Update from the Heartland
No.316
24.12.07 – 30.12.07
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
No.316
24.12.07 – 30.12.07
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
Happy New Year to all. We can still pray for peace and goodwill toward all.
During this season of generosity, forgiveness, renewal and celebration, I am compelled by a sense of propriety, balance, and the spirit of the season to acknowledge and recognize the good parents doing a great job. The vast majority of our children grow up in loving, caring homes with engaged parents and become productive, contributory citizens, prepared to raise successive generations. Many of my words in this humble forum are focused on the tiny fraction of parents who fail their children and fail society, as they and their damaged progeny become the criminals we seek to neutralize. As with most if not all labels, we paint with very broad strokes and injure innocents caught in the swath, and yet, we must never forget our failures, as in the case of the pedophile killer or the addict female who birthed seven (7) children ranging in age from 8 months to 12 years with seven (7) different males [161]. Thus, despite my persistent theme and with a joyous, grateful and happy heart, I offer my praise and gratitude to all those good parents among us. Thank you very much; well done!
"Contest win unites Marine family for holiday"
by Ron Sylvester
Wichita Eagle
Published: Tuesday, 25 December, 2007; page 1B
The Wichita Eagle gave us a Christmas story of the Gallagher family -- Rhonda and John Gallagher, to be specific. For the first time in six years, the Gallagher's four grown sons returned home for Christmas, from across this Grand Republic and during wartime -- all four are U.S. Marines. God bless them all for their contributions to the defense of this Grand Republic.
Thursday evening, in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, in what appears to be a combined and coordinated, suicide attack, an assassin or assassins fired at least three rounds from an automatic pistol, and then detonated a powerful, explosive vest, mortally wounding former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, killing at least 22 innocent citizens, and wounding numerous others. Some reports suggest the attack was a sophisticated, rehearsed, combined operation indicative of an al-Qaeda event. In an earlier statement, Bhutto said some of the blame, if she was assassinated, would have to be levied at President Musharraf and the government for their failure to provide protection during her election campaign. Given today’s instant communications, pervasive Press coverage, and in the global War of Islamic Fascism of which Pakistan is an integral part, the government’s failure in this instance may well prove to be a mortal error. Successive governments in Pakistan have tried to walk a very fine and often blurry line between the diametrically opposed forces of moderate democracy and radical fundamentalist Islam. Pakistan has long been the site of covert operations against the radical elements; I’m afraid that Bhutto’s assassination may well boil the pot over and add Pakistan to the list of active, aggressive, international, combat operations in the complex and durable War on Islamic Fascism.
Benazir Bhutto’s testament designated her husband, Asif Ali Zadari, as her successor in deference to her son, Bilawal Bhutto, whom she wanted to finish his Oxford undergraduate education before entertaining political aspirations. Zadari indicated he did not want the job, suggested Bilawal should be the chosen successor, and then agreed to serve as co-chairman with Bilawal until the younger man completed his studies – an interesting twist in an already turbulent Pakistani political arena.
I try not to mention sports events as they get enough Press / Media play as it is. Yet, this week is another exception and a bit of an oddity. Saturday night, we watched a scrappy, feisty, determined New York Giants football team take it to the undefeated New England Patriots. The 16-0 regular season record sets the Patriots and several of their players in the record books of history; however, it is the passionate play of the Giants, when neither team had anything to gain and much to lose for the playoffs and the championship, that truly deserve praise and recognition. Superb! Praise be to the vanquished. Brilliant job, lads!
As is so often the case these days, my attention was drawn to House Resolution 847 (H.Res 847) -- a paucity of heraldry suggests a dubious purpose. Beyond the "whereas" tripe, H.Res 847 states:
Happy New Year to all. We can still pray for peace and goodwill toward all.
During this season of generosity, forgiveness, renewal and celebration, I am compelled by a sense of propriety, balance, and the spirit of the season to acknowledge and recognize the good parents doing a great job. The vast majority of our children grow up in loving, caring homes with engaged parents and become productive, contributory citizens, prepared to raise successive generations. Many of my words in this humble forum are focused on the tiny fraction of parents who fail their children and fail society, as they and their damaged progeny become the criminals we seek to neutralize. As with most if not all labels, we paint with very broad strokes and injure innocents caught in the swath, and yet, we must never forget our failures, as in the case of the pedophile killer or the addict female who birthed seven (7) children ranging in age from 8 months to 12 years with seven (7) different males [161]. Thus, despite my persistent theme and with a joyous, grateful and happy heart, I offer my praise and gratitude to all those good parents among us. Thank you very much; well done!
"Contest win unites Marine family for holiday"
by Ron Sylvester
Wichita Eagle
Published: Tuesday, 25 December, 2007; page 1B
The Wichita Eagle gave us a Christmas story of the Gallagher family -- Rhonda and John Gallagher, to be specific. For the first time in six years, the Gallagher's four grown sons returned home for Christmas, from across this Grand Republic and during wartime -- all four are U.S. Marines. God bless them all for their contributions to the defense of this Grand Republic.
Thursday evening, in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, in what appears to be a combined and coordinated, suicide attack, an assassin or assassins fired at least three rounds from an automatic pistol, and then detonated a powerful, explosive vest, mortally wounding former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, killing at least 22 innocent citizens, and wounding numerous others. Some reports suggest the attack was a sophisticated, rehearsed, combined operation indicative of an al-Qaeda event. In an earlier statement, Bhutto said some of the blame, if she was assassinated, would have to be levied at President Musharraf and the government for their failure to provide protection during her election campaign. Given today’s instant communications, pervasive Press coverage, and in the global War of Islamic Fascism of which Pakistan is an integral part, the government’s failure in this instance may well prove to be a mortal error. Successive governments in Pakistan have tried to walk a very fine and often blurry line between the diametrically opposed forces of moderate democracy and radical fundamentalist Islam. Pakistan has long been the site of covert operations against the radical elements; I’m afraid that Bhutto’s assassination may well boil the pot over and add Pakistan to the list of active, aggressive, international, combat operations in the complex and durable War on Islamic Fascism.
Benazir Bhutto’s testament designated her husband, Asif Ali Zadari, as her successor in deference to her son, Bilawal Bhutto, whom she wanted to finish his Oxford undergraduate education before entertaining political aspirations. Zadari indicated he did not want the job, suggested Bilawal should be the chosen successor, and then agreed to serve as co-chairman with Bilawal until the younger man completed his studies – an interesting twist in an already turbulent Pakistani political arena.
I try not to mention sports events as they get enough Press / Media play as it is. Yet, this week is another exception and a bit of an oddity. Saturday night, we watched a scrappy, feisty, determined New York Giants football team take it to the undefeated New England Patriots. The 16-0 regular season record sets the Patriots and several of their players in the record books of history; however, it is the passionate play of the Giants, when neither team had anything to gain and much to lose for the playoffs and the championship, that truly deserve praise and recognition. Superb! Praise be to the vanquished. Brilliant job, lads!
As is so often the case these days, my attention was drawn to House Resolution 847 (H.Res 847) -- a paucity of heraldry suggests a dubious purpose. Beyond the "whereas" tripe, H.Res 847 states:
"Resolved, That the House of Representatives --
"(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;
"(2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;
"(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;
"(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;
"(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and
"(6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world."
On 11.December.2007, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Res 847 [vote: 372-9-10-40]. Our local Representative Todd Tiahrt, co-sponsored and voted for the resolution -- duly noted. This resolution is a classic example of why simple majority rule is a potentially destructive force within a representative republic and contrary to the Founding Principles. The 372 elected representatives who voted for this resolution clearly do not understand the history of this Grand Republic, and are apparently far more comfortable playing to a parochial fraction of our citizenry. H.Res 847 accomplishes nothing other than state the obvious -- Christianity is the majority religion in the United States -- kinda like a resolution to proclaim that the Sun rises in the east. A perhaps intended upshot, although I am willing to be generous and say unintended consequence, is the implied statement that this is a Christian country, not a Christian theocracy (yet), and all other religions are of lesser significance, importance, relevance, or influence. I especially grimaced at Clause 5 of the resolution. And, I ask, where is the resolution rejecting bigotry "BY" Christians? Or . . . the rejection of bigotry against ANY religion? It is silly congressional actions like H.Res 847 that make me so bloody angry, that boil my outrage, and that propel me to speak out and act against those who seek to inject religion into government or vice versa. While H.Res 847 has no force of law, we must not ignore even these little penetrations of the necessary “wall of separation.”
In our continuing struggle to define public and private, proper and inappropriate, tolerable and unacceptable, a relevant challenge faced by airlines moving to provide in-flight, Internet access may help us shine a little light on the difficult question. To put a fine point on this issue, does a passenger on a scheduled airline flight have the right to view pornography or carry-on a telephone conversation using profanity? With selectable on-demand, movies available on some airlines, do we have a right to watch a movie that would be acceptable in your home but not in mine? Such conduct is certainly protected in privacy, even though some of us may disapprove of that behavior anywhere. Normally, some degree of privacy is expected even in the close quarters of an airline coach seat. If some commonly protected private behavior is not acceptable in a quasi-public venue like an airline cabin, how do we enforce such standards? To me, the answers are quite simple and ultimately boil down to respect for others. We do not need more indiscriminate laws against obscenity, profanity, pornography, and such. Those who press the limits of propriety in public conduct jeopardize freedom for all of us. Yet, it is the pressing of limits that nudges society toward more reasonable tolerance. Democracy simply cannot be a community of lowest common denominators, e.g., some among us believe any visible skin of a adult female is offensive. Do they have the right to demand all females be covered with loose, opaque, non-revealing clothing? Conversely, does a young, attractive, shapely woman have the right to wear a closer-to-her-crotch-than-her-knee mini-skirt and form-fitting, low-cut blouse in a confined public space? The difficulty with freedom is its very nature, thus the threshold tolerance becomes so difficult to monitor and defend. Laissez-faire or anarchistic tolerance can be far more destructive than fundamentalist strictures. The challenge to us remains and will persist in how we define acceptable public conduct without imposition upon any citizen’s private Pursuit of Happiness. The debate shall continue as inevitably it must.
On 2.November.2007, a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C Eagle fighter crashed; the pilot managed to eject safely. Subsequent public actions and available information indicate a primary structural failure. Some in the popular Press and most of the aviation professional Press opined on the significance of the event.
“On the Wings of Eagles, or Not -- After the F15's failures, does the U.S. need the best plane in the skies?”
Editorial
Wall Street Journal
Published: December 27, 2007; page A10
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110011043
The editorial concluded:
“We cannot predict what kind of adversaries the U.S. will face in the coming decades, but we do know that part of the responsibility of being the world's 'sole remaining superpower' is to be prepared for as many contingencies as possible. One prudent way of reducing the threat is to discourage potential adversaries from trying to match America's advantages in numbers and technology. Replacing our faltering Eagles with additional Raptors may be expensive, but allowing our neglect to be exploited by those who wish us harm would be ruinous.”
In the main, the opinion is spot on. And yet, I am reminded of similar circumstance in the 1960's. The B-52 strategic bomber had a service-threatening, wing life problem (cracking) that was eventually solved by a technical team of military and industry engineers, led by my uncle, MajGen (then Col) Warner E. Newby, USAF (Ret.). The B-52 is still operational today as a result. I have not yet found any precise details regarding the F-15 structural problem, but chances are it can be resolved. The real question will be whether the Air Force leadership wants to extend the F-15 service life. Regardless, the United States must maintain technical and physical air superiority as well as preserve our ability to project military power overseas, to protect our interests and our allies. That said, I must offer an additional ‘shame on you’ to the Air Force for their continued neglect of the most common and likely aerial mission – close air support (CAS) of engaged ground combat forces. They have several old and one new aircraft that possess the capability, but they certainly do not live CAS like Marine Air and some Naval Air assets do. Perhaps the F-15 technical question will encourage the Air Force to re-examine its mission and finally adjust to contemporary threat potentials.
Comments and contributions from Update no.315:
“Getting coverage of your winter storms here have you lost your power...which rhetorically is a most crass question to put to someone with no electrics!”
My reply:
Winter storms have indeed devastated parts of the Great Plains. Fortunately, in our community, the local power lines are underground and not susceptible to ice and other natural calamities. Some communities with conventional electricity distribution infrastructure have been with power for several weeks -- a genuine emergency especially in winter time. All is well for us.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
"(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;
"(2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;
"(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;
"(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;
"(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and
"(6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world."
On 11.December.2007, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Res 847 [vote: 372-9-10-40]. Our local Representative Todd Tiahrt, co-sponsored and voted for the resolution -- duly noted. This resolution is a classic example of why simple majority rule is a potentially destructive force within a representative republic and contrary to the Founding Principles. The 372 elected representatives who voted for this resolution clearly do not understand the history of this Grand Republic, and are apparently far more comfortable playing to a parochial fraction of our citizenry. H.Res 847 accomplishes nothing other than state the obvious -- Christianity is the majority religion in the United States -- kinda like a resolution to proclaim that the Sun rises in the east. A perhaps intended upshot, although I am willing to be generous and say unintended consequence, is the implied statement that this is a Christian country, not a Christian theocracy (yet), and all other religions are of lesser significance, importance, relevance, or influence. I especially grimaced at Clause 5 of the resolution. And, I ask, where is the resolution rejecting bigotry "BY" Christians? Or . . . the rejection of bigotry against ANY religion? It is silly congressional actions like H.Res 847 that make me so bloody angry, that boil my outrage, and that propel me to speak out and act against those who seek to inject religion into government or vice versa. While H.Res 847 has no force of law, we must not ignore even these little penetrations of the necessary “wall of separation.”
In our continuing struggle to define public and private, proper and inappropriate, tolerable and unacceptable, a relevant challenge faced by airlines moving to provide in-flight, Internet access may help us shine a little light on the difficult question. To put a fine point on this issue, does a passenger on a scheduled airline flight have the right to view pornography or carry-on a telephone conversation using profanity? With selectable on-demand, movies available on some airlines, do we have a right to watch a movie that would be acceptable in your home but not in mine? Such conduct is certainly protected in privacy, even though some of us may disapprove of that behavior anywhere. Normally, some degree of privacy is expected even in the close quarters of an airline coach seat. If some commonly protected private behavior is not acceptable in a quasi-public venue like an airline cabin, how do we enforce such standards? To me, the answers are quite simple and ultimately boil down to respect for others. We do not need more indiscriminate laws against obscenity, profanity, pornography, and such. Those who press the limits of propriety in public conduct jeopardize freedom for all of us. Yet, it is the pressing of limits that nudges society toward more reasonable tolerance. Democracy simply cannot be a community of lowest common denominators, e.g., some among us believe any visible skin of a adult female is offensive. Do they have the right to demand all females be covered with loose, opaque, non-revealing clothing? Conversely, does a young, attractive, shapely woman have the right to wear a closer-to-her-crotch-than-her-knee mini-skirt and form-fitting, low-cut blouse in a confined public space? The difficulty with freedom is its very nature, thus the threshold tolerance becomes so difficult to monitor and defend. Laissez-faire or anarchistic tolerance can be far more destructive than fundamentalist strictures. The challenge to us remains and will persist in how we define acceptable public conduct without imposition upon any citizen’s private Pursuit of Happiness. The debate shall continue as inevitably it must.
On 2.November.2007, a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C Eagle fighter crashed; the pilot managed to eject safely. Subsequent public actions and available information indicate a primary structural failure. Some in the popular Press and most of the aviation professional Press opined on the significance of the event.
“On the Wings of Eagles, or Not -- After the F15's failures, does the U.S. need the best plane in the skies?”
Editorial
Wall Street Journal
Published: December 27, 2007; page A10
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110011043
The editorial concluded:
“We cannot predict what kind of adversaries the U.S. will face in the coming decades, but we do know that part of the responsibility of being the world's 'sole remaining superpower' is to be prepared for as many contingencies as possible. One prudent way of reducing the threat is to discourage potential adversaries from trying to match America's advantages in numbers and technology. Replacing our faltering Eagles with additional Raptors may be expensive, but allowing our neglect to be exploited by those who wish us harm would be ruinous.”
In the main, the opinion is spot on. And yet, I am reminded of similar circumstance in the 1960's. The B-52 strategic bomber had a service-threatening, wing life problem (cracking) that was eventually solved by a technical team of military and industry engineers, led by my uncle, MajGen (then Col) Warner E. Newby, USAF (Ret.). The B-52 is still operational today as a result. I have not yet found any precise details regarding the F-15 structural problem, but chances are it can be resolved. The real question will be whether the Air Force leadership wants to extend the F-15 service life. Regardless, the United States must maintain technical and physical air superiority as well as preserve our ability to project military power overseas, to protect our interests and our allies. That said, I must offer an additional ‘shame on you’ to the Air Force for their continued neglect of the most common and likely aerial mission – close air support (CAS) of engaged ground combat forces. They have several old and one new aircraft that possess the capability, but they certainly do not live CAS like Marine Air and some Naval Air assets do. Perhaps the F-15 technical question will encourage the Air Force to re-examine its mission and finally adjust to contemporary threat potentials.
Comments and contributions from Update no.315:
“Getting coverage of your winter storms here have you lost your power...which rhetorically is a most crass question to put to someone with no electrics!”
My reply:
Winter storms have indeed devastated parts of the Great Plains. Fortunately, in our community, the local power lines are underground and not susceptible to ice and other natural calamities. Some communities with conventional electricity distribution infrastructure have been with power for several weeks -- a genuine emergency especially in winter time. All is well for us.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment