Update no.666

Update from the Heartland

No.666

15.9.14 – 21.9.14

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

To all,

Congress passed H.J. Res. 124 virtually as they ran from town; after all, they are far more concerned about re-election (4.November) than they are about the nation’s business.  The President has not yet signed the bill, at least as reflected in the public record so far.  H.J. Res. 124 is actually titled: Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015, which is yet another continuing resolution that extends federal spending authorizations established by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 [PL 113-076; 128 Stat. 51; 17.1.2014] [631] until 11.Deceember.2014.  More significantly, Section 149 was tacked on literally at the very end of the appropriation bill.  Precisely, it states:

“SEC. 149. (a) The Secretary of Defense is authorized, in coordination with the Secretary of State, to provide assistance, including training, equipment, supplies, and sustainment, to appropriately vetted elements of the Syrian opposition and other appropriately vetted Syrian groups and individuals for the following purposes:

“(1) Defending the Syrian people from attacks by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and securing territory controlled by the Syrian opposition.

“(2) Protecting the United States, its friends and allies, and the Syrian people from the threats posed by terrorists in Syria.

“(3) Promoting the conditions for a negotiated settlement to end the conflict in Syria.”

Further, they included Section 149 (i):

“(i) Nothing in this section shall be construed to constitute a specific statutory authorization for the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations wherein hostilities are clearly indicated by the circumstances.”

And, of course, they felt compelled to remind the President of the applicability of the War Powers Resolution [PL 93-148; 87 Stat. 555; 7.11.1973] [344].

            The situation in Syria has been troubling for several years, not least of which was the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime [21.8.2013; 611, 614].  The ISIL group bloomed in Syria from the remnants of al-Qa’ida in Iraq, mutated into a rabid, radical, Islamofacist group that has demonstrated their total disregard for human life and even other Muslims who do not believe as they believe.  Given the situation on the ground in Syria and Iraq, at least as we know it, the Section 149 authorization is a spit-in-the-ocean, and not likely to be constructive toward a satisfactory outcome.  The potential for this very constrained initiative is far more likely to have a similar result as our support of the Taliban during the Soviet incursion [24.12.1979 – 15.2.1989] – al-Qa’ida.  I have long argued against half-measures.  Section 149 is a sliver-measure, a long way from even a half-measure level.  Regardless, iacta alea est.

On 1.May.1707, the Union with England Act [6 Anne c.7 (16.1.1707)] became effective, and Scotland joined England and Wales.  Just as a point of history, the United Kingdom did not fully coalesce until the passage of the Act of Union (Ireland) 1800 [40 Geo. 3 c. 38 (1.1.1801)].  All that history came into question on Thursday, when citizens in Scotland voted on a referendum to cede from the United Kingdom.  The voters rejected the proposal 45-55% with an incredible turnout close to 90%.  Prime Minister Cameron announced the result the following day and reaffirmed the intentions of Her Majesty’s Government to enact governance reforms to allow more autonomy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  Those reforms are as yet unspecified, but they will be interesting to watch unfold.

            Other contributors proffered their perspective:

Contributor 1:

“The Scots did indeed vote to stay, with some incentives offered that might actually be delivered. However, the 45% who voted to leave are still a substantial minority. That minority voted to leave despite all sorts of dire warnings from various sources. I conclude that Scotland is by no means content to be ‘united’ with England.”

Contributor 2:

“On vote results: Better now for global security. As much as I thought if the Scottish wanted freedom, great, at this juncture with so much geopolitical and economic volatility, it is best not to trigger a domino effect.”

            I understand the history between England and Scotland from Sir William Wallace [11.9.1297] to the Battle of Culloden [16.4.1746], when Scottish broadswords charged the regular English infantry – the slaughter ended the clan system in Scotland.  For that matter I suppose, we could go back to Hadrian’s Wall [128 AD] that was constructed to defend Roman England from Scottish tribes.  Nonetheless, I am struggling with exactly what freedom the 45% folks feel they were missing as an important part of the United Kingdom?  To be quite blunt, the independence vote appears to be far more emotional than rational, but hey that’s just me.  More than a few talking heads amplified the implicit frustration of the separatist Scots as indicative of other disenfranchise movements like Eastern Ukraine or non-Alawite Syria.  I imagine if we held a referendum in South Carolina or Alabama, quite a few residents would vote to complete what their ancestors started in 1860.  So, let us play out those dissolution desires to the end-point.  What if we dissolve all nation-states and make every individual a nation, so each new nation will have no one else to be angry at – seven billion nations.  In that vein, when does a new individual become a new nation – at 18 years of age, at birth, oh heck why not at the instant of conception.  OK enough drivel, bottom line: the Scots are far stronger within the United Kingdom than they ever could be alone.  Saner minds prevailed.  Done!  So, let’s move on.

My friend, colleague and fellow author posted his opinion on domestic violence on Facebook.  With his consent, I have included his opinion and the link to his posting.  The comments from others are worthy of your attention.  Lastly, I have added my opinion below.

https://www.facebook.com/kevinready.sr/posts/10204522633975963

“Time for a story/commentary on Domestic Abuse. It is a controversial subject, so I am ready for comments, as deserved. It involves the current Domestic Abuse controversy in the NFL and elsewhere. I thought of this old story when I heard one of the young women “Talking Heads” CNN put on to give their opinion on what the NFL should do with/to Ray Rice. This "expert" was adamant that the NFL should have a “Zero Tolerance, One Strike” policy, thus banning any player who ever had a domestic violence offense. She thought that their elite position, prestigious salary and public persona dictated that they should have higher standards and any of them who committed domestic abuse should never again play pro football regardless of what punishment the courts might mete out. This young woman’s “expert opinion” seemed rather harsh and unyielding, and it reminded me of a lecture on domestic abuse I had been given by another young woman decades before.

“In the early 1980’s I was the command judge advocate of a military base on an island in the middle of the Mississippi River. That military base happened to be on exclusive federal jurisdiction territory, so there was no state jurisdiction, just the federal government. As such, I also had a dual commission from the US Justice Dept. as a Special Assistant US Attorney in addition to my military duties. Simply said, I was the “law” both military and civilian for that island/military base. One Saturday evening, I got a call from an ER doctor in a nearby city. It seems he had treated a co-worker of his, an ER nurse, who had come to work that evening with bruises and obvious wounds from a beating. He said he understood I was the one to call to report a domestic violence case occurring in the on-base housing on our island military base. I took his telephone report, made a few calls, seeking advice from my commanding officer and others on how to handle this. Then, I put on my uniform and proceeded to the ER to interview the victim.

“The victim, who I will call Mrs. Jones, was a young pediatric nurse at the hospital. She was a Filipina immigrant, attractive and well-spoken, early 30’s. I met her in a staff lounge and could see she had taken a hard hit to the face with some other injuries. I introduced myself and asked her if she would tell me what happened. She thought for a long moment and then softly, “No, nothing happened.” This took me aback, I blustered a bit and told her what I already had heard and told her how she needed to let me “help her.” She gave a little smile and said, “No, the Doctor, misunderstood, I had an accident and have nothing to report.” I gave her all of the possible lines I could think of about taking action to protect herself and her children, etc. She would not relent from her nothing to report line. At length, she gave another little smile and said, ”Look, Captain, I know you are trying to help, but let me explain. Consider what I say as theoretical, just for arguments sake. Okay?” I nodded agreement.

“Mrs. Jones continued “Captain, assuming you thought my husband had beaten me, and I gave you testimony about it, you would have a duty to report it, and the very minimum action the military would take would destroy my husband’s career. He is a master sergeant with 17 years in, and if you court-martial him or even tell his commander, it will cause my husband to be kicked out with a minimum of a bad efficiency report, maybe charges, and he will never make his retirement in three years. He has spent his life as an infantry sergeant, in Viet Nam and Korea, and if he would be discharged without his retirement he, and I, and our children would have our life and future destroyed. How can you expect me to give you information that would destroy my life? My husband is a good man, your Army made him a warrior and put him through hell in Viet Nam. That may have made him to have a bad temper, who knows. I can tell you that if he had a momentary slip and hurt me or the kids, he would be his own judge and would do whatever was needed to make up for it. So, don’t you go off trying to help me, when all you will succeed in doing is to destroy my life. Leave me alone and let me deal with this.” She picked up her purse and left.

“At work on Monday morning, I discussed the case with the commanding officer and the base medical officer. We acknowledged that we could do nothing on mere speculation and without the wife’s testimony we could do nothing on the supposed domestic violence charge, even with the proclivities of military law. The base medical doctor said he would interview the husband and wife and see if he could get them into counseling.

“Thinking back on those events, I wondered if the Talking Head on CNN had any idea what a “One Strike” domestic violence policy would do to the rate of NFL wives reporting violence. One of the conundrums a battered wife faces is the decision of what is best for her to do; report the abuse, accept the abuse, or try to handle it herself. Women like Janay Rice, knowing that any report of abuse would cause their husband to lose his football career, would almost never report abuse. Janay Rice married her abuser after the event and decided she could handle the problem herself. Yes, we need to do more to prevent domestic abuse, but a rock solid policy of domestic abuse ending careers is a certain way to stop the battered women from reporting the wrongdoing.

“Your thoughts?”

I have included one particularly illustrative comment:

“The first time it is reported is the last straw in a domestic violence relationship. When a woman reports, she knows, it may be death by his hands she is facing. Reporting is the end, and may be the only way out. One strike rule, is likely the umpteenth strike she has taken.”

I added my opinion:

            What we are missing in all this is due process of law.  Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, by a jury of his peers?

            I understand our collective frustration with the tragedy of domestic violence, but lynch mob prosecution is NOT the answer.

            I am reminded by the tragic case of Jessica Gonzales whose case was illuminated in the Supreme Court ruling in Castle Rock v. Gonzales [545 U.S. 748 (2005); no. 04-278] [186].  Without question, there are horrendous examples of domestic violence and spousal abuse.  As a society, we cannot ignore such crimes.  However, our abhorrence must not mutate our commitment to due process of law.

            The NFL has an extraordinary brand to protect, but that must not supercede our most fundamental commitment to justice.

            Kevin gave us a perfect rationale for caution and a more enlightened approach to dealing with this terrible problem.  As in Kevin’s example and I will be so bold to say in the Rice case, criminal prosecution is not possible without a complaint.  Yet, we must establish a system of assistance and intervention to help men like Ray Rice amend their behavior and prevent the tragedy of Jessica Gonzales.

            Zero Tolerance and One Strike reflect our anger, frustration and disapproval of such conduct.  Unfortunately such policies or laws ignore false accusations for retribution and contributory culpability in such cases.  It seems to me, domestic violence is more akin to mental illness than felonious crime.  We need a more discerning system of triage filtration, and mental health treatment and intervention short of the criminal justice system.  As a society, we clearly failed to protect Jessica Gonzales and her children.  Destroying the lives of the perpetrator and victim in the heat of our righteous indignation is simply NOT the answer.

            Let us find a more enlightened means of dealing with domestic violence.  We must quickly abandon this damnable lynch-mob mentality.

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

News from the economic front:

-- The People's Bank of China injected 500 billion yuan (US$81B) into the country's five major state-owned banks in the form of a three-month, low-interest-rate loan to the banks, as it moves to counter a worse-than-expected slowdown in the world's No. 2 economy.  The move follows disappointing economic data, reflecting the PRC's economy is worsening rapidly despite targeted easing and other stimulus measures taken by Beijing early this year.

-- The U.S. Federal Reserve made no change to its position of low short-term rates for a “considerable time” after it stops buying assets in October.  According to the Wall Street Journal, 14 of 17 Fed officials believe the central bank’s first increase in near zero short-term rates will occur in 2015, with one member thinking the Fed should boost rates this year, while the other two think the central bank can hold off until 2016.  The internal debate continues to reflect concerns for the unemployment rate and the economic recovery.

Comments and contributions from Update no.665:

“Indeed my friend, September 11th. History will look back at that date aghast as we now look with equal horror on the murders by be-heading of our welfare workers and journalists. One cannot imagine a punishment suitable for these tainted individuals who in some misguided name of their religion find some satisfaction in these appalling acts.

“If they believe their God, whoever he is, will pat them on the back when the time comes then they are going to be grossly disappointed.

“I believe our two nations are, as one, in determination to locate and punish these individuals accordingly.  It may take time but it will occur.

“Remember Nuremburg.

“And if anyone is in doubt that justice will not prevail look at the link I have provided below.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Axis_personnel_indicted_for_war_crimes

My reply:

            Re: rabid Islamo-fascism.  Quite so!  As the President said, they are neither religious nor a state.  There is only one God . . . regardless of what name any of us utilize to refer to Him.  They falsely interpret God’s expectations; and, yes, absolutely, God will not be pleased with their conduct.  The sad reality is, they have been so bloody misguided by mutant clerics.

            Yes, we are one.  It took 20+ years to finally get bin Ladin with several missed opportunities along the way.  Yes, we will eventually get the murderer who so savagely executed our innocent citizens.

            I had not seen that particular listing.  Someone spent a lot of time & research compiling that list.  And, quite so . . . we have a long memory and a very long reach.  Thx for that war crimes link . . . useful for many purposes.

Hope you feel better soon, my friend.  Take care and enjoy.

Cheers,

Cap

 . . . follow-up comment:

Subject:  RE: Update no.665

From:  "Pete Gipson"

Date:  Wed, September 17, 2014 2:42 pm

To:  cap@parlier.com

“Cap, we need a new word in our language, murderer is not descriptive enough or conjures up enough horror in the mind for what these human misfits have done and may well do again. Barbarism, no, horrendous, certainly, repulsive, all of these yes but we need one word to sum up these ghastly descriptions and we can then apply it to these appalling misled miscreants.”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            Quite so!

            Groups like al-Qa’ida and ISIL remind me of a mob . . . once incited to violence, the mob takes on a life of its own. 

Comment to the Blog:

“I agree with the ominous tone of your writing around the term "New Russia." I suspect that the immediate Russian objective is Black Sea access. As with religion, ethnic strife makes a good cover story for economic objectives.

“I still use strategic objectives as my foundation for analysis. Based on that, the next question is what Russia sees as the next useful property. Perhaps you can suggest something Putin wants.

“On the Middle East, I urge caution. I remind all of the number of times US tools have turned on us. We supported the Taliban when they fought Russia, and at one time we backed Saddam Hussein. If the current crop of Syrians or whoever ends up shooting our weapons back at us, it will be our own doing. We do not learn.

“I agree with your analysis of the actual events in Ray and Janay Rice's violent relationship. A real discussion of violent relationships would take much more than a blog reply even at the simplest level, but I agree that it takes two parties. The initial NFL response was inadequate, but the commentator community wants emotional catharsis more than actual change. Where I disagree is in your conflating of this with the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown incidents. Wealthy celebrities' disagreement on the consequences of tarnishing the league's image have no relationship to police conduct, racism, or protest whether or not peaceful. For the other parts, personal relationships cannot be reasonably compared to official conduct or to crime in the streets. It's just not the same.

“My only question in the Oscar Pistorius matter was whether he is mentally ill. Apparently not.

“I am glad to see a hedge-fund manager go to prison for his crimes. Another dozen or two, televised, might be the beginning of a deterrent. The deterrent would be stronger if a majority of the next dozen or two were top managers of the "too big to fail" banks.

“I read that entire article on the police dressing as if they were soldiers. I agree with it based on both my education as a communication major and on my experience living and working in a wide variety of environments. The use of uniforms to shape attitude and thus behavior has been studied many times and that article is in the mainstream of the results.

“I would go further in two ways. One is the identity issue specific to police work. I believe police officers identify with each other and build their identities around their work more than people in any other field and regardless of such factors as age, race, or gender. They have an "us against them" mentality even before they acquire military uniforms and tank-like vehicles.

“The other thing the article does not address is the effect of those military uniforms and that gear on its audience of protestors and onlookers. Most people interact with ordinary uniformed police and base our opinions of them on that. However, most of us have little daily experience with the military, and those who do are training for, supporting, or participating in foreign wars. People relate to the appearance of what appears to be military troops and equipment in the streets of home only through movies they have seen. In movies, troops in one's home town are there to either take over or destroy the nation. I believe that is an important factor in the destruction in Ferguson, Missouri.

“People still argue about events similar to Ferguson that happened in the 1960s. I see no point in continuing that. Endlessly trying to place blame does no good. You are a writer, and you know, or should know, the effects of words like "agitator" and "anarchist." We have an opportunity to improve how our society functions by understanding what happened in Ferguson. Whether we use that opportunity is the open question.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: Russia.  Indeed!

            Re: Putin.  I think he seeks what Stalin had.  While I would like to think he will not be allowed to occupy and subjugate his neighbors.  He might be satisfied if he sufficiently intimidates his neighbors to bend them to his will and keep them from politically moving closer to the West.  If we do not stop him, he will keep going until he has a puppet government in Kiev.  Then, he will move on to Moldova and may even attempt intimidation of the Baltics.

            Re: caution in Middle East.  Indeed!

            Re: conduct.  No, no, I was not connecting the events.  There are huge differences between battery and homicide.  No, my comment was not about the events, it was about public conduct in the aftermath.

            Re: Pistorius.  My opinion.  He was perfectly sane.  If anything, he has anger control issues and a sense of entitlement that often accompanies celebrity.  He was guilty of murder, in my humble opinion; not remediated murder, but murder nonetheless.

            Re: monied punishment.  Indeed.  I’m all for that.  The whole nation and a goodly chunk of the world paid a terrible price for the irrational exuberance of those financial decision-makers.

            Re: police attitude.  For a long time, police suffered similar disrespect those of us who served in military uniform did during Vietnam.  Those attitudes changed.  The attitudes that affect police will as well.  I go out of my way to show my appreciation for the work of police officers and firefighters; I think that respect will change attitudes in time.  Perhaps if we helped police deal with crime, it would help break down that “us versus them” attitude as well.  We should be helping the police.  In fact, I believe it is our duty as citizens to help the police.  In this context, what makes the military so bad?

            I live through the King riots in 1968.  We have seen that reaction far too many times, the latest incident in Ferguson.  I do agree; Ferguson should be a societal lesson in many ways.  I’ve heard far too many voices condemning Officer Wilson before the facts are known; far too many people ignoring delinquent conduct as a stimulant; and far too many people rationalizing the rioting, destruction of property and violence as some justifiable response to perceived transgressions.  What we saw in Ferguson was modern-day lynch mob mentality instigated by outside agitators for their selfish purposes.  Let the justice system work.  If it fails, then let us all protest and improve the system.  This aftermath behavior has got to stop.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)