Update no.619

Update from the Heartland

No.619

21.10.13 – 27.10.13

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

To all,

My most humble apologies for my faux pas of oversight . . .

On Tuesday, 15.October.2013, President Obama awarded the Medal of Honor to Captain William D. Swenson, USA, of Seattle, Washington, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty during Operation Buri Booza II (Dancing Goat II).  On the morning of Sunday, 8.September.2009, Captain Swenson was serving as an embedded advisor to the Afghan National Border Police, Task Force Phoenix, Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan in support of 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, as his combat team was moving on foot toward the village of Ganjgal, Kunar Province, Afghanistan, for a meeting with village elders.  The team entered a well-executed Taliban ambush.  Captain Swenson repeatedly defied withering small arms, heavy automatic weapons, RPG and mortar fire to rescue his comrades, evacuate the wounded, organize their defense and account for everyone in his team.  Thank you Captain Swenson for your extraordinary service to this Grand Republic.

Rather than continue my Quixotic railing against the duplicity, hypocrisy, corruption and outright insanity of pork barrel politics practiced so expertly by our dear, esteemed, Members of Congress, I should offer solutions.  So, in that vein, here is a suggestion.

            Let us agree by law to set aside a small percentage of every annual budget solely for the largesse of Members of Congress.   Each Member would be allocated a portion of the Largesse Pool to be dispersed at his discretion.  Since we have senators and representatives, each citizen is represented three times, so the pool would be divided into thirds: a Senior Senator Portion, a Junior Senator Portion, and a Representative Portion.  If there is no proper budget, then there is no largesse pool.  Further, just as they do with their various pork projects and earmarks, they would have no requirement for legislative or public scrutiny; they simply must declare this project or that is to be funded by their respective Largesse Portion – no justification or rationale required.  If their projects in any particular year exceeded their Portion, they are permitted to trade or pool their Portion allocations as they choose.  In this scheme, no expenditures will be permitted beyond the Largesse Pool without an individual, specific, legislative bill that must go through the community review process, and by proactively notice to the Press and the public – active notification rather than passive access; i.e., no earmarks, no attachments, no amendments, only the straight bill.  Thus, if Congress passes a proper budget (continuing resolutions or any other similar instrument do not qualify) and as an example we say the Largesse Pool for a given fiscal year was say US$3B, each senator of a state would have an allocation of US$20M and each representative would have an annual allocation of US$2.299M.  The only restriction other than as noted above would be it must be a public project; they could not spend the funds on themselves, or family members, or cronies, or contributors, or intangibles; they could spend it on a museum of tiddlywinks or a bridge to nowhere as long as the project is auditable and fulfilled.

            Since human beings elected to Congress are flawed and cannot resist the temptation of corruption, let us legalize corruption, get it out into the sunlight, kind of like drug abuse or prostitution should be.  We must find a way to stop these damnable unscrutinized pork barrel attachments to vital legislation. 

Another, different opinion:

“Edward Snowden is no traitor”

by Richard Cohen

Washington Post

Published: October 21 [2013]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-cohen-edward-snowden-is-no-traitor/2013/10/21/f9d2ae5a-3a74-11e3-a94f-b58017bfee6c_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions

Since I am one of those who uses the term “traitor” in referring to Snowden or his actions, I feel compelled to acknowledge Cohen’s opinion as well as argue my case more specifically.  Cohen asks, “If he is a traitor, then which side did he betray and to whom does he now owe allegiance?”  I do not believe treason requires a recipient of the betrayal or allegiance to a foreign or rebel entity; betrayal is the only requirement.  Nonetheless, Snowden betrayed the United States of America and We, the People. His only discernible allegiance is to himself, as the prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner.  Cohen concluded, “But (and?) I am at a loss to say what should be done with Snowden. He broke the law, this is true. He has been chary with his information, but he cannot know all its ramifications and, anyway, the government can’t allow anyone to decide for himself what should be revealed. That, too, is true. So Snowden is, to my mind, a bit like John Brown, the zealot who intensely felt the inhumanity of slavery and broke the law in an attempt to end the practice. My analogy is not neat — Brown killed some people — but you get the point. I suppose Snowden needs to be punished but not as a traitor. He may have been technically disloyal to America but not, after some reflection, to American values.”  Edward Snowden and John Brown are not comparable.  Yes, they both broke established law.  Brown fought the scourge of slavery.  We could argue that Snowden fought against what he saw as illegal, unconstitutional surveillance and spying by agencies of the U.S. Government (USG).  However, Snowden chose a path to harm the entire nation, not just those he believed exceeded their legal authority.  Brown sought only to harm those involved with slavery.  I could accept Cohen’s argument, if Snowden had chosen a means to raise the question without damaging national security.  I think Cohen is flat wrong.  And, I believe Snowden is a traitor by the strictest or any definition, and should be tried and punished as such.

News from the economic front:

-- The Labor Department finally reported the U.S. economy added 148,000 jobs in September., as the unemployment rate decreased to 7.2 per centum.  Analysts had expected an increase of 180,000 jobs last month, and that the unemployment rate would remain at 7.3 per centum.  The October report will reflect some of the impact of the USG shutdown.

-- The Federal Reserve proposed new rules requiring the largest banks to hold enough safe assets—such as cash or those easily convertible to cash—to fund their operations for 30 days, if other sources of funding are not available. The proposal goes beyond international agreements and is intended to strengthen the ability of the largest banks to withstand periods of market stress.  The rules are also intended to prevent a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis, when financial markets froze due to a lack of liquidity.

-- The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced US$5.1B in settlements with J.P. Morgan Chase, including US$4B to end legal actions over securities disclosures and US$1.1B covering mortgage repurchases.  The deal apparently clears a lawsuit alleging the bank misled Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac about the quality of mortgages it sold to them during the housing boom, and less than the US$6B billion initially sought by FHFA.

Comments and contributions from Update no.618:

Comment to the Blog:

“I reside in the U.S. State of Ohio, and I remain unaware of any issues concerning the Lower Ohio River. There are ways and means of following campaign contributions and awarded contracts to seek out the pork-barrel culprit in the lock-and-dam issue, but it’s simpler to note that Senator McConnell is the only suspect who voted for the project.

“I’ll leave your main issue mostly alone except to note that France, Brazil and others are more concerned with the NSA violations of their personal and collective privacy than with Mr. Snowden. Me too.

“I have no idea why veterans and others would be unaware of the cause of Federal shutdown.

“The Baseline Scenario economics blog pointed out this past week that rating services’ rating of the Federal government mean very little right now. Nobody believed that Government debt would remain unpaid. The only question was exactly when that would happen. Usually that matters very little for the large entities that would be making decisions related to the issue.

“Realistically, “a billion here and a billion there” means less to JP Morgan Chase than it apparently did to Senator Dirksen. At least, they seem not to mind racking up fines in that range.”

My response to the Blog:

Calvin,

            I do not know about the worthiness of the Lower Ohio River construction project.  Further, I do not have to time or capacity to work the laborious process of tracking down the source §123.  My point for illuminating the change was the timing, choice and ethics of adding it specifically to the continuing appropriations act, delaying a proper appropriations law(s) and increasing the debt limit to respect the spending by Congress.  If the project is worthy, then it can withstand the legislative scrutiny and proper rigor rather than buried in a critical stopgap law.  It should have been discussed in the Press, the local media, townhall meetings, and petitions to various governmental agencies.  The lack of general regional public awareness strongly suggests the project is exactly what I believe it is – pork barrel benefits for local crony construction companies and rich donors.

            The faux public indignation over the Snowden betrayal belies the reality of international intelligence operations.  France is notorious for their intelligence agencies breaking into hotel rooms or any other facility that struck their interest.  It happened to me in 1990 when I participated in the Paris Airshow, and it still happens to this day.

            The veteran protest at the World War II Memorial is so typical of the political extremes at both ends of the spectrum.  They have no qualms using citizens or veterans for their parochial, selfish, political purposes.  Those veterans may have been coincidental or they may have been die-hard Tea Party supporters bent upon embarrassment of the President.  Either way, using the WW II Memorial as a cause célèbre for the anti-PPACA folks is wrong in every way I can think of.  Being used like that really pokes the coals for me.

            For big banks like JP Morgan Chase, it is just a cost of doing business they pass along to the shareholders and customers.  The only thing that possibly stands a chance of slowing down this rampant greed is long-term prison sentences and prohibitions from the industry.

 . . . round two:

“Re the Lower Ohio River Project, that's pretty much what I said. If someone wants to follow this particular money trail, they have a starting point. What might make it worthwhile for someone is the utter hypocrisy of crusading against spending while inserting new projects within your constituency into the budget.

“The ultimate usefulness of the Snowden and various other well-publicized revelations is that collectively they might change "business as usual" in the mis-named intelligence community.

“The specific protest at the World War II memorial flies in the face of common sense a little too much to avoid the implication of being a setup. US politics is not getting any more ethical.”

 . . . my response to round two:

            Re: “earmarks.”  And, that was precisely my point . . . the hypocrisy and outright audacity to add another US$2.2B of new spending for a local project to a continuing resolution spending authorization after putting the nation and the world through the trauma of uncertainty.  There must be a better way.

            Re: “intelligence.”  I sure hope the Snowden treason does not change IC’s means & methods; they work.  That is not to say reforms are not needed, but I’m reluctant to support restrictions.  Yes, there are reforms required.  I have advocated for filters or firewalls of sorts for a long time, to reduce the potential to use the data collected for collateral or political purposes.  You suggest the IC is mis-named.  What would you name the IC?

            Re: “politics & ethics.”  The reference antipodes are mutually exclusive and defy common sense.  To watch these politicians defile monuments and veterans along with other good citizens really raises my ire.

 . . . round three:

“In re the intelligence community (which is neither notably intelligent nor a true community), my point was precisely the opposite of what you said. Edward Snowden, Wikileaks, etc., will change the ‘means and methods’ of government by repeatedly providing proof that secrecy has become impossible to assure. The enforced transparency that is occurring is not limited to any given nation or phase of operations, and that may well result in healthier limits on governing bodies in general.



"Another name for what you call the ‘intelligence community’? Spies."

 . . . my response to round three:

            I suppose the simple question here is, if we make all of our intelligence material public, aren’t we telling our enemies exactly what we know?  If our enemies know what we know, they also know what we don’t know.  It doesn’t get much better than that for our enemies.  So, how is that a good thing?

Another contribution:

“I am not now able to completely digest and respond to your latest Update. However, I believe maybe instead of treating Snowden like he is a traitor, perhaps, we should be looking at our own government and the NSA as traitors to our Constitution and lawful Americans. We are on very dangerous slopes of balance. Our Fourth Amendment rights are breached by those you believe are there to protect US.  My 1st Amendment rights gets violated daily in the name of political correctness ("hate speech"?). My
2nd Amendment rights get breached all the time in the good old state of California. My 4th Amendment rights again get violated going through highway checkpoint, regardless of what the $old-out SCOTUS rule. Most of them are traitors, total sellouts. You are very critical, and you have your right, against Cruz and the Tea Party. Maybe Cruz and they are the 
few left in Washington who truly are American. George Washington was after all considered a revolutionary, today he'd be a terrorist.

“And those that are supposed to be sworn to uphold our Constitution, are much worse I bet than Snowden. Your targeting seems off, in all due respect, Cap.”

My reply:

            Oh my . . . a lot in a few words.  I’m going to try to break it down into segments.

            Re: “traitor.”  Perhaps we need to agree on a definition.  The dictionary says a traitor is someone who betrays another person or his country.  As used in the Constitution, treason is a betrayal of the country – the key word being betrayal.  In this context, betrayal means being unfaithful in guarding, maintaining or fulfilling his commitment to this Grand Republic.  Regardless of his employment status, he took and signed an oath to protect (not disclose) the information he had access to . . . to anyone who did not hold the appropriate security clearance AND had a need to know.  The information he chose to steal and disclose to the Press and public was about as highly classified as it gets within the U.S. classification system.  He chose to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner all by himself; he had no way to know or appreciate the context of what he considered wrong.  George Washington did NOT do that EVER; he operated with a collective, resisting oppression.  Snowden did nothing even remotely similar.

            Re: “USG.”  My opinion(s) does not exclude criticism of the USG.  Those key individuals charged with clearing him and supervising him failed miserably to perform their duties.  If the NSA or any other element of the IC exceeded its authority under the law, they should be prosecuted.  There is culpability with in the USG.  I trust those responsible will pay the appropriate price for their failure(s).  Further, I have long advocated for IC reforms to better control the classified information we collect.  I truly wish Elliott Spitzer had had the strength and courage to challenge what the politcos did to him; I believe he was truly harmed by the NSA warrantless surveillance program – opportunity lost.

            Part of the basis of our system of jurisprudence (right or wrong) requires an injury or impending injury to have a foundation for legal action.  I’m not aware of any injury, or oppression, or threat suffered by Snowden.  Are their elements of his disclosures that are valid topics of public debate and action – YES!  What he did and how he did it was not to foster public debate, but rather to inflict serious injury on this Grand Republic.  Further, he took his intentional, purposeful, informed action to harm the United States of America during wartime; that is treason by any definition.  As I have written before, I am not aware of any treason that has been more damaging to the national defense of the United States than what Snowden has done, and that goes from Benedict Arnold to Snowden.  In a slim sense, I think Snowden may have seen evidence he believed violated the Constitution; however, the expanse, scale and depth of his treason defy a noble purpose.  We need public debate on some of these issues, but NOT this way.

            Re: “Our Fourth Amendment rights are breached.”  Really?  How have you been harmed?  Have you seen any evidence your privacy has been violated?  Certainly, the generalizations offered second, third, fourth hand suggest a potential violation of our collective 4th Amendment rights, but I have seen no evidence . . . only the Press yammerings about these Snowden revelations.  I have physical proof the USG censored personal mail during WW 1 and WW 2; I don’t recall public outrage at those proven violations of 4th Amendment rights. 

            Re: “My 1st Amendment rights gets violated daily in the name of political correctness ("hate speech"?).”  I respectfully submit, your sense of violation in this context is self-inflicted.  Political Correctness (PC) is a societal induced form of peer pressure to impose the vocal groups sense of propriety.  I’m not aware of any legal restriction other than the common inciteful speech provisions.

            Re: “My 
2nd Amendment rights get breached all the time in the good old state of California.”  I’ve heard rumors of this nonsense, but I’ve not studied the law, if there is a law.  If there is a violation of the Constitution, challenge the damn law in court, as it should be done.

            Re: “highway checkpoint.”  We can have a good, hearty debate on this topic.  I do believe the common law jurisprudence recognizes the misty line here between individual privacy rights versus the common good.

            Re: “Cruz & Tea Party.”  As I have written, I may not agree with Cruz, but I defend his right to do what he feels appropriate within the law.  To my knowledge, he violated no law.  My stiffest criticism goes to the House leadership who allowed the fiasco to progress to the shutdown and potential debt default.  Shutdown the government and penalizing the rest of the world because they object to the PPACA is like Russian roulette with our head.

            Re: “much worse I bet than Snowden.”  Again, really?  Please give me an example or two.  I can understand and appreciate Snowden’s contention that operatives and agents inside the USG may have violated the Constitution, i.e., 4th Amendment; but, there are legal, proper means for challenging those actions without jeopardizing the national security of the United States.

            I think my targeting is spot on but not exclusive.

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

Cheers,

Cap

From the same contributor but a different thread:

“The way I interpreted [his] response Cap, is that simply: Institutions become self-serving and can deviate outside the laws/Constitution. Look at Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's most recent opinion, which you read. There are certain principles I don't need to educate people as bright as you, and well studied as you, on, but they need to be black or white, very binary, and we're currently operating on the backside of the power curve.

“And as to my opinion that institutions become self-serving, that is the non-sinister version that those within the institutions given excessive power (CIA/NSA/FBI/etc.) can become abusive/dangerous to the very citizenry they are pledged to protect. What happens when they go to the dark side or become directed by elements that don't recognize our country's sovereignty, history or Constitution?”

My reply:

Darren,

            I think we all share concern for rogue agents and/or agencies given the enormously powerful tools currently available to the USG.  Where the threshold tolerable conduct and performance lays should remain a perpetual topic of public debate.  My concern remains reform or refinement of the IC to avoid broad general constraints like the Church Commission induced in the late 70’s.  We should be looking for ways to allow the IC as much range as possible while restricting the uses or application of the collected material, e.g., using intercepted communications of enforce morality (private conduct) principles.  We must focus our attention on proper objectives rather than taking the easy path as Congress did with the Church Commission findings.

A different contribution:

Subject: telephone furore
From: "Peter Gipson"
Date: Fri, October 25, 2013 12:53 pm
To: "'cap'"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/25/world/europe/europe-summit-nsa-spying/

“How naïve of them ‘to think or not to think’ that this eavesdropping was not going on!

“The technology of listening to a radio communication even if one of those in the communication has some form of protection has been in practice for many a year. I believe that even you and I are occasionally ‘listened’ too. And why not? I have nothing to hide. This is pure political venting and squabbling. I have never heard such nonsense. I shall be pleased to see your views, which may be roughly aligned with my own. We shall see.”

My response:

Peter,

            I’m sure you know quite well what my views will be.

            As I have repeatedly said in a variety of fora, folks who are disturbed by signals intelligence should read a few books that detail the ULTRA and MAGIC programs 70 years ago, or even a few history books that document the enormous benefit of those programs to waging war successfully.  NSA & GCHQ have been listening to communications since their inception, and I hope they continue to do so for as long as there are bad men in this world.  I also hope they continue to refine and hone their skills as technology evolves.

            In fact, I believe eavesdropping as a legal term goes back to at least 1765 and Sir William Blackstone.  A lot of the public outcry is a paucity of understanding regarding signals intelligence (SigInt) and/or resentment they do not possess the capability and capacity of NSA & GCHQ.

            I think the best the professionals can do now is close the door, shutter the windows, and disappear . . . as they keep their governmental supervision informed.  I note with interest the congressional and parliamentary members charged with that supervision have remained largely silent or issued innocuous statements of defense.

            The furore will burn itself out eventually, although in this instance Snowden, his helpers and the collaborative Press are insuring a constant trickle, which I surmise may go on for quite some time.

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

Have a great weekend.

Cheers,

Cap

 . . . and a follow-up comment:

Subject: RE: telephone furore


From: "Peter Gipson" 


Date: Fri, October 25, 2013 4:42 pm


To: cap@parlier.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------



Cap, evening from a wet Suffolk with a severe gale pending.



“Yes of course I knew your views!





“We’re working up to Remembrance Sunday here. We have a very hectic couple of weeks with fund raising and the Poppy appeal. I have 5 school presentations to do and will speak to approximately 2000 youngsters. It’s quite brilliant and beneficial but tiring. I take a couple of WW2 veterans and one who served in Malaya. They have tragic memories.”

Peter.

 . . . my follow-up response:

Peter,

            The storm forecast for Southern England made the news here on the Great Plains.  I hope y’all weather the storm well.

            Always interesting to talk to veterans.  I hope the Poppy Appeal is amply successful this year.  Malayia was nasty business for Percival’s III Corps as well as the assets and population they protected.  Good luck.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)