose group are executed by the Nazis, while Trevor completes his arduous extraction to safety.  The Russian finally begin to push back the Germans, as the Western Allies liberate North Africa, invade Sicily and Italy, and turn the Italians against the Germans.  The planning for the invasion of France is well underway, when Roosevelt and Churchill agree that General Dwight 'Ike' Eisenhower will be the Supreme Commander for the Normandy invasion next spring.

This latest book, along with all of my other books, are available in print and all digital formats. I doubt brick and mortar bookstores stock the book, but your choice of form can be ordered or purchased from any retail source.

 

            The follow-up news items:

-- For those who might seek to understand the genesis of the January 6^th insurrection [991], I strongly recommend the CNN Special Report: Assault on Democracy – The Roots of Trump’s Insurrection reported by Drew Griffin, broadcast on 20.June.2021. The program is an excellent documentary of what led up to January 6^th. Let there be no doubt whatsoever that the date, time and place of the January 6^th event was chosen for its desired purpose—disrupt or stop congressional certification of the Electoral College election results. While I acknowledge there are those who see and probably truly believe the January 6^th insurrection was not what it was, the facts remain. The [person who shall no longer be named], the certified draft dodger and coward, pulled the trigger and stoked the fire. He did not assault a Capitol Police officer or break down a door, but he sure as hell encouraged his minions to do just that. They sought to stop the constitutional process that was in its final stages. The [person who shall no longer be named] and his believers at the Capitol that day violated the U.S. Constitution they had sworn to protect and defend. Many of his believers will suffer the consequences of their violations. It is yet to be seen whether the [person who shall no longer be named] will suffer the same consequences.

-- The convicted former Minneapolis Police officer Derek Chauvin [1005] was sentenced to 22.5 years in prison for his murder of George Floyd [959]. As numerous commentators have noted, the sentence is the longest to date for crimes committed by a law enforcement officer in uniform. However, the sentence does not seem adequate for the callousness of his crimes. Chauvin’s defense counsel laid the groundwork for an appeal, so I imagine we are not done

 

After a contentious debate, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops voted [168-55-6] to advance a process that could call into question the eligibility of politicians (President Biden) to receive Communion. They are apparently not satisfied with the president’s private and personal condemnation of abortion in the light of his public support for a woman’s right to choose. There is little doubt the purpose of the bishops’ action; they seek to intimidate politicians into compliance with their dicta.  This is exactly why separation between church & state is wise and should be bilateral. 

 

On Tuesday, 22.June.2021, the Senate voted On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed (Motion to Invoke Cloture: Motion to Proceed to S. 2093) [Senate: 50-50-0-0(0)]. By Senate rules, the motion failed, preventing debate on the significant voting reform bill. The House passed their version (H.R. 1) four months ago [House: 220-210-0-2(3)]. It is publicly not clear what the path forward may be.

 

A long-time friend sent along this message:

“Maybe you are a conspiracy theorist as well! You believe [the person who shall no longer be named] and his supporters planned the event [January 6th insurrection] and it’s not true! So you are believing it was a conspiracy and it’s only in theory not fact.”

To which I replied:

Interesting accusation. I wonder what fact(s) would convince you? I suppose what you see is not enough. What you hear is not enough. What you read is not enough. Heck, we've got BICP congressman who are claiming it was a peaceful tourist group. If you can believe that, you can believe anything—aliens did it, antifa boogeymen are everywhere. and the masked grandma stole their PB&J sandwich. It does not matter what I think or why. Only what you believe. I know it was an insurrection against the U.S. Constitution that was inspired, stimulated and enabled by the former president. That is as good and relevant as if he had entered the House chamber and shot the vice president presiding at the Speaker’s Dais.

 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Alexander Milley, USA, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd James Austin III testified before the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday, 24.June.2021, regarding the president’s 2022 budget request for the Defense Department. Most of the questioning and testimony were about various elements of the Defense budget request. However, Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II of Florida opened with why Colonel Lohmeier was relieved of command. Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Lohmeier, USSF (U.S. Space Force) was relieved of his command of the 111^th Space Warning Squadron, Buckley Air Force Base, Aurora, Colorado. Lohmeier was relieved for publicly criticizing the Pentagon’s diversity push and what he believes is Marxism spreading in the ranks. Gaetz pressed on with questions about the embrace of Critical Race Theory (CRT) [1013] in the Defense Department. General Milley wanted to address the issue, but Gaetz cut him off. Representative Christina Marie ‘Chrissy’ Houlahan née Jampoler of Pennsylvania offered her five minutes of question time to allow General Milley to answer. I quote General Milley’s statement in full.

“Sure. First of all, on the issue of critical race theory, et cetera, I'll obviously have to get much smarter on whatever the theory is, but I do think it’s important for those of us in uniform to be open-minded and be widely read. The United States Military Academy is a university. It is important that we train and we understand. I want to understand white rage — and I’m white. What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that? I want to find that out. I want to maintain an open mind. I do want to analyze it. It’s important that we understand it. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and guardians — they come from the American people. It’s important that the leaders, now and in the future, understand it. I’ve read Mao Zedong. I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin. That doesn’t make me a communist. So what is wrong with having some situational understanding about the country we are here to defend? I personally find it offensive that we are accusing the United States military — our general officers, our commissioned and non-commissioned — of being ‘woke’ or something else because we’re studying some theories that are out there while calling out those who have criticized military officials as ‘woke’ for entertaining the theory based on the idea that systemic racism exists in America. [Critical race theory] was started at Harvard Law School years ago and proposed that there were laws in the United States prior to the Civil War that led to a power differential with African Americans that were three-quarters of a human being when this country was formed. We had a Civil War and an Emancipation Proclamation to change it. We brought it up in the Civil Rights Act. It took another 100 years to change that. I do want to know. I respect your service and we’re both Green Berets, but I want to know. It matters to the discipline and cohesion of this military. And I thank you for the opportunity to make a comment on that.” [emphasis mine]

I stand with General Milley. I need to understand white rage. What on earth would lead good citizens, many of them veterans, to carry out an insurrection against the U.S. Constitution? . . . a document and ideal they were sworn to defend against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. We are a very long way from successfully dealing with institutional racism in American society. So, I say, thank you Secretary Austin and General Milley for taking the high road in addressing institutional racism, white supremacy, and extremism within the military ranks and Defense Department in general.

 

On Thursday, 24.June.2021, a five-judge panel appointed by the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, issued their ruling in a complaint brought by the Attorney Grievance Committee against Rudolph William ‘Rudy’ Giuliani. The panel reviewed the factual evidence associated with just a dozen instances of Giuliani’s multitudinous false statements, which were more than sufficient to convince the panel of Rudy’s malfeasance. They concluded “that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent [Giuliani] communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for [the person who shall no longer be named] and [his] campaign in connection with [his] failed effort at reelection in 2020. These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client. We conclude that respondent’s conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law, pending further proceedings before the Attorney Grievance Committee.” As a consequence of the panel’s findings, Giuliani has had his license to practice law in the State of New York suspended indefinitely. They also observed, “The seriousness of respondent’s uncontroverted misconduct cannot be overstated. This country is being torn apart by continued attacks on the legitimacy of the 2020 election and of our current president, Joseph R. Biden.

“One only has to look at the ongoing present public discord over the 2020 election, which erupted into violence, insurrection and death on January 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol, to understand the extent of the damage that can be done when the public is misled by false information about the elections. The AGC contends that respondent’s misconduct directly inflamed tensions that bubbled over into the events of January 6, 2021 in this nation’s Capitol.”

For Rudy, I sure hope you feel the compromise of your professional ethics and blind support of the [person who shall no longer be named] was worth it. This judicial action does not bode well for Rudy who is facing multiple criminal charges. Rudy’s predicament probably does not look good for the [person who shall no longer be named] either.

The judicial vice is closing in slowly on the BIG LIE and its perpetrators. The [person who shall no longer be named] is not far away. He continues to spew his lies, and his believers persist in their blind faith in the BIG LIE. 

 

Then, to add insult to injury, Rudy and his colleagues in crime [Sidney Powell & Mike Lindell] had to appear in court for their motion to dismiss the US$1.3B defamation lawsuit—Dominion Voting Systems v. Rudy Giuliani [USDC DC Case 1:21-cv-00213-CJN]. The parallel companion cases are:

-- Sidney Katherine Powell [Case 1:21-cv-00040]

-- Michael James ‘Mike’ Lindell [Case 1:21-cv-00445]

Giuliani chose not to appear for the hearing before U.S. District Judge Carl John Nichols. There was no indication from the judge when he will render judgment of the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

 

            Comments and contributions from Update no.1014:

Comment to the Blog:

“Bipartisanship as you describe it came about immediately after Obama’s election. I’m glad someone is finally reporting on it.

“I have the same complaint you do about blind loyalty to either of the two major parties. Of course, I’m a Green Party USA member, but as we’ve seen, I don’t support them at all times or on every issue.

“To continue the discussion of small arms, Americans have a constitutional right to freedom of movement, because it’s necessary for assembly, the press, etc. Despite that, we regulate vehicles and their operators for public safety. I’m not allowed to drive a bus or a big rig without the proper license because society doesn’t have proof I could do it safely. There’s no rational reason not to do the same with firearms. Now that the NRA’s influence is waning, that could happen.”

My response to the Blog:

President Obama’s election was certainly a trigger for a segment of our society because of the hereditary pigmentation in his skin. The [person who shall no longer be named] dredged up, mobilized, and sanctioned that fringe element into the mainstream, and he tapped into the Tea Party unrest that has been visible since the days of Newt Gingrich. I finally watched the CNN Special Report: Assault on Democracy – The Roots of Trump’s Insurrection. I will urge everyone to watch it in this week’s Update.

I am not a member of any political party, and I strongly doubt I will ever choose to align myself with any political party. Independence suits me just fine.

We are agreed. I am all in favor of improved regulation of firearm possession with one critical caveat—appropriate protections against abuse by zealous governmental agents. The last thing we need is another tragic prohibition like the Controlled Substances Act. We have forfeited our fundamental rights in the name of a falsehood—a canard of epic proportion. Without those safeguards against potential abuse, I cannot support additional regulation. Below that threshold, I am deeply concerned that we are being tempted to react to the symptoms without dealing with the root cause(s). An inanimate object is NOT and can NEVER be a root cause.

 . . . Round two:

“I agree that inanimate objects don't cause homicide and also that mental illness needs to be addressed. However, most homicides can't be attributed to known or specific mental illnesses. The underlying cause of homicide is man's inhumanity to man. We need to address the instruments of crime simply because we have no way to address the first cause.”

 . . . my response to round two:

Interesting point with which I agree without qualification. I know “man's inhumanity to man” is not an establish textbook mental illness or affliction. However, to the expanded definition at least in my mind, it is itself a mental illness. Such human behavior has its genesis from many sources but so much can be traced back to bad parenting. As I recently wrote, citizens with respect for other citizens and human beings in general were taught well by their parents. Perhaps, we should be looking far deeper into the human story than today’s conduct. Several of the serial killers had documented abusive parents; those killers learned their behavior from those dysfunctional parents. Racism, xenophobia, homophobia, et al, are taught in childhood by parents, by religion, by community influence. The same is true for disrespect. We need a societal triage process for identifying such abhorrent conduct as violent tantrums, bullying, and other indicators that can be seen in childhood, by schools, by daycare facilities, by retail stores, et al. We can see the signs, but we choose not to intervene. That attitude must change if we are to have any hope of overcoming the root cause(s) of violent crime like mass murder. As I recently wrote and confessed, I have been well trained in the use of firearms for killing, but I feel no urge to use firearms to resolve my grievances. Most American citizens are in that category. Do not punish me because we refuse to deal with bad parenting and aberrant behavior. If we are offended by mass murder with firearms, let us amend societal conduct to identify and intervene with the early signs. Jeffrey Daumer and Adam Lanza (et al) were visible to their communities, but we chose not to interpose the greater common good before they acted. I want balance. I am all in favor of confiscation of firearms from those who exhibit the tendencies; however, such laws can be and are easily abused by overzealous do-gooders. Balance requires safeguards to prevent such well-intentioned zealots from intruding on the rights of peaceful, law-abiding, respectful citizens. Balance!

 . . . Round three:

“I think you'd find that essentially no parents live up to your standards. After all, the parents were raised by parents who also had no training/background in those standards, and so on back to Adam. Also, study neurochemistry, neurobiology, and genetics. Those are other important factors that affect mental well-being.

“Nobody wants to punish people for owning firearms any more than they want to punish you for driving. The objective is safety, not self-righteousness. We'll never be safe if we wait to deal with first causes.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Well, that is a rather dire assessment. I am not quite so pessimistic. In contrast, I think most parents surpass my threshold of performance or tolerance. The segment of society who have the potential for mass murder or even criminal conduct is a tiny fraction of the whole. But no one is perfect, which is simply an aspirational ideal rather than an attainable objective. The vast majority of American citizens are respectful of other people.

Yes, the chain of ignorance is perpetuated and hard to break. However, as Henry Ford said, “If we continue to do what we’ve always done, we will continue to get what we’ve always gotten.” We should all strive to do better. Lord knows I tried, but I fell well short of the ideal. I still try even through our kids and some of the grandchildren are grown. All of our children and grandchildren are peaceful, productive, law-abiding, contributory citizens. I am proud of who they are.

To my knowledge, Nancy Lanza struggled to find professional assistance to help her troubled son. Society failed her. It is not clear whether Nancy was a dysfunctional or deficient parent that produced Adam’s mental illness. Again, to my knowledge, Adam’s mental illness was genetic with perhaps environmental contributions. Nancy did not have access to the necessary resources to help her son. Perhaps the resources in Connecticut did not exist. We all share that responsibility. It is we who must change, to be more engaged in our communities, in how our children are raised, act, and contribute.

There is no perfect solution, but we must make the effort. All I am asking for my support is a bona fide effort at a balanced approach. We can improve as we go. A lopsided or unilateral response is just not acceptable.

 . . . Round four:

“All of that discussion is geared to get around discussing simple, effective regulation of firearms. Any attempt to change parenting would take decades and entail massive violations of Constitutional rights to privacy, the sanctity of people's homes, and various other things. Even if it worked, in itself it wouldn't fully resolve the issue of homicide. Meanwhile, the tool that makes homicide so easy can be regulated and should be.”

 . . . my response to round five:

That seems a bit harsh, but nonetheless, I respectfully disagree. I am not trying to get around anything. I am only seeking balance.

What regulation do you propose?

 . . . Round six:

“We could follow motor vehicle-style regulations, with the exception of regulating ownership rather than usage. (Usage is harder to detect and more dangerous with firearms.) We should require registration and background checks with every transaction, not just for licensed dealers. Owners should be duly qualified and safety precautions in required for both owners and equipment. Also, allowing an unlicensed operator to use your equipment should carry a penalty.”

 . . . my response to round six:

I can support such registration, but I ask for what purpose? Who runs the background checks? How deep do those background checks go? How is rejection defined? Who determines rejection? What appeal process is provided?

I do not see how registration deals with mental illness.

 . . . Round seven:

“Dealing with mental illness is a separate issue that won't materially reduce homicide rates in itself if it ever happens. In the meantime, society can work out how to handle registrations and background checks.”

 . . . my response to round seven:

They are inextricably intertwined. I dare say, solving the mental illness identification, triage, treatment, and follow-up process is more likely to reduce firearm mass murder than registration of firearms. The risk of giving the government more authority to intrude upon our private lives and private choices is far greater than whatever benefit firearm registration might provide . . . and it’s not clear to me what the governmental purpose (objective) is with registration.

 . . . Round eight:

“You'd have to show me real numbers from reliable sources to support that. In any case, we can make more progress within a few years by limiting the easiest tools of homicide.”

 . . . my response to round eight:

Ah, yes, the chicken or egg conundrum. So, here we sit. I guess we must wait for one or more of the states to take on the role as the incubator of innovation and change.

 . . . Round nine:

“The mental health issue, as you present it, is a straw man. The level of expansion and innovation in that field that you seem to seek would take decades and would not, in itself, address firearm deaths effectively. Yes, it would catch some of the mass shooters, but they are a small minority of killers. Let's do something more realistic.”

 . . . my response to round nine:

Respectfully, I disagree. We must start somewhere. We are discussing the potential of supersedence of our collective constitutional rights by taking the easy path. I still seek balance. This shall have to be the last word for this edition. You are welcome to press on for the next edition.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)