Update no.597

Update from the Heartland

No.597

20.5.13 – 26.5.13

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

To all,

The follow-up news items:

-- The Internal Revenue Service, Director of Exempt Organizations Lois G. Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination as she was called to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.  The unfolding multi-pronged investigation into the IRS’s targeting of conservative political groups [596] has not offered reassurance to citizens of this Grand Republic.  Lerner’s refusal to testify was not a good sign for the integrity and impartiality of our federal government.  However, I must say, it is her constitutional right, and she may be concerned about other threats in her life such as retribution from her colleagues within the government.  Some opposition politicians have called for a special prosecutor.  While the issue may not affect most of us directly, it should give us all a chill – when will the government decide to turn the powerful instruments of the State on us?

-- President Obama announced major changes in the War on Islamic Fascism [152 & sub], including new, more restrictive, guidelines for drone strikes, the transfer of battlefield combatant detainees from the Guantánamo facility to places unknown, and other measures to soften our public image.  If the President was intent upon these changes in this war, I would have preferred no public announcement that has the collateral notification for our enemies.  Regardless, we have what we have; we move on to do the best we can with the cards we are dealt.

What should have never happened as a local criminal investigation in Sebastian, Florida, just north of Vero Beach, has become a national cause du jour.  Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt, 18, a senior student at Sebastian River High School, was arrested on 16.February.2013 at 20:15 [R] EST, and was charged with two counts of “lewd and lascivious battery of a child 12 to 16 years of age” for her relationship with a 14-year-old, female, freshman student.  Both girls were members of the school’s girl’s basketball team.  In addition to being charged with a serious crime by the law, she was expelled from high school for reasons not yet clear, but surely not for being accused of sexual child abuse.

            I have not yet found the exact content of the accusations made against Kaitlyn that brought the criminal charges.  Various Press sources offered meager glimpses.  The best image I can derive from the smattering of news renditions indicate the younger girl’s parents, or at least her father, Jim Smith, objected to the relationship between the two girls and accused Kaitlyn of seducing and subverting their daughter into a life of homosexual debauchery.  They apparently attempted to warn Kaitlyn away from their daughter and sought remedy by the law as a choice of “last resort.” 

            Kaitlyn’s parents, Kelley Hunt Smith and Jim Hunt, are not pleased with what has happened to their daughter.  They have begun a campaign to defend their daughter and clear her name.

            This case is reminiscent of the Genarlow Wilson v. State of Georgia [SC GA S07A1606 (26.October.2007)] [307], although the Wilson case dealt with a minor female and adult male with a two-year age difference.  My opinion of such cases has not changed.

            In the light of such cases, we must ask ourselves what is the purpose of these laws and are they still relevant in contemporary society?  I understand the law.  There are examples where even the minimalist interpretation of the law is warranted, justified and appropriate; there are in fact adult sex predators who violate the person of minor children.  Is the Hunt case really one of those cases?  Although somewhat mitigated over time, these sex laws have been around for decades (a few centuries, if we expand the definition slightly).  In the United States, they appear to be a genesis back to the Victorian-Comstock morality era, where a willful minority (some might claim majority) codified Judeo-Christian sexual morality for all citizens, regardless of their religious, personal or private beliefs.  The central premise in this particular instance rests upon the fundamental principle of Judeo-Christian morality that sex is permissible only within a sanctioned marriage and for procreation only, with marriage being narrowly defined as adult, heterosexual, bilateral, monogamous-for-life and happily-ever-after.  Under that ethos, children (under 18yo) are incapable of making rational decisions regarding anything sexual.  The notion of a post-pubescent child being sexual is beyond comprehension or imagination.  From my perspective, the younger girl’s parents in the Hunt case failed to teach their child properly, and they found a prosecutor to do their job from them.  There is not one sliver, hint, suggestion or modicum of anything other than a purely consensual relationship between the two girls, and further I can find not one bit of evidence that their relationship was even sexual.  If there is any good to come from this disappointing case, beyond clearing Kaitlyn’s good name, perhaps it might be the reformation of these damnable sex laws to take a more enlightened approach to all matters sexual.  The only charges that should have come from this should be for the failure of the younger girl’s parents to properly teach and supervise their child.  We must stop using the law to mask bad parenting.  Destroying another girl’s life with antiquated laws is wrong, and those parents should be condemned for what they have done.  If I choose a strict, fundamentalist approach to sex and I choose to instill those beliefs in my children, my decision is between my children and me, and is not a matter of State interest.  I should not expect or attempt to impose my beliefs on anyone else and especially anyone else’s child.

An immigration reform bill has cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 13-5 – S.744, provisionally titled the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.  The language in the bill at this stage of the process appears to be fairly balanced and apparently has bipartisan although not unanimous support.  The bill has cleared only one critical Senate committee and still has a long way to complete the legislative process.  We need to keep an eye on this one as it evolves.

News from the economic front:

-- The Bank of Japan decided to hold its monetary policy steady with signs the nation’s economic conditions are improving.  The board feels the huge stimulus unveiled in April will be enough to spur price gains in the world’s third-largest economy.

-- Preliminary data from HSBC indicates the PRC’s Manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) fell to a seven-month low of 49.6 in May, signaling a contraction in activity. The gauge of nationwide manufacturing activity was down from a final reading of 50.4 in April.

Comments and contributions from Update no.595:

“Seeing the morning-after pill as a sane response to rape involves the fact that rape victims feel an irrational guilt about what happened. The morning-after pill gives them a way to prevent a horrendous potential consequence without having to tell what happened if they are not ready to do that. In some of the more backward states, even successful prosecution may not be sufficient to allow ending a pregnancy so that the morning-after pill is the only option.

“I hear repeatedly from certain quarters the notion that ‘they’ want to ‘take our guns away.’ Not so, except in the case of a felon who said that to me. He is already prohibited from owning firearms in this state.

“Detecting ‘bad men’ by personal judgment fails for the same reason as the statement that, ‘I cannot define pornography but I know it when I see it.’ Neither of those is a sound foundation for asserting one's personal taste and judgment as a matter of law. Society's decision to take harmful actions toward a person or group demands a very clear definition of the offense and a clear demonstration of harm to a person, property or institutions.”

My response:

           Yes, in many cases, not just rape, the morning-after pill may be the only choice to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.  Unfortunately, the morning-after pill, like all contraceptives including conventional birth control pills, condoms, IUDs, and such, gets caught up in the wider debate at the root of the abortion debate; fundamentalist Judeo-Christian morality clearly states that sex is only permitted within an adult, heterosexual, monogamous marriage, for procreation only.  Thus, anything that deviates from that narrow morality is wrong, sinful, and to be condemned as unnatural, immoral, perverted and otherwise abhorrent.  What’s worse, for decades, they enforced that morality with the law.

            Part of the root cause in the firearms debate is distrust of government.  Some folks trust government inherently; others do not.  Taken from a broad perspective, the genesis of this Grand Republic and the founding documents of our governance reflect that inherent distrust of government from the beginning.  I am not so sure all felons should be prohibited from possessing firearms, but I most assuredly support the strict prohibition for violent felons or those who have used firearms in committing a felonious crime.  So, there is no disagreement regarding violent felons.  The challenge for us is all the rest of us law-abiding, peaceful, respectful and productive citizens.

            Re: bad men.  You are, of course, spot on, which is my point precisely for the social constabulary . . . not law enforcement, not social worker, but in between.  Some folks believe the side of the road is their ashtray and rubbish bin.  If we accept that, then we have defined good and bad.  I do not want the State imposing itself in private matters, but littering or potentially violent anti-social behavior is in the public domain, and it is up to us to define acceptable.  One person should not and cannot be a matter of law.  But, I do believe most of us would agree with what is acceptable public conduct, thus what is good and bad.

Comments and contributions from Update no.596:

“Must confess, thought of you all this morning when the BBC ran the dreadful news item on the tornado damage to the school and homes in Oklahoma. Not certain of my geography here but you obviously suffered from the same system. I don't understand, if all have access to some form of 'storm shelter' why weren't all safely tucked away? Especially those school children.

“Or am I being too simplistic?

“Our sympathies go to all our American cousins who are suffering after this dreadful event.”

My reply:

            Yes, same weather system, but different event.  The problem in Moore was, many folks did not have structural shelters . . . apparently the ground is rocky or safe rooms are too expensive.  Unfortunately, school was still in session.  Fate is a hunter.  And so it goes on the Great Plains.

Comment to the Blog:

“As I write this on Tuesday, May 21, 2013, another day has passed since your posting. Since then, I am well aware of the extreme and horrendous EF-5 tornado at Moore, Oklahoma. I hope that all and sundry in your part of the country have or acquire strong shelter.

“I applaud your addition of e-books to your publication avenues. I have a Kindle Keyboard with a couple hundred books on it. I do almost all of my reading on that device because of its e-ink screen. I can only work or read on other screens for a limited time before eyestrain sets in, but I can read the e-ink screens as long as paper. In fact, I can go longer if the paper version has a poor font. I can change the e-ink font size to suit myself.

“The IRS bumble concerns me only in that a particular political viewpoint was apparently targeted. While much of the Tea Party outlook seems fear-based, irrational and repugnant to me, we must protect their right to free speech and a free press. None are free unless all are free. I share your dislike of tax breaks for political organizations in general, but with a stipulation that this nation would benefit from transparency in election financing generally.

“I have already sent a further response to our discussion of last week’s blog post. I will allow that one to stand on its own.”

My response to the Blog:

            Thank you for your kind words.  Yes, all members of the Wichita portion of our clan have good basements for shelter in such storms.  The Austin branch does not, but they have a good plan.

            Frankly, I am rather fascinated by the whole eBook phenomenon.  I am still learning.  For those of us not named Hillary or Bill, or Barack or Michelle, it offers a means to reach readers with our work.  I have high hopes.  With Jeanne’s encouragement and the prospects & potential of eBooks, I am eager to return to books and those characters.  I am impressed with the flexibility and utility of eBooks.

            This whole IRS kerfuffle is sad on many levels, not least of which is feeding the distrust of government held by too many in this Grand Republic.  If this becomes the catalysts for tax reform, then perhaps some genuine good can come from it.  We shall see.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“I'm glad you and yours are safe. Here at the northeastern edge of the tornado zone, most housing has basements. I know that does not prevail everywhere, and many apartment-dwellers have no safe place. Mobile home parks here rarely have any shelter from extreme weather.

“For ‘simple’ reading, I will be sticking to ebooks most of the time. In certain categories, such as instructional materials where graphics matter and I tend to go back and forth between sections or pages, paper remains my first choice, and other applications will probably call for printed books. In general, though, I favor the extreme portability (200 books in one hand) and lower prices of ebooks.

“The IRS mess continues. An IRS official has invoked the Fifth Amendment, which most readers will know protects citizens from self-incrimination. To me, that action states that criminal (incriminating) acts are involved. What concerns me even more is the seizure of Associated Press phone and other information. Freedom of the press is an absolute necessity to a free nation.

“The notion of tax reform still makes a great rallying cry, but real fairness and clarity are unlikely to occur so long as politicians depend on large campaign donors.”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            Yeah, the benefits far outweigh the detractors with eBooks over print books.  Interacting with tabular or graphical data is one example of when print is better, but most books I read don’t have that part.

            Invoking your 5th Amendment rights does not imply criminal conduct.  I would invoke my rights if I thought I was being used or set up as a scapegoat.  The 5th Amendment, as with other amendments, are to protect citizens against the power of the State.

            I certainly share your apprehension regarding the chilling effect on freedom of the Press with respect to the AP phone records.

            Yes, there are many obstacles to meaningful tax reform.  Hidden campaign donations are one of many of those obstacles.  Illuminating abuse is at least one stimulant.  So much of tax law is just wrong.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.596

Update from the Heartland

No.596

13.5.13 – 19.5.13

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

To all,

For those who may be concerned, all family members are accounted for and well.  We had several strong tornados pass through Wichita Sunday afternoon.  There are some reports of damage, but no injuries reported, as yet.  The cell that came the closest literally blew up in 30 minutes to the southwest of Wichita and took another hour pass us.  The weather occupies the broadcasting, so damage reports will probably not come until Monday.  The warning systems, Internet radar images, and local television coverage gave us ample time and fairly precise location information.  It was a close call, but close only counts in horseshoes.  Fortunately, the storms passed early enough for us to get everyone out of their basements and have a family gathering.  Jeanne did a magnificent job with dinner – a great conclusion to a tumultuous afternoon.

You may have noticed, the Updates have been a little thin lately.  A good chunk of my available capacity has been diverted to working with the publisher of my books – Saint Gaudens Press – to prepare and release the Electronic Book (eBook) versions.  The Anod series is currently on-line and the others will be accessible on-line shortly.  They are or will be obtainable from all delivery systems, so your choice entirely.  Saint Gaudens Press has also decided to publish my To So Few series of historical novels – the first book, To So Few – In the Beginning, should be released later this summer.  As retirement approaches, I am eagerly looking forward to writing full-time and returning to Anod and Brian Drummond in the not too distant future.  Thank you for your patience, understanding and support.

            If you have not yet made the jump to eBooks, I highly recommend the system and process.  I am currently reading The Last Lion – Winston Spencer Churchill – Defender of the Realm, 1940-1965 by William Manchester & Paul Reid – the third volume of Manchester’s book about the man who mobilized the English language and took it into battle.  The third and final volume is well worth the wait.  Manchester was unable to finish is primus opus before his passing.  The family selected Paul Reid to use the completed portion of Manchester’s draft manuscript, and his notes and research to finish the project.  Little, Brown and Company published and released the book in November 2012.

            The flexibility and interactive features of eBooks truly enhance the reading and learning experience more than I ever imagined.  For those who may be interested, I use an Apple iPad as my reader and the only thing it does not do is provide the smell of the ink and paper.  So, there you have it; now, you know.

This whole IRS kerfuffle stimulates all sorts of emotions – anger, frustration, rage, annoyance, understanding and curiosity – and even a dollop of I-told-you-so.  On one hand, the IRS has a responsibility to investigate all applications for 26 USC §501(c) non-profit organization, tax-exempt status.  In that context, they must understand the nature and context of the organization’s business.  This instance would not be the first time one group or another fraudulently claimed non-profit status to hide from the tax collector.  Frankly, I am suspicious of political groups – conservative, liberal or otherwise.  The problem here, it seems, rests on the zealotry of the agents in prosecuting their responsibilities.  The notion of the IRS singling out political organizations for special scrutiny and using the powerful instruments of State to pry into the internal affairs of any organization whose politics the government does not care for triggers off all sorts of alarm bells, warning klaxons, and outright indignation.  On the flip side of this coin, these governmental shenanigans are not new or unique to this administration.  Tricky Dick Nixon and his cronies are now infamous for their abuse of power and abuse of the IRS.  This is precisely what scares the bloody hell out of good citizens – the thought of some government bureaucrat rummaging through our lives and private affairs.  Intellectually, I would prefer to exclude all political groups from tax-exemption; yet, the thought of the taxman auditing political groups is also a rather disconcerting notion.  Then, we add the profound ramification of Citizens United v. FEC [558 U.S. 310 (2010); 21.January.2010]  [424] and the potential for abuse and vast amounts of foreign money being laundered through political organizations staggers the imagination.  Nonetheless, at the end of the day, any governmental system including tax collection must be run by flawed human beings who sometimes make dreadful mistakes.  We must prosecute those who offended the public trust.

Comments and contributions from Update no.595:

Comment to the Blog:

“I heartily agree with Judge Korman in the Tummino v. Hamburg (“morning-after pill”) case. In particular, I agree that the disputed ruling was ‘arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.’ This particular piece of political nonsense went on for 12 years and therefore does not excuse either the Bush (43) or the Obama administrations. I see no point in giving parents control of that situation either. Too many parents are unreasonable and will do great damage to their children’s futures by denying them this opportunity to take responsibility for their actions. After all, how do girls get into situations where they need a morning-after option? Not through responsible parenting. That factor also applies to (conservative) Judeo-Christian morality. With either of those approaches, the morning-after option specifically only applies after the approach touted has already failed.

“Small investors are borrowing against their portfolios again? How quickly they forget. Do these people really deserve to be protected?

“You and others continue to talk about firearms (not “guns” please; three of my brothers served in the US Army) bans when no firearm ban has been proposed. I will not accept a slippery-slope approach. That is pure fear-mongering.

“Your other commenter gave a clear discussion of the differences between pressure cookers and firearms. That also applies to shoe bombs, explosive underwear, etc. If we ban everything that has ever been or clearly could be used in a bomb, we ban pretty much everything. Bare hands have been used to kill people. Ban those?

“Incidentally, your notion that there are “bad men” who can somehow be prevented from using firearms that are readily available to everyone else lacks support, beginning with a very clear definition of “bad men” that allows for their detection by available means without infringing on everyone else’s rights. In the real world, families and friends will not see their brothers, sons, or others they care about as “bad men.” In the particular case of the Boston Marathon bombers, too many people are potentially suspicious from the viewpoint of the sanity-challenged people in the intelligence community to allow for close examination of each of them. The other mass killers have not had political connections in most cases. Killers in general are typically neither political nor involved with the mental-health treatment system.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: morning after pill.  We cannot have it both ways.  Either parents are responsible and accountable for the conduct of their minor children, or they are not – therein lies my conflicting views on this issue.  Of course, this topic gets us into childhood sex education and other hypersensitive subjects.  As I wrote, I agreed with Judge Korman’s decision for the reasons he clearly established.  However, while the decision follows the law, it does not recognize or acknowledge the parental accountability factor.

            Re: investor borrowing.  Indeed, how quickly we forget – irrational exuberance that threatens another crash.  They deserve no protection, and insurance against that risk should be so bloody expensive they cannot ignore the risk.

            Re: firearms.  Ah, yes, the DI’s famous admonition – “This is my rifle. This is my gun.”  LOL  Our penchant for prohibitions are all too familiar.  One group uses the law to impose their beliefs, their values, on everyone else.  That is not freedom, no matter whose beliefs are being imposed.

            Re: pressure cookers.  My sarcasm did not translate well, apparently.  We cannot ban tools, no more than we can ban ideas.  Free is free, or it is not.

            Re: “bad men.”  The criterion is actually quite simple – respect.  If each of us respects the space, person and property of all other citizens, then there will be no bad men.  Littering may not be a sign of a serial killer, but it is the same disrespect for others.  Bullies in the schoolyard disrespect others.  There are signs.  Each of us can look for and illuminate those signs.  It is in minds of bad men that these crimes germinate and transform into action.  You are quite right; mass or serial killers rarely have a political agenda; they are motivated only by the killing – the ultimate disrespect for a human being.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“I will freely admit to having little interest in either law or ideals with regard to the morning-after pill. To me, it simply gives women and girls a chance to take responsibility for their choice. We can attempt to hold parents responsible for teens' (and sometimes pre-teens') choice but if we do that we will have still more unwanted children of incapable parents. That also gives them a sane response to rape and coercive situations. I would like to prevent damage to the mothers and the children in all of these situations. As I pointed out before, by the time the need for a morning-after pill arises the parenting has already failed.

“‘Our penchant for prohibitions’ is indeed familiar, but all the same no gun ban is under consideration.

“You're right: I don't understand sarcasm much of the time. Sarcasm, according to experts, is a difficult tool to use well because so many of us share that particular trait and even those who do understand have widely varying responses to it.

“Your criterion for "bad men" does not translate to action.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

Calvin,

            Yes, I imagine a consequence of holding parents accountable may be more unwanted children.  In those cases, the States should take action to protect the children and prevent the negligent parents from having more children.  We must start somewhere.

            Re: “That also gives them a sane response to rape and coercive situations.”  I do not understand this sentence.  Sorry.

            Re: failed parenting.  Spot on!  We should not be banning things to assuage bad parenting.  Using the law to compensate for inadequate parenting is not the way to raise responsible future parents.  This is precisely why we must hold parents accountable.

            The current congressional efforts to prohibit assault weapons has stalled, so yes, there is no firearms ban currently under consideration.  Perhaps, now, we can move to working on the root causes rather than the tools.

            Respectfully, I believe my definition of bad men does work.  Look around.  Watch people.  You will see disrespect in some.  When we care enough about our communities, we will encourage respect and punish disrespect. 

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.595

Update from the Heartland

No.595

6.5.13 – 12.5.13

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

To all,

With all the Press fascination and consumption surrounding the Boston bombing and aftermath, I would not be surprised if most folks missed the announcement by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that they approved the lowering of the age for the over-the-counter sale of the Plan B One-Step (levonorgestrel) contraceptive to 15-years-of-age, from 17-years-of-age.  In fact, I would probably have paid-no-never-mind to the announcement, either, if it was not for my reading of a recent federal court judgment that sparked my curiosity.

            Five weeks ago, Judge Edward R. Korman, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, issued his ruling in the case of Tummino v. Hamburg [USDC NY ED no. 12-cv-763 (ERK)(VVP) (2013)].  He overruled the FDA and ordered approval of Plan B for females of any age.  The ruling was controversial enough, but it was the judge’s indignation regarding the actions of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) that made this decision noteworthy. On 7.December.2011, Secretary Sebelius issued a memorandum to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, countermanding the FDA’s approval of Plan B for over-the-counter distribution – an unprecedented intervention by the Secretary of HHS.  Judge Korman saw the Sebelius memorandum for what it was, a “politically motivated, scientifically unjustified, and contrary to agency precedent,” and declared the HHS order “arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.”  Judge Korman railed against the travesty of 12 years of legal wrangling, subterfuge, obfuscation and outright delay for purely political reasons. 

            When I stand back from this issue, I cannot ignore the intellectual conflict.  Why is the government injecting itself into what should have been a simple decision?  Is this drug safe for its intended usage?  The application to children under 18-years-old (as long as the age of legal majority remains at 18 years) should be a private, parental matter, not a function of the State.  Yet, with so many parents abdicating to the State and politicians seeking to placate the religious-right, the judicial intervention in Tummino is understandable.

            I think we can all appreciate our social heritage whether we agree or accept that history.  The social conservatives among us believe to their core that sexual activity should (must) be confined to adult (>18yo), heterosexual, monogamous-for-life marriage; and, in some beliefs, for procreation only, i.e., use of contraceptive medicines, materials or practices are strictly forbidden.  This is the Judeo-Christian morality regarding private conduct that has been codified in our laws and enforced as the laws can be applied and prosecuted; thus, the prohibitions of prostitution, abortion, contraception, sodomy (intercourse other than vaginal), childhood sex education, ad infinitum.  Freedom means each of us can believe and live as we wish, as long as we cause no injury to other people or property.  At the end of the day, the State has no place in private matters.  Lastly, I prefer knowledge over ignorance.  I appreciate Judge Korman’s frustration, and I think it regrettable that a federal judge had to get involved, but ultimately, I agree with his decision.  The need for or use of Plan B by minor children is entirely a parental matter.  Either parents are accountable for the conduct of their children, or they are not.

News from the economic front:

-- The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has cut its benchmark cash rate by 0.25% to 2.75% – a record low.  The RBA sees a persistent strength of the Australian dollar and reduced demand for credit, as it renews their attempt to boost activity outside of the resources sector and soften the impact of a strong domestic currency on trade-exposed industries.

-- The People’s Republic of China (PRC) had a positive trade differential of US$18.2B in April, rebounding from a slight deficit in March.  Exports increased 14.7%, while imports rose 16.8%.

-- The Wall Street Journal sent out a little News Alert that said, “The nation’s biggest banks are going on the offensive to fend off growing efforts in Washington to rein them in.  The banks have hired longtime, influential Washington hands to deflect regulatory and political pressure to strengthen their finances and to sell assets.”  This is precisely why we must press our congressional representatives for banking reform that is long overdue.  How many more clues do we need beyond “Too Big To Fail,” the LIBOR Debacle, the banking crisis of 2008, et cetera ad infinitum ad nauseum?

-- The Wall Street Journal also reported that small investors are borrowing against their portfolios at an increasing rate, reaching levels of debt not seen since the financial crisis, as a combination of rising stock values and rock-bottom interest rates.  Now this is a really scary little piece of information.  I have no idea whether it is true, but the Wall Street Journal is usually a reliable news source.  If true, we have a growing number of Americans who are borrowing money to gamble against an indefinable risk.

-- The Federal Reserve has indicated they plan to reduce their unprecedented US$85B per month bond-buying program in careful and potentially halting steps, varying their purchases as their confidence about the job market and inflation evolves. The timing on when to start is still being debated.

Comments and contributions from Update no.594:

“On the 747 crash, most experts have opined on the air that was internal cargo shifting- like you said. The plane, among other things, was carrying five MRAPs, each weighing 14+ tons.  One aviation expert noted the plane's gear was still down, which indicated to him that something had gone wrong very early in the take-off.  The pilots' attention was diverted from the normal procedure - to him, the wheels should have been up.

“Attached is a video of a Vietnam era crash of a C-2 COD from the RANGER.  It was in late 1970 and off Vietnam.  The plane was taking a jet engine/large engine part to the PI for intermediate-level maintenance.  The engine or large engine part was packed inside a packing box which was secured to the deck. The problem was that the engine/engine part was not adequately secured inside the box.  On the launch, the engine shot out of the back of the box-killing two crew standing in the aft of the plane.  You can see the C-2 wobble from side to side as it climbs steeply.  About 7 were lost.

URL:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlDmMwI9cik

My reply:

Jan,

            I noticed the gear as well – an indicator of how busy the crew was, trying to recover.  I suspect the load shift occurred at or near rotation, or perhaps second segment given what was presumably a tactical takeoff.  If it occurred prior to VR, the crew should have had indications something was wrong and been able to abort the takeoff.

            I had not seen the C-2 accident before.  Inertia and momentum are powerful forces.  Thx for the clip.

Another contribution:

“Why ban guns, but not pressure cookers?

“Because it takes an enormous amount of extra effort, additional hazardous materials and skill to make a pressure cooker deadly, whereas a gun is deadly as purchased. Also, the primary purpose of pressure cookers is to cook food, the primary purpose of guns is to shoot people.  The pressure cooker is not the instrumentality of death, the explosives are and those explosives are restricted by law, more so than guns are. If you have enough high explosive you could make a trash can, a soup pot, a water bottle or virtually any container a deadly bomb vessel. Whoever decided the physics of a pressure cooker made it an enhanced explosive device did not study their physics well.  While a pressure cooker does require a certain level of internal pressure to explode, delaying the explosion until the internal pressure is high does not enhance the explosion, it contains it and keeps the explosive force from being omni-directional. Lives and limbs were probably saved by the pressure cooker being the bomb container. Instead of directing the shrapnel in all directions through the crowd, the pressure cooker shape limited some level of side explosion and used much of the bomb's energy to propel the pressure cooker lid high into the air and two buildings over to the rooftop of the neighboring building where it was found. The husk of the pressure cooker bodies were found semi-intact, so they did not add to the shrapnel effect appreciably. A heavy glass bottle or a earthenware "moonshine" jug would have been much better bomb containers than a pressure cooker. Also, the fireworks they used for the Boston explosive mix was very primitive (and low yield) and no justification for further limitations on fireworks, other than the existing safety issue with fireworks. It is a well-known fact that a trip to buy two everyday items at a garden supply store and a camping equipment store can produce a much more efficient and deadly explosive than the fireworks powder used in Boston. But, I bet the manufacturers like Vigoro and Coleman are not quaking in their boots waiting for their products to be restricted.”

My response:

            Thank you for articulating the differences between a gun and a pressure cooker bomb; no argument.  Nonetheless, there are also similarities.  They are both instruments (like many others) used by bad men and evil do’ers to cause injury to persons and property.  One may be more convenient or readily usable; however, they are still the same in this context.  The root cause of these tragic events remains within the demented and disturbed brains of bad men, not the instruments they choose to do their dastardly deeds.

            There were clues – signs – especially with the older brother, and actually even with the younger brother.  Three young men are in serious trouble today because theychose friendship over citizenship.  We even had specific notice from the FSB.  Yet, our threshold of awareness or tolerance was apparently set a little too high in this instance.  We must find the will to focus on the root cause(s), to engage the community to look for the signs, and we need a domestic intelligence apparatus with appropriate safeguards to filter out the chaff.  Law enforcement cannot, and I will argue should not, try to do it all, and government can never do it all without the support of a vigilant, engaged and determined citizenry.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Once again we seem to be in synch on this issue. As to the threshold of awareness issue, I think political correctness will continue to obfuscate a realistic level of intelligence gathering. And, I think America's threshold of awareness for our own domestic mentally ill who lead, repeatedly, to mass killings is as significant a problem as our view of political terrorists.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Spot on, brother.  Freedom entails certain risks, and as such, there will occasionally be those individuals who pass the filters as in the case of the Tsarnaev brothers – a regrettable price of freedom.  Our best protection is the vigilance of every citizen.

Cheers,

Cap

Comment to the Blog:

“The reasons pressure cookers are not regulated as firearms may eventually be regulated are that firearms serve the primary purpose of killing people and because firearms do that with ease of operation undreamed of in other weapons. Yes, the choice of tools does count.

“It seems the Congress can actually pass laws efficiently when their own interests are at stake. In one-way or another, allowing Congressional staffers and other senior government officials to abuse insider information will benefit members of Congress financially.

“We have discussed earmarks and other pork-barrel spending at some length, but I still find it hypocritical when those claiming patriotism overrule the military leadership in order to serve their campaign contributors and/or obtain votes by bringing a few jobs to their districts.

“Various leaders have begun to stand against austerity, which is the idea that we can bring about growth by cutting back. That does not work for business either. The notion comes from a deliberate distortion of Adam Smith’s economic ideas, which were specifically geared to economies not including corporations, as we know them. Other economic news continues to confuse everyone, probably including the experts who make and present such news.

“I do not see improvised explosive devices (IEDs) such as the pressure cooker bomb as living up to the label of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ (WMDs). How about if we make a simple distinction where a WMD must be capable of killing an arbitrary number of people (say, 1000 or more) in one instance of its use?

“Speaking of definitions, can you define the ‘War on Islamo-Fascist Terrorists’ or whatever we call it in such a way that (a) the enemy force is clearly defined and (b) an observer will know when the ‘war’ has been won or lost? Unless and until that definition comes to me, I will treat the war as an excuse for manufacturing war goods and taking away Americans’ Constitutional protections.

“What is the DHS agency referred to in the comments from the prior posting?

“I still contend that aside from the many moral/ethical arguments about ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ (a.k.a. EIT or torture), the ultimate point against them is the simple fact that they produce poor-quality information. That is a known, well-studied result, and it pretty much invalidates the reasons given for using EIT.

“You state that the Boston bombers acted ‘on behalf of an enemy of the State, i.e., Islamo-Fascism.’ You are on thin ice, Cap. ‘Islamo-Facism’ is a concept, not an organization. The bombers’ apparent motive is Chechen nationalism, and from all I’ve heard they were not in touch with any specific organization and thus not representing anything but their own views. Let us prosecute our criminals, including the Boston bombers and those responsible for the West, Texas, fertilizer plant.

“The discussion of a 5-year-old boy killing his sister reinforces the ‘ease of operation’ argument above. I’ll say it again; the choice of tools does indeed matter.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: pressure cooker vs. gun.  As with most things in life, it is all about attitude.  If we want to see the negative in anyone or anything, we can always find them.  In the flying biz, we always say any pilot worth his salt can ground an airplane anytime he does not want to fly.  There are negatives with guns without question or doubt.  It’s all about perspective and perception.

            Re: Congress.  Spot on, brother!

            Re: pork-barrel spending.  Again, spot on!  Spending is spending regardless of object.  In troubled times, we must be extra strict on squashing wasteful spending.

            Re: austerity.  The opposite of austerity is more spending.  If the government spends too much and cannot borrow more, then they print more money (well those nations that can).  When government’s print more money, it inevitably causes inflation.  Unfortunately, human inclination is to spend excess revenue.  In good times, government’s tend to spend more, which conditions citizens to that spending.  Then, when times turn bad, there is inherent resistance to cutting spending that should not have been going on in the first place.  I do not think, in the light of all the earmarks, pork-barrel spending, and other unnecessary spending, we are not in balance, and we have not been in balance for decades.  Too much austerity is just as damaging as too much spending; there must be balance.

            Re: WMD.  If we wish to define WMD as causing 1,000 deaths or casualties per event, I am good with that.  The definition in common use today has no threshold – only intention and potential.

            Re: War on Islamic Fascism.  We have been around this loop many times.  If it is not a war, what is it?  I do not believe the present war is an excuse for anything.  I also disagree with Smedley Butler, despite his prominence as a Marine.

            I do not know what specific agency the contributor was referring to in last week’s comments.  My assumption was ATFE = Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; but, they are under Justice rather than DHS, and used to be under Treasury.

            We will continue to argue and disagree on the product of EIT.  Interrogations of any form, by any means, are very rarely used as singular rationale; they are always suspect.  I think the movie “Zero Dark Thirty” did a reasonable job of portraying the use of EIT as well as the complexity of placing any information obtained by interrogation into a proper context.

            Whoa dawgy.  I believe I have been very careful to say that they “may have” acted on behalf of Islamo-Fascism, but there was insufficient evidence so far available to establish that motive beyond a reasonable doubt.  If they did act on Chechen nationalistic interests, then I would put their actions in the category of an act of war.  The available evidence supports your position – actually our position; my current impression: Tamerlan was a disgruntled young man, who was rejected for naturalization due to his own actions, and sought a reason to lash out, make a statement, and unfortunately sucked his younger brother into his crime.  If that state continues to hold up, then yes, they are criminals just as McVeigh was, and Dzhokhar should be tried and punished accordingly.  My point was also, given the known circumstances, they should have been held as battlefield combatants until we understood their motive, and they should have been subjected to extended national security exigency interrogation until we were satisfied they were just common criminals.  It is a very thin line and quite slippery, but I would err on the side of national security.  It is easier to go from combatant to criminal than vice versa.

            Re: choice of tools.  Perhaps we are at loggerhead.  The tools matter little to me; it is the decision to kill that is my focus.  In the case of the 5yo boy, a handy, loaded gun is no different from an unprotected pool; it is ultimately the parents who should be held accountable for their negligence and complacency leading to injury, in this case death.

   “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

Cheers,

Cap

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.594

Update from the Heartland

No.594

29.4.13 – 5.5.13

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

To all,

The follow-up news items:

-- Why haven’t we heard the hue and cry for laws to prohibit pressure cookers?  After all, they are the weapon of choice for young, misguided, American jihadis [592].  Where is the outrage?  What is it about firearms that drives some folks so bloody crazy?  Is it that firearms must be aimed and a trigger pulled, while pressure cooker bombs are more indiscriminate?  I suspect a greater percentage of pressure cookers have been used as weapons of mass destruction than the percentage of firearms used by mentally ill, mass killers, yet many of us are quite comfortable prohibiting certain firearms, magazines and such.  Why aren’t we banning pressure cookers?

WARNING – The following URL connects to a video clip of a rare and dramatic aircraft accident crash sequence.  It is NOT for the faint of heart.  Forewarned is forearmed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj2GS26Imdo&feature=youtu.be

At 11:20 [D], Monday, 29.April.2013, a National Air Cargo Boeing 747-428 freighter crashed on takeoff from Bagram Air Base, Kabul, Afghanistan. All seven (7), American crewmembers died in the crash; no one on the ground was injured.  The NTSB has dispatched a multi-disciplinary team to assist in the investigation.  This event should not take long, comparatively, to sort out.  There was no known, observed or indicated enemy action, despite the quick public claim by the Taliban.  The video sequence suggests an excessive angle of attack stall.  If so, the most likely cause may well be an internal load shift that took the aircraft out of its center of gravity limits shortly after rotation.  Physics affects all flying machines, even the massive B-747 aircraft.

Apparently, when it comes to sustaining a corruptive environment, Congress is surprisingly efficient and quite effective in a shockingly bipartisan manner.  It took a mere four (4) days – yes, I did say days, not weeks or months, and that included a weekend – from the introduction of the S.716 legislation by Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, to the President’s signature, making the bill law.  They did not even have time to come up with some clever or fancy title, and they moved so quickly neither chamber saw the need to take one of those annoying, recorded, roll-call votes – the Senate passed it by “unanimous consent,” and then the House passed it “without objection.”  What was this bill that was so important?  A formal declaration of war against Islamo-fascism?  Nope!  A properly reviewed and approved federal appropriations bill?  No!  For lack of a title, this S.716 bill is called “A bill to modify the requirements under the STOCK Act regarding online access to certain financial disclosure statements and related forms.” [PL 113-007; 127 Stat. 438; 15.April.2013]  Now, as you may recall, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012 (STOCK Act) [PL 112-105; 126 Stat. 291; 4.April.2012] [538] was a watered-down, rather lame attempt to curtail congressional insider-trading – a federal, felony crime for the rest of us peons, I must add.  Instead of strengthening the original anti-corruption law, Congress chose to weaken an already weak law even further.  Financial reporting now only applies to the President, Vice President, Members of Congress, and candidates for Congress.  Some 26,000 congressional staffers and other senior government officials were removed for the applicability of the STOCK Act; thus, my only conclusion must be that it is OK for congressional staffers to get rich trading on inside congressional information.  I have no idea why Congress decided to do this, but it definitely does not look good; and, they wonder why we distrust them so bloody much.

This is what the Press should be watching, but unfortunately, it seems so few are reporting on these facts.  At least we have two views:

“Why Are We Forcing The Army To Build Tanks It Doesn’t Want?”

by Annie-Rose Strasser

www.care2.com

Published: April 30, 2013; 5:00 pm

http://www.care2.com/causes/why-are-we-forcing-the-army-to-build-tanks-it-doesnt-want.html

and

“A Peek at Pentagon Pork: A Taxpayers’ Guide”

by Winslow Wheeler

Time

Published: May 29, 2012

http://nation.time.com/2012/05/29/a-peek-at-pentagon-pork-a-taxpayers-guide/

The sad reality is, facts like these are just snowflakes atop the tip of the iceberg, and these forms of largesse have been going on for years.  These are hard call-out, non-discretionary funding lines that were not touched by the sequester reductions [585].  Powerful senators and representatives use the public treasury for local jobs – small short-term, local gains at the long-term penalty of the entire nation.  This is wrong in every form, every time and should be labeled for what it is.  One day, we shall take the power from these narrow-minded men.

News from the economic front:

-- Prime Minister Robert Fico of Slovakia has called for an end to “completely counter-productive” austerity policies and for governments to focus instead on reigniting growth.  Slovakia has a small but very open economy that has been pummeled by the economic slump in the eurozone.  The previous coalition administration led by former Prime Minister Iveta Radičová slashed benefits and public sector salaries, driving the deficit down from a high of 8% of GDP in 2009 to 4.3% in 2012, all while keeping taxes low.  Slovakia became a poster-child for austerity processes. Slovakia now represents a growing number of national government leaders in Europe who are rattling the saber against austerity measures implemented to recover from the debt crisis.  My dilemma in such reactions grows from the lack of balance – too much austerity or too much spending.  There is a delicate balance between revenue (taxes) and expenses (spending); too much of either side of the equation means imbalance and ultimately failure.

-- The Federal Reserve indicated they would continue their US$85B/month bond-purchasing program and may vary the amount depending on employment and inflation.

-- The European Central Bank (ECB) cut its benchmark interest rate from 0.75% to 0.5% in an attempt to drag the euro zone out of its longest recession in over 40 years.

-- The European Commission (EC) forecasted that three of five of the EU’s largest economies – France, Spain and the Netherlands – will bust through EU-mandated deficit limits this year as the bloc’s recession continues to deepen.  The EU’s third-largest economy, Italy, will come within a hair’s breadth of missing the limit of 3% of GDP threshold, with a forecasted 2.9% 2013 deficit. The EU bloc GDP is now expected to drop 0.4% this year, down from a 0.3% projection just six months ago.

-- The Labor Department reported the U.S. economy added 165,000 jobs last month, more than the 148,000 gain expected by economists.  Private sector added 176,000 jobs. The unemployment rate dropped slightly to 7.5%, the lowest unemployment rate since December 2008.

Comments and contributions from Update no.593:

“The FSB (ФСБ, Федеральная служба безопасности), the domestic intel arm of the former KGB, may have provided information to the FBI, but apparently that organization did not give enough information to the Bureau.  Also, they have made many requests, and some are simply to harass people who have no contact with terrorism.  The question is did the FSB give enough information, especially regarding phone taps, to the Bureau to go on.  And the FSB, according to some, might just have been protecting sources and means in not telling the Bureau.   Not always simple and not always the obvious answer.

“Also, not totally comfortable charging Tsarnaev with WMD. I recall back in the day, WMD referred to nuke weapons. Period.   Later it morphed to include bio and chem. weps- although many argued about that. Today, while  the federal law might include the pressure-cooker bombs,  the term WMD has really gotten stretched out beyond what it originally meant..  Other commentators have made the same point. Also, if a pressure-cooker bomb is now WMD, what about an AR-15 with expanded magazines that can kill 28 people?  We have changed the term WMD to be almost meaningless, except in charging.

“Regarding the West, TX explosions, it is a prime example what lax or non-existent regulation can lead to.  Texas has notoriously lax zoning laws- and even they weren't apparently followed in the case of the chem. plant at West.  Not only ammonium nitrate, a serious explosive was stored there, but other ammonium products.  Housing and schools were allowed to be built next to the plant.   The schools nearby had to be evacuated to ammonium leaks in the past.  Even more problematic, under the Bush Administration, supervision of chemical plants was taken from the EPA and given to DHS. This was a blatantly political move, made by VP Cheney's son-in-law, to move supervision to a supposedly more lax body.  And away from the EPA, which is a bugaboo to many Republicans.  As might be expected DHS did not have, nor did it obtain, the expertise and ability to do the job. To be fair, the EPA was so thinly staffed, that it couldn’t' sufficiently inspect such plants.  Also the plant was to inform DHS that it was chemicals such as ammonium nitrate- it didn't.  In fact, DHS didn't even know there was a chemical plant at West.  Somebody should go to jail and people should lose their jobs.”

My reply:

            Re: FSB information.  Well said and quite appropriate.  My understanding as well.

            Re: WMD.  What definition would you suggest for WMD?  I will hold mine.  I would like to hear yours first.  Also, when does a criminal act become an enemy action?

            Re: West, Texas.  It has been widely reported that the owners/operators of the fertilizer plant did not comply with federal notification law.  I trust they shall be appropriately prosecuted, convicted and punished.  Oddly, it was executive action by conservative love-child, Tricky Dick Nixon that created the EPA in the first place.  I do not know why Bush 43 excluded EPA.  I do not see DHS as exclusive as the objectives of DHS & EPA are not the same and can work in parallel.  I am still suspicious of this event as something more than a simple workplace accident.  Nonetheless, perhaps this event will re-energized workplace safety laws and practices, including in Texas.

A thread contribution:

[The subject was enemy classification.]

Contributor A:

“That would  be an INCREDIBLY stupid thing to do, AND a massively ‘slippery slope,’

AND has absolutely NO basis in the Constitution.”

Contributor B:

Subject: Re: Update no.593

From: "Darren via smart phone"

Date: Tue, April 30, 2013 3:37 am

To: "Critical E-Loop/Bl"

I agree Bud [Contributor A], and respectfully disagree with Cap on this matter.  Besides the integrity of our Constitution, it has been documented in many sources that torture/etc. (Enhanced Interrogation Techniques) tend to yield little value per any truth. Maybe I don't know something as to its true value, and am open to any persuasion otherwise. On classification of ‘enemy combatant’ the problem is when/why/where that other AMERICAN CITIZENS can also be declared such, breaching our Constitution and due process for a fair CIVILIAN trial.  DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!”

. . . to which I responded:

            Re: “an INCREDIBLY stupid thing to do.”  Pardon me, but I am not sure what the “stupid thing” is here . . . designation, EIT, what?  The rest of my statement explicitly established my support for the administration’s action in the Tsarnaev case.  So, I’m not sure to what he is reacting to here.  I would like to expand this topic, if everyone (anyone) is willing.

            Respectfully, I think both of you jumped to some erroneous conclusions.  Regardless, let us take that line for the purpose of furthering public debate.  When does criminal action become an enemy action?  As noted in my words, I have not seen sufficient evidence to cross the threshold, thus my support for the administration’s action.  For this debate, we must define that threshold, so what are your definitions?

            Now, let us assume the Tsarnaev brothers crossed that threshold.   It appears to me, either or both of you are excluding EIT from interrogation of battlefield combatants?  If so, then what are the limits?  Should every battlefield combatant receive Miranda and a lawyer?  Should interrogation be confined to criminal interrogation techniques?  My advocacy for EITs in battlefield interrogation is simply the tool kit for interrogators.  If combatants offer up their information without inducement, then there is no need for the tools.  I am not sure why everyone jumps to the conclusion that every tool must be used immediately and in every case?

 . . . follow-up from Contributor B:

“Let me weigh-in, [Contributor A] will later.  So I am assuming you support Obama's action of a civilian trial of the surviving Boston Bomber versus military tribunal vs. an ‘enemy combatant’?

“Is the Boston Bomber an American citizen?

“Second, why would we classify him an ‘enemy combatant’? Was he an enemy on a ‘battlefield’?  I understand that scope has changed in the enemy of battlefield can be those using asymmetric methods and any association, even loosely, to an ideology or religious extremism, using violence whether in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria or here. What I am suggesting is how vague or broad can/will the ‘terrorist’ thus ‘enemy combatant’ or ‘lawful detainees’ application be used in our future?

“What is your retort on the intel/information value of advanced interrogation techniques (is some of that torture?).

“I am going to push the envelope outside the specifics of your stated opinion in your Update to motivate discourse.

“May I add that I think our authorities and media have drifted from reality with their new threshold of what weapons or devices that qualify for a WMD.   While the Boston Bombing was dramatic, violent and killed three people and injured over 100 (with many who lost lower limbs), I am not sure it fits a WMD class. Traditionally, a WMD was NBC (nuke/bio/chem), not a crude homemade explosive.  What's next, a mass shooting using an automatic weapon is classified as a WMD with the perp getting his Bill of Rights stripped?  The reason I raise this issue is because we seem to be on that slippery slope with vague assumptions/classifications and media prosecution of perps.

“The Boston Bomber, do you/FBI have proof he was part of any organized ‘terrorist cell’ and at what point does a perp reach your threshold (or GOV's) for "enemy combatant?"

“One of the other problems I have with this event Cap, is how I perceive it as being used ("don't let any crisis go to waste") by both the GOV and alphabet news agencies to further the objectives/agenda of additional surveillance, data-mining (spying) and data-warehousing, the public's acceptance to minimally, many more surface cameras with new facial recognition applications, and also most likely eventual acquiescence to drone technology.

“The Boston Bombing was most tragic and sad to see human suffering. However, the news media once again has used this event as core focus to distract Americans from all the other news (except today when the top news that came out trumping Boston was the pro basketball player coming out saying he is gay, and both Obama and his wife called and Tweeted the gay ‘star’ applauding him as a ‘hero’ and that ‘Michelle has his back’).  The amount of obsession the psyops outlets (aka: our news) have spent on Boston is not proportionate to the true relevance to Americans based on that one event. If that event is in series to other planned events with real WMDs, then I can understand this 24/7 regurgitation of Boston's news.  Enough already! We've seen enough of the same video of the same bomb and same bloody imagery. Move above the surface and ask what is the objective?

“Our so-called news fails to cover the hundreds killed in Iraq each week, our plane crashes in Afghanistan, the TRUE state of our economy, or whistleblowers vs. GOV being targeted and silenced.  It does not serve the paradigm re-education to show that on our news.

“The ‘slippery slope’ Bud referred to, I think, is the loss of our Constitutional rights using the coin'd Global War on Terror (GWOT); and application of torture at the whim of our government against perps they try in the media versus civilian court.

“Increasingly we live in both dangerous and surreal times where any of us can be declared an enemy of the state, thus ‘enemy combatants’ and tortured or placed on the classified ‘kill list.’

“The Boston Bombing killed 3 people. What’s the next NEW NORM Cap if (God forbid) a real WMD with true NBC qualities strikes 1 or more American cities in 1 week?  We've already been handing over our freedoms for decades. I'd hate to be witness to not only such a horrible event but fear what will happen to the free thinkers and open dissenters during times of national suffering.  Conformity will be the only option ("you're either for us or against us!").   Call it the Enhanced Freedom Patriot Act (EFPA).

“Please excuse typos/spelling/grammatical errors. I wrote this lying down, after being awakened from sleep, with my smart phone and no spell checker and have not proofed it.  My mind is also still tired so I may have drifted from object/sequence/reason. Back to a hopeful REM dream state that Carl Jung would be happy for (and I will feel later on Tuesday like I actually slept).   Hopefully in my dream I don't see that CIA MKUltra guy from Conspiracy Theory telling me they are taking me to Room 101 (from Orwell's 1984).”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Do I support the administration’s action in the Tsarnaev case?  Yes.  I have not seen sufficient evidence to warrant a different tack.  However, I must say, the local magistrate who invoked Miranda 48 hours after his arrested acted prematurely and adversely to the national security interests of the Grand Republic.

            Re: “Is the Boston Bomber an American citizen?”  To my knowledge, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, was not (rejected by INS), which may have been one of numerous reasons for his radicalization, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was a naturalized U.S. citizen.

            Re: “why would we classify him an ‘enemy combatant’?”  Well, let me see; perhaps because they acted on behalf of an enemy of the State, i.e., Islamo-fascism.  Again, as noted above, I have seen insufficient evidence to warrant the classification but it can occur, as it did in the case of Herbert Haupt (who actually took no physical action against the U.S., only planned to do so).  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev acted, while Herbert Haupt had not yet acted; they were both U.S. citizens; Haupt was an enemy of the State; Tsarnaev is close to that threshold.

            Re: “Was he an enemy on a ‘battlefield’?”  In today’s War on Islamic Fascism, yes, he was on the battlefield.  The enemy has classified any civilian target they deem appropriate to be a target, therefore the battlefield is the world including cyber-space.

            Re: “What I am suggesting is how vague or broad can/will the "terrorist" thus "enemy combatant" or "lawful detainess" application be used in our future?”  When your professed motive is the destruction of the United States, then you are at war with this Grand Republic.  If you employ non-traditional, asymmetric, methods of war with the expressed intent of terrorizing the civilian population, then you are a terrorist.  Whether he was following orders from al-Qa’ida or self-actualized, their proclaimed purpose was the “defense of Islam” – pretty damn close to al-Qa’ida’s purpose.

            Re: “What is your retort on the intel/information value of advanced interrogation techniques (is some of that torture?).”  My retort?  The intel biz is far more sophisticated than most folks realize.  The CIA interrogators are accomplished, competent and successful.  I want them to have the largest tool kits available, to allow them to adapt to any particular situation.  The more we constrain them, the more we harm our national security.  Yes, I do believe there are limits upon EITs.  To me, it is permanent injury, e.g., extraction of fingernails is permanent injury; death is permanent injury.

            Re: “what weapons or devices that qualify for a WMD?”  Other contributors raised the same question in this week’s Update.  What is your definition?  Yes, traditionally, WMD has been defined as Nuclear/Biological/Chemical (NBC).  To me, WMD are intended to cause indiscriminate mass casualties, especially in a civilian population, e.g., Fat Man and Little Boy were clearly WMDs.  Ricin-laced letters are WMDs.  If a pressure cooker loaded with explosive material and shrapnel-enhancing items with a remote controlled detonator placed in a crowded civilian sporting event is not WMD, then what is?  Are only NBC devices WMD?  What would a rental truck loaded with several tons of ammonium nitrate, kerosene, and a timer detonator be classified?  A frag-grenade in a civilian crowd . . . perhaps.  An automatic weapon . . . debatable; it is aimed rather than indiscriminate.  So, where would you draw the line?

            Re: “do you/FBI have proof he was part of any organized "terrorist cell" and at what point does a perp reach your threshold (or GOV's) for "enemy combatant?"”  To my knowledge, no, they do not as yet have “proof” beyond a reasonable doubt; however, the publicly available information is dreadfully close to that threshold.

            I share your concern regarding the cause de jure.  The West fertilizer plant killed and injured more citizens than the Tsarnaev pressure cooker bombs, but so far, it appears to be a disastrous workplace accident.  If al-Qa’ida or the Aryan Brotherhood was found to be the instigator of the event, I think the Press focus would change quickly and definitively.  Nonetheless, your frustration with the inordinate Press coverage of the Boston bombing is warranted from my perspective.

            Re: “slippery slope.”  I have written my concern with that phenomenon.  We typically allow more latitude in wartime than we do in peacetime.  Regardless, there are thresholds of acceptable conduct.  The drone targeting list or warrantless electronic surveillance teeter on the line, which means we must be ever-more vigilant for abuse.

            Re: “Enhanced Freedom Patriot Act (EFPA).”  I don’t think so.  I also believe we are a long way from such infringement.

Another important contribution:

[Based on this article:

“Kentucky: Boy, 5, Kills Sister, 2”

by the Associated Press

New York Times

Published: May 1, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/us/kentucky-boy-5-kills-sister-2.html?_r=0]

“Does this still hold true to your theory that guns don't kill people, people kill people?  If this kid weren't given a gun that IS MADE FOR KIDS do you think this would have happened?

“We as a people have time and time again proven we are not smart enough to handle and own guns.  Unfortunately the 2nd Amendment is too erotic for many people and they can't grasp the idea of a world sans their Remington.

“Don't get me wrong, these parents should be executed as they're fully responsible but without the tool easily at hand there's no question in my mind this would have been avoided.

“So sad.”

My response:

Tyson,

            This is so clearly the negligence of parents, just as it would be allowing unsupervised children near a pool, or playing in the street, or any other risky activity.  Also, the very first axiom of firearm possession is clearing the chamber to ensure it is safe.  The parents did not realized a bullet was in the chamber – really!  Yes, this is a tragic event, and in my opinion, the parents should be prosecuted and sent to jail to contemplate their grievous error, not so much to punish them, but for a clear message to other parents.  Are you suggesting firearms should be restricted for every single citizen, because their negligent, complacent and foolish parents like the Sparks of Kentucky?

 . . . round two:

“Let's back up one step and I would like for you to answer the question ‘Do you think it's ok for a company to build guns specifically targeted for children's use’?”

  . . . my response to round two:

            Re: “Do you think it's ok for a company to build guns specifically targeted for children's use?”  Short answer: yes.  I also think it is irresponsible for any parent to give a 5-year-old child a firearm.  This is offensive to me, but that does not give us the right to decide for other parents.  When are we going to stand up and demand parental accountability?  The issue here is the parents, not the gun.

 . . . round three:

“If you think it's ok for a company to build these guns then we truly are on opposite sides of the fence.  In my opinion you're giving way too much credit to the human population.  What other evidence have you seen that says differently?  Why are Americans so hung up on the 2nd Amendment when many other developed countries feel and act differently?  Just like the war on drugs it's time to do something different because the current system IS NOT WORKING! 

“How can you argue with these facts?  Or am I missing something that justifies our antiquated laws?”

URL:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2012/12/firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg 

 . . . my response to round three:

Tyson,

I do not know if you disagree.  Where we disconnect is the focus of the issue.   Who bought the rifle?  Who loaded the rifle?  Who left a loaded, unsafetied rifle standing in the corner of the room?  How many other families handle that exact same rifle in a proper, responsible manner?  When they say the rifle is designed for and marketed to children, I don't think anyone envisioned pre-school-ers; more likely teenagers.  Let us focus on the root cause, not the tools or symptoms.

Love,

Dad      :-)

Comment to the Blog:

“I support treating the Boston Marathon bomber as a criminal. Indeed, my opinion is that the United States would have benefitted far more from treating each and all of the ‘terrorist attacks’ as the criminal acts they are rather than raise all this hysteria about an indefinable ‘war on terror.’

“The disaster in West, Texas, is tragic enough in its own right and as a horrifying example of corporate negligence. I see no reason to aggravate the damage by claiming that this, too, is an “act of terrorism” unless and until someone presents very strong evidence.

“The ricin letters sent to the White House and to other government officials is appropriately being treated as a criminal law issue. This particular attack seems to have encountered some strange event, such that someone was arrested and then released after one week. I hope once the danger is clearly over someone will investigate the investigation. Such incidents merit handling by (competent) law enforcement agencies and criminal charges rather than a military/intelligence response. We can argue that essentially any criminal act causes terror in its commission. That is no reason to extend the ‘war on terror’ to cover every illegal act.

“The case of Herbert Haupt took place in wartime and so does not apply directly to the Boston Marathon attack.

“I see you still put energy into others’ driving habits. That will aggravate any stress-related illnesses you have and perhaps help bring on more of the same.

“The Congress found the political will to negate the part of the sequester that directly affected them, air traffic control. It’s a pity they cannot find the will to help the rest of us.”

My response to the Blog:

Calvin,

            Re: Boston bombing.  In this instance, as I have stated, I support the administration’s action.  However, if investigative processes establish a linkage to al-Qa’ida, any of its affiliates, or any other organization intent upon doing harm to this Grand Republic or any of our citizens, beyond a reasonable doubt, then they were enemy battlefield combatants and should be treated as such.

            Re: war on terror.  I agree.  It is indefinable.  The War on Islamic Fascism is readily definable.

            Re: West, Texas explosion.  Yes, I agree.  My only point is, again as I stated, I do not like coincidences.  I remain suspicious of that event in that week with those other events.  It may, in fact, be a tragic industrial accident.  It might also be malfeasance for one of a number of motives.  It could also be something far more serious.  I remain vigilant, attentive, and observant.

            Re: ricin letters.  The same as above. 

            Re: criminal versus enemy action.  The differentiation is simple.  Criminal = individual or group self-serving action.  Enemy = external or internal threat to the State.  A bank robbery is not a terrorist act.  Bombing the Murrah Building was.

            Re: wartime.  Well, I guess that says it all.  We have been at war at least since 9/11 and AUMF [PL 107-040, 115 Stat. 224].  Tsarnaev is not yet Haupt, but the evidence is edging closer.

            Re: “driving habits.”  I handle my stress quite well, thank you.  My only purpose is to affect just one person who does not know how to drive with respect for other citizens.

            Re: sequester.  Spot on, brother.  However, it is not about simply un-doing the consequences of the sequester spending reductions; it is all about reducing the hard, non-discretionary spending.  They have yet to face reality.  The air traffic controller kerfuffle was a gnat in a locust plague.  They will have to face reality someday.  They remain delusional today.

   “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

Cheers,

Cap

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)