Update no.498

Update from the Heartland

No.498

27.6.11 – 3.7.11

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

To all,
Happy Independence Day . . . to celebrate the efforts of our forefathers, as they began our separation from the British Crown. Just a mere 235 years ago, the glorious Declaration was signed and became the symbol of freedom for this Grand Republic. Jeanne will read the Declaration aloud this year, even though our children, grandchildren and friends will not be able to join us for the celebration. Happy Birthday Americans!

The follow-up news items:
-- On Monday, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for:
Muammar Muhammad Qaddafi [237 & sub],
his son Seif al-Islam Muammar Qaddafi [489] and
his brother-in-law and intelligence chief Abdullah al-Sanoussi.
The ICC charged them with crimes against humanity in the Libyan leader's four-month battle to cling to power. In response, Qaddafi threatens to attack Europe, as he did in the late 80’s . . . of course, why not. Then, the Associated Press reported that the African Union asked its member nations to ignore the warrant. I have mixed opinions on the ICC action, but hey . . . iacta alea est.
-- After Leon Panetta was confirmed as SecDef [497], General David Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate [vote: 94-to-0] to succeed Panetta as Director of Central Intelligence. Of course, Panetta’s predecessor offered some words of counsel.
“The Peril Of Deep Defense Cuts – Our country has taken an axe to the national security budget after every war of the 20th century. And every time we later regretted it.”
by Donald Rumsfeld
Wall Street Journal
Published: July 1, 2011; pg. 15
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304584004576416271311589238.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h

Abortion has long been a hot-button topic, especially here in Kansas, where state politics have been dominated by social conservatives for a long time. So it continues. The Kansas legislature passed and on Monday, 16 May 2011, Governor (former senator) Sam Brownback signed into law SB36 – an act concerning abortion; relating to licensure of abortion clinics, which became effective on 1.July.2011. Using the new law, the state government has refused to issue licenses to the three remaining clinics in the state without an inspection or even the courtesy of some other sliver of interaction.
“State closing clinics”
Editorial
Wichita Eagle
Posted: Wednesday, June 29, 2011
http://www.kansas.com/2011/06/29/1913066/state-closing-clinics.htmlWe know the state is well intentioned in their endeavor to banish and forbid the legal practice of abortion, and perfectly willing to condemn women to the back-alley butchers of many decades ago. I appreciate the frustration of lawmakers who seek to eradicate the medical procedure known as abortion, as well as their unwillingness to find a mutually supportive compromise solution. Instead, the power majority takes the bludgeon to an unfortunate minority. This episode is a perfect example of what the Founders / Framers sought to avoid – a willful majority denying rights to a hapless minority. And, they wonder why so many of us do not trust government. Licensing is an important regulatory function for government; however, when that process is used as a political tool to oppress a minority, it is as wrong and repulsive as the Jim Crow laws were.

As noted previously, I endeavor to remain clear of commenting on criminal activity for a host of reasons. Occasionally, I cannot resist. So it is in the sordid case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK). He stood accused of sexually assaulting a housekeeper in a New York City hotel. I imagine the police and prosecutors developed suspicions regarding the credibility of the “victim,” so much so they searched the jail recordings of her boyfriend, who is detained in Arizona for apparent immigration violation(s). Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your perspective, the “victim” is recorded telling her boyfriend, “Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.” There are no ways to cut this in a positive manner. I do not know what happened in that hotel room, but we do know DSK left a deposit. We do not know what happened surrounding that event. Based on the publicly available information, I do not think the housekeeper was an innocent victim. Conversely, regardless of the housekeeper’s motive(s), DSK hardly demonstrated a modicum of self-control, discretion or differentiation worthy of a corporate or national leader, but none of that is a crime.

In March 2003, FBI agents apprehended Abdullah al-Kidd (née Lavoni Kidd – a native-born, U.S. citizen, former University of Idaho football star, and Muslim convert – as he checked in for a flight to Saudi Arabia at Kennedy Airport, New York. The FBI executed a material-witness warrant issued in Boise, Idaho, for al-Kidd in the prosecution of Sami Omar al-Hussayen – a Saudi graduate student at the University of Idaho, accused of creating and running a website in support of terrorism. Al-Kidd remained in federal custody for 16 days under harsh conditions, subjected to intense interrogation, and then on supervised release until al-Hussayen's trial concluded 14 months later. Al-Kidd was never called as a witness. Al-Hussayen was tried, acquitted, and eventually deported to Saudi Arabia. In March 2005, al-Kidd filed what the lawyers call a Bivens action {see Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents [403 U.S. 388 (1971)] [417]}, to challenge the constitutionality of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft's alleged policy, allowing what the Court called “pretextual use of the material-witness statute” – i.e., using the statute to detain and interrogate a citizen who may be a suspect, but the government has insufficient evidence to hold under criminal charges. The law at issue was the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 [PL 98-473; 98 Stat. 1982], specifically, Title II, Chap. I, Sec. 203(a), §3144 (18 U.S.C. §3144). Ashcroft v. al-Kidd [564 U.S. ___ (2011); no. 10-98] reversed and remanded the appeals court’s finding that the Attorney General’s application of 18 U.S.C. §3144 in al-Kidd’s case was unconstitutional. Associate Justice Scalia wrote for the unanimous Court, reversing on narrow technical grounds in that the Attorney General enjoyed absolute immunity, which precluded further consideration of the more serious issue; thus, the Supremes dodged the constitutional question. Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor wrote concurring opinions to cast a dark cloud over the government’s conduct in the al-Kidd case – a sort of warning shot across the bow. Unfortunately, we do not have access to the government’s evidence against al-Kidd. However, from the reflection seen in the Court’s observations, it does not appear that the government acted honorably. Associate Justice Ginsburg said it best as she concluded, al Kidd’s “ordeal is a grim reminder of the need to install safeguards against disrespect for human dignity, constraints that will control officialdom even in perilous times.” I have consistently advocated for aggressive prosecution of the War on Islamic Fascism. I suspect Lavoni Kidd was not an innocent bystander, but that does not give the government the right to ignore the Constitution and abuse citizens in the name of national security. The last time I checked, the 4th Amendment supersedes common law, even if the Supremes choose to look the other way.

News from the economic front:
-- The International Monetary Fund executive board elected French finance minister Christine Madeleine Odette Lagarde, née Lallouette, to be managing director, over Mexican central bank governor, Agustín Guillermo Carstens, to replace disgraced Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
-- After weeks of civil unrest in Athens primarily, the Parliament of the Hellenes approved the unpopular but necessary €28B (US$40B), five-year austerity package of spending cuts and tax increases. The European Union and International Monetary Fund demanded the austerity measures pass before they approve the release of a €12B loan installment from last year's rescue package. I do not know the details or history of the Greek economic crisis; however, to my lay knowledge, I think the genesis rests in the banking fiasco that affects all of us, and to a large extent, the socialist mindset that has existed for decades in the country. The Greeks have lived outside their means for all those decades. That said, I suspect a substantial portion of the violence and unrest in Athens comes from anarchists simply using the situation to cause trouble, to instigate government reaction for their unilateral purposes. A friend sent this relevant article:
“Greece can share Byng’s fate”
by Martin Hutchinson
Asia Times
Published: June 29, 2011
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/MF29Dj01.html
For those who may not read the article or recognize the name . . . on 14.March.1757, the Royal Navy executed Admiral John Byng, RN, by firing squad on the deck of the captured French warship Monarque in Portsmouth Harbor – the first & only British admiral executed for cowardice in battle. He was blamed for the loss of the Battle of Minorca (20.May.1756) and the island. Point taken, I do believe.

The Blago Scandal [365]:
-- On Monday, a jury convicted former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich on 18 of 20 counts of trying to sell or trade President Barack Obama's old Senate seat and other corruption charges. The panel deliberated for nine days following the retrial of Blago. I expect he will be sentenced to an appropriate prison term, and he will undoubtedly appeal his conviction.

Comments and contributions from Update no.497:
Comment to the Blog:
“We agree on the futility, harm, and expense of the “war on drugs,” but disagree on the value of addiction treatment. For me, a history of success trumps any intellectual exercise. History shows that treatment has a much better record than imprisonment. While judicial orders do not work perfectly, experience shows they do work for some addicts. The history of Prohibition, Repeal, and the treatment of alcoholics illustrates the relative success of treatment.
“Beyond that specific issue, treatment in general has helped alcoholics and addicts well enough to deserve funding. One thing you might not know is that demand for treatment far exceeds funding. Picture a desperate addict finally willing to undergo treatment being told that no bed is available but that he should check back daily at 8 a.m. for a couple of weeks and maybe a bed will come open. Interventions on TV don’t work that way; the addict is rushed to treatment the day of the intervention because he or she can rarely remain committed for any length of time without actually receiving treatment. Treatment works well when the addict is ready, but the timing matters.
“Also, I always advocate for public education as part of any effort to reduce usage because of the long-term success it has demonstrated against tobacco. The ‘there’s nothing society can do about addiction’ argument opposes actual results for other addictive chemicals.”
My reply to the Blog:
Re: “war on drugs.” Respectfully, I do not believe we disagree on the value of treatment programs. I truly believe treatment programs are far more effective than incarceration for the substance abuser (addict). Nonetheless, based on my experience, knowledge and awareness, my point was, neither incarceration nor treatment have any hope of success if the individual himself has not convinced himself he must change. I think we are all keenly aware of the gross recidivism among users. Any program that does not recognize that fundamental reality is just more wasted money (public and private). The truly hard part in treating any addiction is knowing what is in a person’s soul, i.e., are they truly ready for sobriety? Redemption or saving a soul is in God’s domain, not ours; my concern is the elimination of the horrendous collateral damage often inflicted by an individual’s substance abuse.
Re: substance abuse treatment. Yes, absolutely; there are successful treatment programs, and plenty of citizens who have been helped successfully by treatment programs. If demand exceeds funding, I would be in favor of diverting funding from prosecution of consumers, directly to treatment services. However, I must question the bona fide demand. I would not include anyone who seeks treatment for other than personal, individual, private choice. I cannot support court ordered treatment, or family interventions, or angry parents, or treatment to avoid prosecution. I believe that only personal choice has any prayer of success. Freedom is about choices, not about being forced to do something you do not want to do.
Re: public education. I see this element in the context of informed consent, just as we did with alcohol, tobacco, and I believe we should do with pubescent sex education. The educating of children on the attractions and damage of substance abuse, as well as the illumination of public collateral damage, will go a long way to preparing children to avoid addiction. “Just say no” was a naïve, myopic and fanciful program as an avoidance mechanism.
. . . with follow-up comment:
“We cannot determine anyone's motivation with any reliability. Believing that people who find themselves in deep legal trouble are not ready for recovery has no more likelihood of being accurate than believing they are. We pretty much have to take their word for it. That method has serious and obvious flaws, but no better method is available. Thus, determining a ‘bona fide’ quality to demand for treatment will not become possible in the foreseeable future.
“The procedure I mentioned (‘call at 8 a.m. every day and maybe a bed will come open’) is what happened to two different people I know personally. It appears to be standard procedure here in Columbus, OH. Neither of these people was involved with either the court system or any other ‘intervention’ procedure.
“I'm not sure what you mean by ‘the context of informed consent.’ I will note that a genetic component has been clearly demonstrated in addiction, so "informed consent" may be more complex than it seems at first glance. All the same, programs focusing on education in various formats have apparently succeeded with tobacco and, to a degree, with alcohol. I do not have specific statistics at hand; they are available to anyone who cares to do the research. ‘Just Say No’ was not education but misguided oversimplification.”
. . . and my follow-up reply:
Re: motivation. Precisely! Like so many forcing functions, such as “deep legal trouble,” they are external inducements, not internal motivation. I think we will get closer to an individual’s genuine choice, which is precisely why I advocate for a more tolerant environment for the user. Although, I must admit that doing anything other than what we are doing is bound to be better.
I am sorry your acquaintances could not find help when they sought it. Hopefully, things will change.
Re: informed consent. Your point is well taken. Some addicts are predisposed, genetically predisposed, to the seduction of psychotropic substances. Others fall into addiction for a host of other reasons. My use of informed consent is similar to alcohol and tobacco . . . helping children and adults understand the “pro’s & con’s” of intoxication and perhaps appreciate the rules for safe use and no collateral damage / injury. That is what I mean by informed consent.

My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)