Update from the Heartland
No.352
8.9.08 – 14.9.08
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
No.352
8.9.08 – 14.9.08
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
We remember our Day of Infamy seven years ago, as the War on Islamic Fascism continues. The presidential candidates put politics aside for a joint remembrance in New York City. Lest we ever forget . . .
The follow-up news items:
-- Two years ago, history recorded the arrest of a score plus of British citizens, accused of planning a massive bombing campaign against trans-Atlantic airliners, using liquid explosives [244]. This week, three of the eight conspirators, tried for terrorism crimes, were convicted of lesser crimes; four were found not guilty, and one had the charges dropped. A series of contrasting newspaper reports acknowledged this week’s event.
1. – “Three of Eight Men Found Guilty in ’06 Bomb Plot”
by Reuters
Published: September 8, 2008; Filed at 11:48 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-britain-plot.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
2. – “Police in crisis after jury rejects £10m terror case”
by Sean O’Neill, Security Editor
The Times [of London]
Published: September 9, 2008
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/public_law/article4710879.ece?&EMC-Bltn=PMVHI9
3. – “No One Convicted of Terror Plot to Bomb Planes”
by John F. Burns and Elaine Sciolino
New York Times
Published: September 8, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/world/europe/09london.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
4. – “Airliner bomb trial: Three British Muslims guilty of conspiracy to murder – Three British Muslims who were accused of plotting the world's biggest terrorist atrocity have been found guilty of conspiracy to murder.”
by Duncan Gardham and Gordon Rayner
The Telegraph [of London]
Last Updated: 12:53AM BST 09 Sep 2008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2706494/Airliner-bomb-trial-Three-British-Muslims-guilty-of-conspiracy-to-murder.html?DCMP=EMC-new_09092008
One sentence in report no.2 above represents a far more ominous reflection of our collective ability to execute the War on Islamic Fascism. O’Neill wrote, “The jury’s indecision in the face of a detailed Crown case raises questions about the public perception of the terror threat that could undermine government attempts to introduce further security legislation.” We have discussed that perception many times in this forum. From my humble perspective, a jury in England returned enemy warriors to the battlefield to look for other opportunities to kill innocent people. Sadly, the reality will suck down precious law enforcement and intelligence resources to keep track of them. Lastly, I ask you to take note of the titles of each article about the same event. Perspective!
-- Anarchistic activity outside the Republican National Convention (RNC) [350] drew some Press attention, but never reached the levels of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. I urge you to read the following essay for several reasons: 1.) to see the potential of what might have happened, and 2.) to learn of a success in combating domestic terrorism.
“The Lessons of St. Paul”
by Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
Published: September 10, 2008 1946 GMT
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/lessons_st_paul
The trial of the airline bombers (noted above) shocked the British government and certainly stirred the hornet’s nest. The five-month prosecution did not achieve the expected and what some believed inevitable result. Some are calling the case, Great Britain’s O.J. Simpson trial – the 1995 criminal version (since there are so many) – because of the jury’s conclusion in the face of monumental, definitive, factual evidence. We do not have access to the evidence presented or the body of intelligence collected against this network, except as reported in the Press. The Crown Prosecution Service has begun (what we Marines call) an After-Action assessment, and a fair amount of attention is being directed at the judge – The Honorable Mr. Justice Sir David Calvert-Smith, QC. As the British government analyzes the investigation and prosecution of these jihadistanis, we all need to pay attention for many reasons, not least of which is guidance necessary for future prosecutions. Like similar cases in the United States, this episode lays at the fringe of a misty boundary between justice and warfighting. The case also illuminated tension between the British and American governments. The catalytic event centered upon Rashid Rauf – a 25-year-old male with dual British-Pakistani citizenship and an alleged al-Qaeda operative – who was arrested on 9.August.2006, in Bhawalpur, Pakistan. The following day, fearing exposure of their investigation, British security services rounded up a couple of dozen individuals in the United Kingdom, on terrorism charges. Some public information suggests that Rauf’s arrest by Pakistani security services had been ‘encouraged,’ perhaps even forced, by American intelligence operatives and against the objection of British intelligence. Obviously, much of this aspect of events remains on the dark side beyond public scrutiny, but the conflict is certainly understandable and predictable. Let us assume the limited, foggy, Press rendition is precisely true and accurate. The Americans presumably wanted to neutralize a senior al-Qaeda operative and to interrogate Rauf for more intelligence to aid the warfighting task. The British had numerous citizens under surveillance in England who were plotting grievous attacks and wanted to ensure ironclad prosecution that would remove the homegrown jihadistanis permanently from public threat. If the assumption and hypothesis are correct, the case may well be the best example to date of the clash between war and justice. The outcome of the British jihadistani trial is certainly disappointing for a host of reasons; yet, the case will hopefully serve as a marker or progression toward dealing with future Islamic fascist terrorists caught in the law enforcement net, as opposed to being captured on the warfighting battlefield. As a side note rather than a postscript, Rauf escaped from his Pakistani guards and remains at large.
I do not usually become engrossed in judicial procedure – conclusions, yes, but not process. However, a judge’s ruling in San Diego caught my attention for several reasons. United States District Judge Roger T. Benitez, Southern District of California, wrote a 23-page decision denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss in Johnson v. Poway Unified School District [USDC CASD case no. 07cv783 BEN (LSP) (2008)]. Within the school district in San Diego County, Westview High School mathematics teacher Bradley Johnson filed suit claiming his constitutional rights had been violated. For 25 years, Johnson displayed a set of personal banners in his classroom:
“In God We Trust,”
“One Nation Under God,”
“God Bless America,”
“God Shed His Grace On Thee,” and
“All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator.”
On 23.January.2007, Westview Principal Dawn Kastner told Johnson that his classroom signs had to be removed since “his banners were impermissible because they conveyed a ‘Judeo-Christian’ viewpoint.” Judge Benitez noted, “The banners do not quote from the Holy Bible, or books of other particular religions such as the Jewish Torah, the Islamic Koran, the Mormon Book of Mormon, the Buddhist Diamond Sutra, or the Hindu Bhagavad-Gita.” Judge Benitez also observed that Principal Kastner allowed Buddhist, Islamic, and Tibetan religious viewpoints to be espoused and displayed. First, based on the Judge’s opinion regarding the motion to dismiss, I hope the superintendent of schools is smart enough read the handwriting, and he settles the case with an sincere apology to Bradley Johnson and an admonishment to Principal Kastner. Second, this foolish case serves as a brilliant display of the thin intellectual façade covering the silliness of political correctness. As much as I harp on the necessity for the separation between church and state, we can see in this case why many Christians look passed the long-held principle of American government to an attack on religion and specifically their religion, as illuminated in the Johnson case. Judge Benitez struck resonance with his observation. Bradley Johnson’s classroom banners did not come from the Bible or any other religious text; they came from American history. If this case does not proceed in court, I hope our friends in San Diego will let us know the final outcome.
The governmental economic action last week to rescue the mortgage giants from bankruptcy produced this exchange from a regular contributor to this forum, yet from a different network.
“Yes, the e_CON_omists have advised our president that the good thing to do is bailout the Mae & Mac.
“Let me get this right: Millions of unqualified (risky) debtors financed homes they used little or phony docs on. The homebuyers did not bother to forecast or factor that their mortgage payment would double in five years. Hundreds of thousands of realtors, homebuilders, mortgage brokers and lenders allowed greed to drive their values, principles, mission and P&Ls. So because of collective gross stupidity and misconduct, we who did not make the mess now are assigned the task of shoveling the mess.
“Some prognosticators are stating this will cost USA taxpayers at least $200 billion. Divide that among taxpayers, it is well above $1,000 per person.
“Our country's economy has been based on free-market dynamics. When the government is bailing out and nationalizing the two largest mortgage providers (already backed by GOV), it makes you wonder whether we are going old Soviet style right here at home.
“United Airlines had a big scare today. Someone (or a group?), leaked falsely, that United had declared bankruptcy (that would have been the 2nd time). It hit the 'net, and trading was shut down. I have a friend who is a captain for United. He has had to endure years of gross mismanagement from brown nosing appeasers to their own pockets and institutional stockholders, selling out future success for short-term performance (a set of metrics that don't measure employee morale or customer satisfaction). So my question to Mr. Bush is since so many employees jobs are on the line at United, can he arrange for a bailout of United too? Why not bailout the thousands of business owners who fail every year, some because of Wal-Mart and cozy deals made between politicians, transnational corporate chieftains, and the Chinese?
“While we are trying to install democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq, while our Great Republic is transforming select businesses into nationalized entities, why don't we reboot and get it right at home?
“It was most entertaining to watch CNBC business outlet this morning. They had many so-called analysts talking positive (I bet these guys/gals are like expert witnesses, they get paid to sing pretty songs) about the bailout of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. They were saying we have hit bottom, it is all getting better from here. They were telling folks to get back in the markets. They said this is good for America. They did not mention that you and I will have to fund the $200+ billion bailout, and that you and I had no vote in the matter.
“Speaking of mortgages, on real estate, CNN profiled a house in Stockton, California, it sold for $295,000 just 3 years ago. The owners lost it through foreclosure. It is now being offered for $29,000! The catch: thieves tore apart many of the walls, stole all the copper out of the home. The foreclosure rate in Stockton is up 500% from just last year. I'm sorry, the good times are here, let's party hard and chant for our sports team, because when in Rome, do what the Romans do.
“The presidential candidate that would get my attention would be the one with the slogan and campaign promise of: SINK or SWIM. If the government cannot regulate the lenders to the degree that billions were lent to those that should not have received loans, then let all of them fall, and let the dominos follow. That would be truly too laissez-faire and too capitalistic to allow to happen in America, land of irrational exuberance. Covering up incompetence via selective bailouts, is going to sink the country.”
. . . to which was followed:
A link to this article:
“The Greatest Bailout of All Time”
by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D.
moneyandmarkets.com
Posted: 25.August.2008
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/Issues.aspx?NewsletterEntryId=2125
and . . .
“If you want to see the graphics, you'll need to link over to the source URL I've provided. It would be most interesting (if it has not already been done), for media to ask Obama, McCain, Biden, and Palin, what their position is on the bailout.”
Being who I am, I had to add . . .
A few thoughts from my humble, lay perspective . . .
The collapse of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (like Bear Stearns) would be the early dominoes in a cascade. At an earlier time, I reluctantly supported the first corporate bailout (to my knowledge) – the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Act of 1979 [PL 96-185] – signed into law in the waning days of the Carter administration. I argued both ways during that time. We could debate, with today’s hindsight, whether that Federal action was a positive move. The latest, and I suspect not the last, bailout saves two, quasi-governmental, mortgage companies from insolvency. The reality in each case, including the earlier Bear Stearns deal, remains Federal intervention to avoid a crisis of confidence in the money markets and preserve necessary liquidity. I will argue that the current banking crisis originated in the early 90’s, after the Savings & Loan debacle, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and our selective ignorance of the explosion of Islamic fascism, led to what Alan Greenspan called ‘irrational exuberance,’ in the dot.com boom and concomitant housing bloom. People became convinced there was no limit. They could get not just something but gobs of money for nothing; they just had to jump into the rushing torrent . . . sign up to home loans for 110 to 125% of a fictitious, inflated, home values, or for ‘investment’ properties they could not support. Revenue minus expenses is a simple equation that has remained the same since our ancestors created money for trade. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, IndyMac, et al, are symptoms, not the disease. The root cause rests squarely with the individual citizens who signed those loan papers, thought they could get something for nothing, and truly believed they were immune to market forces. Allowing the mortgage giants to collapse would adversely affect several orders of magnitude more citizens, including those of us who did not allow our greed to color our rational decision-making. So, we can rail against the massive Federal bailout, or we can quietly thank our lucky stars the government did what had to be done. If we wish to cast blame, let us place it where it rightly belongs – at the root.
As always, “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
We received no comments or contributions from Update no.351.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
We remember our Day of Infamy seven years ago, as the War on Islamic Fascism continues. The presidential candidates put politics aside for a joint remembrance in New York City. Lest we ever forget . . .
The follow-up news items:
-- Two years ago, history recorded the arrest of a score plus of British citizens, accused of planning a massive bombing campaign against trans-Atlantic airliners, using liquid explosives [244]. This week, three of the eight conspirators, tried for terrorism crimes, were convicted of lesser crimes; four were found not guilty, and one had the charges dropped. A series of contrasting newspaper reports acknowledged this week’s event.
1. – “Three of Eight Men Found Guilty in ’06 Bomb Plot”
by Reuters
Published: September 8, 2008; Filed at 11:48 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-britain-plot.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
2. – “Police in crisis after jury rejects £10m terror case”
by Sean O’Neill, Security Editor
The Times [of London]
Published: September 9, 2008
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/public_law/article4710879.ece?&EMC-Bltn=PMVHI9
3. – “No One Convicted of Terror Plot to Bomb Planes”
by John F. Burns and Elaine Sciolino
New York Times
Published: September 8, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/world/europe/09london.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
4. – “Airliner bomb trial: Three British Muslims guilty of conspiracy to murder – Three British Muslims who were accused of plotting the world's biggest terrorist atrocity have been found guilty of conspiracy to murder.”
by Duncan Gardham and Gordon Rayner
The Telegraph [of London]
Last Updated: 12:53AM BST 09 Sep 2008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2706494/Airliner-bomb-trial-Three-British-Muslims-guilty-of-conspiracy-to-murder.html?DCMP=EMC-new_09092008
One sentence in report no.2 above represents a far more ominous reflection of our collective ability to execute the War on Islamic Fascism. O’Neill wrote, “The jury’s indecision in the face of a detailed Crown case raises questions about the public perception of the terror threat that could undermine government attempts to introduce further security legislation.” We have discussed that perception many times in this forum. From my humble perspective, a jury in England returned enemy warriors to the battlefield to look for other opportunities to kill innocent people. Sadly, the reality will suck down precious law enforcement and intelligence resources to keep track of them. Lastly, I ask you to take note of the titles of each article about the same event. Perspective!
-- Anarchistic activity outside the Republican National Convention (RNC) [350] drew some Press attention, but never reached the levels of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. I urge you to read the following essay for several reasons: 1.) to see the potential of what might have happened, and 2.) to learn of a success in combating domestic terrorism.
“The Lessons of St. Paul”
by Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
Published: September 10, 2008 1946 GMT
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/lessons_st_paul
The trial of the airline bombers (noted above) shocked the British government and certainly stirred the hornet’s nest. The five-month prosecution did not achieve the expected and what some believed inevitable result. Some are calling the case, Great Britain’s O.J. Simpson trial – the 1995 criminal version (since there are so many) – because of the jury’s conclusion in the face of monumental, definitive, factual evidence. We do not have access to the evidence presented or the body of intelligence collected against this network, except as reported in the Press. The Crown Prosecution Service has begun (what we Marines call) an After-Action assessment, and a fair amount of attention is being directed at the judge – The Honorable Mr. Justice Sir David Calvert-Smith, QC. As the British government analyzes the investigation and prosecution of these jihadistanis, we all need to pay attention for many reasons, not least of which is guidance necessary for future prosecutions. Like similar cases in the United States, this episode lays at the fringe of a misty boundary between justice and warfighting. The case also illuminated tension between the British and American governments. The catalytic event centered upon Rashid Rauf – a 25-year-old male with dual British-Pakistani citizenship and an alleged al-Qaeda operative – who was arrested on 9.August.2006, in Bhawalpur, Pakistan. The following day, fearing exposure of their investigation, British security services rounded up a couple of dozen individuals in the United Kingdom, on terrorism charges. Some public information suggests that Rauf’s arrest by Pakistani security services had been ‘encouraged,’ perhaps even forced, by American intelligence operatives and against the objection of British intelligence. Obviously, much of this aspect of events remains on the dark side beyond public scrutiny, but the conflict is certainly understandable and predictable. Let us assume the limited, foggy, Press rendition is precisely true and accurate. The Americans presumably wanted to neutralize a senior al-Qaeda operative and to interrogate Rauf for more intelligence to aid the warfighting task. The British had numerous citizens under surveillance in England who were plotting grievous attacks and wanted to ensure ironclad prosecution that would remove the homegrown jihadistanis permanently from public threat. If the assumption and hypothesis are correct, the case may well be the best example to date of the clash between war and justice. The outcome of the British jihadistani trial is certainly disappointing for a host of reasons; yet, the case will hopefully serve as a marker or progression toward dealing with future Islamic fascist terrorists caught in the law enforcement net, as opposed to being captured on the warfighting battlefield. As a side note rather than a postscript, Rauf escaped from his Pakistani guards and remains at large.
I do not usually become engrossed in judicial procedure – conclusions, yes, but not process. However, a judge’s ruling in San Diego caught my attention for several reasons. United States District Judge Roger T. Benitez, Southern District of California, wrote a 23-page decision denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss in Johnson v. Poway Unified School District [USDC CASD case no. 07cv783 BEN (LSP) (2008)]. Within the school district in San Diego County, Westview High School mathematics teacher Bradley Johnson filed suit claiming his constitutional rights had been violated. For 25 years, Johnson displayed a set of personal banners in his classroom:
“In God We Trust,”
“One Nation Under God,”
“God Bless America,”
“God Shed His Grace On Thee,” and
“All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator.”
On 23.January.2007, Westview Principal Dawn Kastner told Johnson that his classroom signs had to be removed since “his banners were impermissible because they conveyed a ‘Judeo-Christian’ viewpoint.” Judge Benitez noted, “The banners do not quote from the Holy Bible, or books of other particular religions such as the Jewish Torah, the Islamic Koran, the Mormon Book of Mormon, the Buddhist Diamond Sutra, or the Hindu Bhagavad-Gita.” Judge Benitez also observed that Principal Kastner allowed Buddhist, Islamic, and Tibetan religious viewpoints to be espoused and displayed. First, based on the Judge’s opinion regarding the motion to dismiss, I hope the superintendent of schools is smart enough read the handwriting, and he settles the case with an sincere apology to Bradley Johnson and an admonishment to Principal Kastner. Second, this foolish case serves as a brilliant display of the thin intellectual façade covering the silliness of political correctness. As much as I harp on the necessity for the separation between church and state, we can see in this case why many Christians look passed the long-held principle of American government to an attack on religion and specifically their religion, as illuminated in the Johnson case. Judge Benitez struck resonance with his observation. Bradley Johnson’s classroom banners did not come from the Bible or any other religious text; they came from American history. If this case does not proceed in court, I hope our friends in San Diego will let us know the final outcome.
The governmental economic action last week to rescue the mortgage giants from bankruptcy produced this exchange from a regular contributor to this forum, yet from a different network.
“Yes, the e_CON_omists have advised our president that the good thing to do is bailout the Mae & Mac.
“Let me get this right: Millions of unqualified (risky) debtors financed homes they used little or phony docs on. The homebuyers did not bother to forecast or factor that their mortgage payment would double in five years. Hundreds of thousands of realtors, homebuilders, mortgage brokers and lenders allowed greed to drive their values, principles, mission and P&Ls. So because of collective gross stupidity and misconduct, we who did not make the mess now are assigned the task of shoveling the mess.
“Some prognosticators are stating this will cost USA taxpayers at least $200 billion. Divide that among taxpayers, it is well above $1,000 per person.
“Our country's economy has been based on free-market dynamics. When the government is bailing out and nationalizing the two largest mortgage providers (already backed by GOV), it makes you wonder whether we are going old Soviet style right here at home.
“United Airlines had a big scare today. Someone (or a group?), leaked falsely, that United had declared bankruptcy (that would have been the 2nd time). It hit the 'net, and trading was shut down. I have a friend who is a captain for United. He has had to endure years of gross mismanagement from brown nosing appeasers to their own pockets and institutional stockholders, selling out future success for short-term performance (a set of metrics that don't measure employee morale or customer satisfaction). So my question to Mr. Bush is since so many employees jobs are on the line at United, can he arrange for a bailout of United too? Why not bailout the thousands of business owners who fail every year, some because of Wal-Mart and cozy deals made between politicians, transnational corporate chieftains, and the Chinese?
“While we are trying to install democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq, while our Great Republic is transforming select businesses into nationalized entities, why don't we reboot and get it right at home?
“It was most entertaining to watch CNBC business outlet this morning. They had many so-called analysts talking positive (I bet these guys/gals are like expert witnesses, they get paid to sing pretty songs) about the bailout of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. They were saying we have hit bottom, it is all getting better from here. They were telling folks to get back in the markets. They said this is good for America. They did not mention that you and I will have to fund the $200+ billion bailout, and that you and I had no vote in the matter.
“Speaking of mortgages, on real estate, CNN profiled a house in Stockton, California, it sold for $295,000 just 3 years ago. The owners lost it through foreclosure. It is now being offered for $29,000! The catch: thieves tore apart many of the walls, stole all the copper out of the home. The foreclosure rate in Stockton is up 500% from just last year. I'm sorry, the good times are here, let's party hard and chant for our sports team, because when in Rome, do what the Romans do.
“The presidential candidate that would get my attention would be the one with the slogan and campaign promise of: SINK or SWIM. If the government cannot regulate the lenders to the degree that billions were lent to those that should not have received loans, then let all of them fall, and let the dominos follow. That would be truly too laissez-faire and too capitalistic to allow to happen in America, land of irrational exuberance. Covering up incompetence via selective bailouts, is going to sink the country.”
. . . to which was followed:
A link to this article:
“The Greatest Bailout of All Time”
by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D.
moneyandmarkets.com
Posted: 25.August.2008
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/Issues.aspx?NewsletterEntryId=2125
and . . .
“If you want to see the graphics, you'll need to link over to the source URL I've provided. It would be most interesting (if it has not already been done), for media to ask Obama, McCain, Biden, and Palin, what their position is on the bailout.”
Being who I am, I had to add . . .
A few thoughts from my humble, lay perspective . . .
The collapse of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (like Bear Stearns) would be the early dominoes in a cascade. At an earlier time, I reluctantly supported the first corporate bailout (to my knowledge) – the Chrysler Corporation Loan Guarantee Act of 1979 [PL 96-185] – signed into law in the waning days of the Carter administration. I argued both ways during that time. We could debate, with today’s hindsight, whether that Federal action was a positive move. The latest, and I suspect not the last, bailout saves two, quasi-governmental, mortgage companies from insolvency. The reality in each case, including the earlier Bear Stearns deal, remains Federal intervention to avoid a crisis of confidence in the money markets and preserve necessary liquidity. I will argue that the current banking crisis originated in the early 90’s, after the Savings & Loan debacle, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and our selective ignorance of the explosion of Islamic fascism, led to what Alan Greenspan called ‘irrational exuberance,’ in the dot.com boom and concomitant housing bloom. People became convinced there was no limit. They could get not just something but gobs of money for nothing; they just had to jump into the rushing torrent . . . sign up to home loans for 110 to 125% of a fictitious, inflated, home values, or for ‘investment’ properties they could not support. Revenue minus expenses is a simple equation that has remained the same since our ancestors created money for trade. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, IndyMac, et al, are symptoms, not the disease. The root cause rests squarely with the individual citizens who signed those loan papers, thought they could get something for nothing, and truly believed they were immune to market forces. Allowing the mortgage giants to collapse would adversely affect several orders of magnitude more citizens, including those of us who did not allow our greed to color our rational decision-making. So, we can rail against the massive Federal bailout, or we can quietly thank our lucky stars the government did what had to be done. If we wish to cast blame, let us place it where it rightly belongs – at the root.
As always, “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
We received no comments or contributions from Update no.351.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment