Update no.701

Update from the Heartland

No.701

18.5.15 – 24.5.15

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

To all,

Ireland became the world's first nation-state to legalize non-heterosexual marriage by popular vote, when voters approved a proposed constitutional amendment.  The vote in Ireland was impressive on several levels: 60% voter turnout, 42 of 43 jurisdictions approved the constitutional amendment; and 61% of those who voted, favored the change.   One day, We, the People, of this Grand Republic will respect the personal, private choices of other citizens.  While the vote in Ireland is encouraging, why does a citizens fundamental right to privacy and freedom of choice necessitate a popular vote?  Progress by jerks, I suppose.

News from the economic front:

-- The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Japan grew 2.4% in annualized terms in 1Q2015, an improvement from a revised 1.1% expansion in 4Q2014.  The unexpected growth was driven by household and business spending – an indication that the world's 3^rd largest economy is starting to fire up again.

-- The Wall Street Journal reported U.S. Federal Reserve officials are trying to make sense of the 1Q2015 economic slowdown.  Many members of the policy board believed temporary factors were holding the economy back.  Further, before they lift rates, they want to be confident growth is on track, unemployment will keep falling, and inflation will gradually rise toward their 2% goal.  The prevailing opinion three weeks ago doubted they would be ready to raise short-term interest rates by midyear.

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) Debacle [552]:

-- Well . . . things seem to be poppin’ now with respect to penalties and punishment of international banks consequent to the LIBOR debacle (and the foreign exchange rate manipulation scandal).  Perhaps, it was the confirmation of Attorney General Loretta Lynch [697] that convinced the banks to take their pain – such as it is – and move on; or, perhaps, it was the Justice Department action voiding the 2012 agreement with Swiss bank UBS [700].

-- UBS became the latest global bank to plead guilty to crimes related to foreign-exchange rate manipulation in the United States, for which the bank received fines of US$545M, after authorities probing the manipulation tore up a three-year-old LIBOR agreement with the bank [700]. 

-- UBS will plead guilty to wire fraud and pay a further US$203M fine related to the LIBOR case.  In addition, UBS will pay a US$342M penalty to the U.S. Federal Reserve, for "engaging in unsound business practices," related to its foreign-exchange business.

-- UBS is one of several big banks, including Barclays, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) that are expected to settle probes into manipulation of foreign-exchange markets with U.S. authorities.

-- Five global banks have agreed to pay US$5.6B in combined penalties and will plead guilty to criminal charges to resolve a long running U.S. investigation into whether traders at the banks colluded to move foreign currency rates in directions to benefit their own positions.  Four of the banks – J.P. Morgan Chase, Barclays, RBS, and Citigroup – will plead guilty to conspiring to manipulate the price of U.S. dollars and euros. The fifth bank – UBS AG – received immunity in the antitrust case, but will plead guilty to manipulating the LIBOR benchmark and will pay an additional, as yet unspecified, LIBOR-related fine.

-- So we don’t lose focus . . . the infamous 16, involved, international banks are:

• ·      Barclays [UK] – US$454M fine [550]; Singapore sanctions [600]; three charged {Johnson, Mathew, Contogoulas} [636]
• ·      Bank of America [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      BTMU [Japan] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Citigroup [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Credit Suisse [Switzerland] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Deutsche Bank [Germany] – US$654M LIBOR profit [578]; set aside €500M (US$641M) for LIBOR liability [589]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Lloyds TSB [UK] – fined US$370M [659]
• ·      HSBC [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      HBOS [UK]
• ·      JPMorgan Chase [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Norinchuckin [Japan]
• ·      Rabobank [Netherlands] – fined €774M (£663M, US$1.06B); CEO resigned; 30 others censured [620]; three charged {Robson, Thompson, Motomura} [631]
• ·      RBC [Canada]
• ·      RBS [UK] – £390M (US$612.6M) in fines, 21 employees involved [582]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      UBS [Switzerland] – US$1.5B fine, two charged {Hayes, Darin} [575]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      West LB [Germany]

Added to the list by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [600]:

• ·      ING [Netherlands] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      BNP Paribas [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Crédit Agricole [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      DBS [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Standard Chartered [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      United Overseas Bank [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Macquarie [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Commerzbank [Germany] – Singapore sanctions [600]

Others involved:

• ·      R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd. [UK] – two charged {Farr, Gilmour} [583]
• ·      ICAP [UK] – fined US$87M + three executives charged {Read, Wilkinson, Goodman} [615]

I trust none of us will lose sight of what these banks have done.  Lest we forget!

Continuation from Update no.699:

“One misunderstanding here. I did not think the shooters in Garland, Texas, were set up. I was pointing out that this event appeared to be an ordinary law enforcement event. What I question is the ‘terrorist’ arrests prior to the ‘art’ show event.”

My reply:

            Thank you for the clarification.

            Re: prior ‘terrorist’ arrests.  We should question every arrest and especially ‘terrorist’ arrests, as those are very serious charges.  To address your implied concern, we need to see the evidence to make the judgment.  Intelligence Community (IC) and Law Enforcement (LE) should infiltrate bad and potential bad groups; that is their job.  If you have a specific instance you are concerned about, we can discuss it to expand this topic.

 . . . with another follow-up:

“The problem with your statement is that you assume the spies do their jobs with some level of common sense and/or integrity. That contradicts history. Back when they were suppressing opposition to the Vietnam disaster, their lists of ‘radicals’ included such threats as the Boy Scouts. There are documented instances of organizations they created or took over for the purpose of ‘finding’ dangerous radicals. Nowadays they focus more on finding individuals vulnerable to being radicalized and providing them with resources for improbable attacks on whatever is handy. Underwear bombs and shoe bombs arise from the same feverish, Hollywood-influenced mentality that tried and failed to assassinate Fidel Castro with cigars and such things.”

 . . . and my follow-up reply:

            Surely, you are not suggesting the IC and/or LE planned, enabled or somehow assisted Richard Reid [22.12.2001] or Umar Abdulmutallab [25.12.2009]?

            I have no hope of dissuading you from your rather negative view of the IC.  I can only say, I have more than one stint in the IC, and I do not share your assessment.  Further, I respectfully suggest, you are confusing political decisions with the conduct of the IC.  The people who are the IC are good professionals, doing their bests to execute the directions they are given by their politician overseers.  Let’s put any blame where it properly belongs.

Comments and contributions from Update no.700:

Comment to the Blog:

“Congratulations to Aspen Shae on finishing high school! In my experience, college was more interesting and offered less silly rules and more mature company.

“I did not understand the point of the amendment to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. ‘Direct and innocuous’ is an unusual combination of adjectives but does not clarify the intent or predicted effect of the amendment. In any case, if it turns on the intent of Congress, the effect will be to oppose President Obama in any possible way.

“The largest Eurozone economies are growing, however slowly. That does not mean we have finished with the stresses of unequal growth, absent social services, or national unrest in Europe.

“The signs of life in the high-finance regulatory community (i.e., the Justice Department) are the most important part of this week's report, and they bring hope. Revisiting LIBOR, setting aside the anemic settlement, and seeking something close to justice seem to me to signal a change of attitudes that could restore governance of the United States to the people. That will be necessary before we can correct the many other harms done by the oligarchy currently in the saddle.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: Aspen.  Thank you.  We hope she has a similar experience in college.

            Re; IRI nuclear deal review.  Amendment to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 was simply the vehicle to express their concern and to make their demand.  The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 was the seminal legislation in the U.S. to control nuclear proliferation and especially weaponization technology, so what little we know about the IRI deal falls under that general purview.

            Re: unequal growth.  Well said and agreed.

            Re: LIBOR.  Again, agreed, which is one reason I try to track these inch-stones on the journey.  Corporate penalties are simply nowhere near as effective as criminal prosecution, conviction and punishment of the perpetrators.  We need more of these guys in prison.

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

Cheers,

Cap                 :-)

Update no.700

Update from the Heartland

No.700

11.5.15 – 17.5.15

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

To all,

Aspen Shae, our oldest grandchild, graduated from high school on Sunday evening.  She will attend and play Fußball (soccer) for Butler Community College, El Dorado, Kansas.  Aspen still has regional and hopefully state championship matches to play before she is completely done.  We are so very proud of her accomplishments and eagerly look to the next stage of her life.  Aspen is the first of our grandchildren to leave the nest . . . so to speak.

The follow-up news items:

-- The House of Representatives passed the Senate’s version of H.R. 1191 [House: 400-25-0-7(3); Senate: 98-1-0-1(0)] [699], which is now titled: Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015.  The text is now available to the public.  The legislation inserts a new section into the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 [PL 83-703; 68 Stat. 919; 30.8.1954] [509] – §135, Congressional Review and Oversight of Agreements with Iran.  The language is rather direct and innocuous, reflecting congressional apprehension with respect to compliance and enforcement.  The real question with this bill hangs upon interpretation by Congress and the Judiciary, which is impossible to predict.  At the end of the day, I still urge President Obama to veto this bill.

-- Surprise, surprise!  The Boston Marathon bombing trial jury deliberated just 14 hours before reaching its decision to sentence Dzhokhar Tsarnaev [592, 699] to death for his contribution to the brutal and deadly terrorist action.  I truly wish the death penalty would never be invoked, but alas, as long as there are evil men who carry out such horrific acts of violence, they deserve to be eradicated like the vermin they are.  Now, the appeals process begins.  It took six years to execute McViegh [302]; I expect a comparable review of Tsarnaev’s conviction and sentence.

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed H.R.2048 [House: 338-88-0-6(3)], provisionally titled: Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2015, or USA FREEDOM Act of 2015, and sent the bill to the Senate.  The legislation offers reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) [PL 95-511; 92 Stat. 1783; 25.10.1978], applying constraints while continuing to enable domestic electronic surveillance by the U.S. Government (USG).  As I read the text, the bill appears to be a reasonable attempt to find balance between protecting our fundamental right to privacy and the USG’s tools to wage war successfully in the War on Islamic Fascism.

News from the economic front:

-- The European Union's statistics agency EuroStat reported the combined GDP of the 19 Eurozone countries was 0.4% higher in 4Q2014, and grew 1.6% on an annualized basis. For the first time since the first half of 2010, all four of the eurozone's largest economies recorded growth.

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) Debacle [552]:

-- The Justice Department announced it has voided its 2012 settlement with Swiss bank UBS AG, related to the LIBOR interest-rate rigging conspiracy – an unprecedented move with a major financial institution that indicates an increasingly aggressive negotiating posture in governmental action.  From a casual, public, observation perspective, UBS has been one of the most cooperative of the major banks, so this USG action peaks my curiosity as to what it means to the agreements with other banks and to those banks not yet concluded.  I would like to think we might see more criminal charges as part of any ‘deals’ to settle the banks’ misconduct in this affair.

Fm 552/575 -- 582:

[MAKE SURE TO COPY CHANGES FORWARD]

-- So we don’t lose focus . . . the infamous 16, involved, international banks are:

• ·      Barclays [UK] – US$454M fine [550]; Singapore sanctions [600]; three charged {Johnson, Mathew, Contogoulas} [636]
• ·      Bank of America [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      BTMU [Japan] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Citigroup [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Credit Suisse [Switzerland] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Deutsche Bank [Germany] – US$654M LIBOR profit [578]; set aside €500M (US$641M) for LIBOR liability [589]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Lloyds TSB [UK] – fined US$370M [659]
• ·      HSBC [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      HBOS [UK]
• ·      JPMorgan Chase [U.S.] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Norinchuckin [Japan]
• ·      Rabobank [Netherlands] – fined €774M (£663M, US$1.06B); CEO resigned; 30 others censured [620]; three charged {Robson, Thompson, Motomura} [631]
• ·      RBC [Canada]
• ·      RBS [UK] – £390M (US$612.6M) in fines, 21 employees involved [582]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      UBS [Switzerland] – US$1.5B fine, two charged {Hayes, Darin} [575]; Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      West LB [Germany]

Added to the list by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [600]:

• ·      ING [Netherlands] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      BNP Paribas [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Crédit Agricole [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      DBS [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Standard Chartered [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      United Overseas Bank [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Macquarie [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
• ·      Commerzbank [Germany] – Singapore sanctions [600]

Others involved:

• ·      R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd. [UK] – two charged {Farr, Gilmour} [583]
• ·      ICAP [UK] – fined US$87M + three executives charged {Read, Wilkinson, Goodman} [615]

I trust none of us will lose sight of what these banks have done.  Lest we forget!

Comments and contributions from Update no.699:

Comment to the Blog:

“Cal Thomas continues struggling to hold back the tide. As a history buff, I find it annoying that Justice Kennedy and others would use ‘millennia,’ which exposes their ignorance of the history they cite. Millennia ago, marriage little resembled today's emotional and individual commitment. It was a joining of family business interests, not expected to be emotionally rewarding except by coincidence. Another change is that nowadays civil society may sanction marriages as well as religious organizations, and that changes the institution's place in the larger society. Worse yet, I suspect Justice Kennedy and Mr. Thomas are attempting an underhanded citing of the Bible. That document does not support monogamy. If we look to Abraham for our best example, the founder of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam was not monogamous sexually, and that is a key point in his story. Other examples of polygamy and/or open concubinage abound. More to the topic at hand, the Bible is subject to interpretation in its treatment of non-heterosexuals, and various quotes and analyses are in use to support differing views.

“I agree with you that the issue at hand exceeds even the important one of marriage. The underlying question is one of general equal treatment. Those ignorant people trying to use history as their tool ignore the fact that history concerns change, not stasis. I believe that change, over the very long term (millennia) tends to more equality among people and less personal and societal violence. However, I disagree with you on the opinion of the majority of the American people. At the time of the Stonewall action in the late 1960s, the great majority surely opposed equality for non-heterosexual people. Forty-some years down the line, the opposition is a vocal minority that is mostly seen by the rest of us as hateful.

“The Congress's latest odd resolution, the budget blueprint, continues a pattern that began the night election returns in 2008 showed that Obama had won. The good of the nation lost its priority with the Republican Party that night, replaced by hatred of President Obama that has not abated. The over-reaching by Congress is another part of the same aggression.

“The attack on the anti-Islamic art show in Garland, Texas, is the first one that follows a realistic pattern. I imagine that it was an authentic effort by ‘lone wolf’ extremists. Official America protects free speech whether or not it is offensive, and that is appropriate. The attackers met the fate one would expect if no outside factors influenced the event. I gather it's necessary to point out that the Catholic Church has not been presented as a threat to the United States by our government and its people have not been held in extra-legal prisons, bombed, profiled, or otherwise attacked. Claims that the U.S. only seeks to punish or prevent ‘extremist’ Islamic attackers ring hollow to those on the receiving end of the bombs and the rest of it.

“I noted with interest the discussion on writing in your comment section. I seem not to have that ‘passion’ around writing so many writers discuss. I experience writing as an easy flow of words and ideas, but not as something that gives me an identity or other great emotional rewards. Editing is a useful skill that I often enjoy for its ability to clarify and strengthen ideas. Others laud my writing in a variety of venues and situations. However, both the willingness and the ability to market and sell my writing are entirely absent in me. I have an odd learning disorder that may account for that, but whatever the cause my writing ability is not matched by a drive to reach an audience.”

My response:

            Re: Justice Kennedy.  Again, I suspect that his ‘millennia’ query was a baiting exercise to test the arguments of the petitioners, rather than an implicit personal comment regarding his attitude toward non-heterosexual marriage.  Nonetheless, we shall probably know his opinion in a couple of months.

            Re: marriage.  Good points all.  Plain and simple, women and children were traditionally considered property of the husband / father – the patriarch of the family.  Our society rejected the Doctrine of Coverture at least a quarter century ago and could be argued the rejection was nearly a century ago.  The traditional argument is flat bogus.

            Re: equality.  Glad we agree.  The marriages cases are about respect for every citizen and equality for all under the law.  Full stop!

            Re: budget.  Again, well said.  I will add the mindlessness of partisan, parochial, political attacks on President Obama were, in my humble opinion, the exact flip-side of the equally mindlessness attack on President Bush (43) during the prior administration.  I can only hope I live long enough to see respectful opposition return to government and politics.

            Re: jihadists.  I’m not quite sure what your point is on this one.  A little additional clarification might be useful.

            Re: religion.  I will note my previously espoused observation that Islam is about 600 years behind Christianity in terms of maturation.  Both religions have claimed there is only ONE true God – theirs.  For Christians, that exclusivity is represented by Jesus of Nazareth; for Muslims, exclusivity is represented by Abū al-Qāsim Muhammad ibn Abd Allāh ibn Abd al-Muttalib ibn Hāshim.  Six hundred years ago, disparaging Jesus would have resulted in your violent death.  Christianity has matured since those days.  Islam will mature as well.  I will argue that tolerance of dissent is critical to testing our faith.  Muslims will eventually figure that out and will condemn the violent element among them.

            Re: writing.  It means something different to all of us.  Fortunately for us, you like to write and express your opinions and perspective.  Thank you very much.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“I'm not aware of any particular maturity among the Middle Eastern religions. So long as they continue to wage war in the name of peace, that is a specious concept.

“I did not use the term ‘jihadist.’ If you refer to the attack on the anti-Islamic art show, I see this as the first of the allegations of ‘terrorism’ by Islamic radicals on U.S. soil that actually follows a realistic pattern of criminal activity. The others, with the exception of 9-11, mostly come closer to the pattern established in the 1960s of infiltration of the peace movement by Federal officials who then fomented violent or illegal actions. Most of the prior ‘terrorist’ arrests follow that dubious model, except that they focus on individuals rather than organizations.”

  . . . my follow-up response:

            Re: maturity.  Well, I cannot quibble with your observation.  I can only note that history has shown the maturation of religious practices are measured in centuries, not decades or human life span.

            Re: jihadist.  Thank you for your explanation.  I will concede that some folks saw that “art show” as “anti-Islamic”; however, I do not.  Was it intended to confront demands for respect often espoused in contemporary intercourse . . . yes!  However, that does not make it “anti-Islamic.”  The difference I see between jihadist terrorism and common criminal conduct is the professed belief, connection, affiliation, et cetera.  In the Garland, Texas, event, they both proclaimed affiliation with ISIL, thus the jihadist label.  I surmise from your words that you may think those two shooters were set-up, framed, coaxed, or otherwise duped into their terrorist actions, and law enforcement efforts to infiltrate such groups is somehow wrong.  If so, we shall respectfully disagree.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.699

Update from the Heartland

No.699

4.5.15 – 10.5.15

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

To all,

The follow-up news items:

-- The surviving Tsarnaev brother was convicted on all 30 charges, including capital terrorism [695], for his part in the Boston Marathon bombings [592].  The penalty phase of his trial is underway.  The defense argument that Dzhokhar should be spared the death penalty because he was unduly influenced by his older brother Tamerlan is so bloody bogus, i.e., the devil made me do it, or the masked grandma stole my homework.  Really!?!  Give me a break!  I hope the jury does what must be done.  However, since the trial is being conducted in Boston, Massachusetts, I expect the jury will accept the argument and decide upon life in prison for Tsarnaev’s punishment.

-- As the mighty cogs of the U.S. Supreme Court turn slowly on the four, state, marriage cases before them, opinion-writer Cal Thomas felt compelled to offer his perspective.

“Supreme Court should not redefine marriage”

by Cal Thomas

Wichita Eagle

Published: Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Dear ol’ Cal e re-illuminated the ‘millennia’ query of Justice Kennedy [698].  He is also concerned about opening the door to polygamists and other non-traditional marriage arrangements.  Cal draws attention to Justice Kennedy’s reasoning in his United States v. Windsor [570 U.S. ___ (2013)] [606], which is rather odd, since Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court in the narrow 5-4 decision that struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 {21.9.1996}[547] as unconstitutional.  Cal concluded, “If we erase the boundaries that have guided humanity for generations, we weaken our society,” which is Cal’s reply to Justice Kennedy’s ‘millennia’ question.  Like so many of these morality issues in the law and thus before the Court, I see the issue in far broader terms, e.g., Roe v. Wade [410 U.S. 113 (1973)]{22.1.1973}[319] was not just about abortion, it was far more about a citizen’s fundamental right to privacy in making very personal medical decisions regarding her body and her life.  So it is here.  This case(s) is much more than marriage.  It is the rights of individual citizens versus the power of the State to impose upon the private lives of citizens.  Cal, and probably a majority of American citizens, believe to their very core and soul that anything other than monogamous, bilateral, heterosexual, traditional marriage is wrong, not just for themselves but for every single citizen; and, like Cal, they believe so strongly they want the full force and weight of the federal government to enforce their beliefs and opinions.  I cannot predict the outcome of the Supremes’ deliberations.  Yet, since Cal Thomas offered his opinion from his bully pulpit, I shall offer mine from the meager platform available to me.  The State has exceeded its authority under the Constitution and the principles that founded this Grand Republic when it imposed its morality upon what is predominately, and nearly totally, a private matter with respect to decisions that citizens should be free to make on how they wish to live their private lives.  Thus, federal, state and local laws that infringe upon an individual’s freedom of choice are unconstitutional . . . as long as those choices cause no injury or harm to others, and they are made freely without coercion or intimidation.  Now that I have said all that, perhaps ol’ Cal is correct . . . the Supreme Court should not redefine marriage . . . I will add, neither should government.  Marriage is a private contractual matter between consenting adults, not an issue for state intervention.  Full stop!

On Tuesday, both chambers of Congress passed an odd resolution [S.Con.Res.11; Senate: 51-48-0-1(0); House: 226-197-0-9(3)] that some folks have touted as the first federal budget since 2009.  This resolution will not be submitted to the President.  It is only a “blueprint” for future budgetary legislation . . . well, at least that is what some elements of the Press have labeled S.Con.Res.11.  I am really struggling with the wisdom of this apparently meaningless gesture.  Both chambers of Congress spent valuable time crafting this document.  The only discernible purpose to S.Con.Res.11 is simply an extravagant shot-across-the-bow to the Administration, as an attempt to dictate to the Executive the only acceptable constraints by which to operate the government.  This smacks of Congress wanting to run the government despite the Constitution’s separation of powers.

The 2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City rendered its judgment in the case of ACLU v. Clapper [2CCA 14‐42‐cv (2015)] – the appeal of ACLU v. Clapper [USDC NY SD case no. 13 Civ. 3994 (WHP) (2013)] {27.12.2013} [632], which supported the government’s position in the application of §215 telephonic metadata collection and analysis program.  The three-judge panel reversed the district court decision and declared the NSA metadata program unconstitutional.  I have not yet read the decision; it is in my “to be read” folder.  The case is destined for the Supremes, I do believe.

In yet another interesting congressional action, the Senate decided to fire its own shot at the Executive, in this instance [H.R. 1191; Senate: 98-1-0-1(0)].  The Senate commandeered H.R. 1191, which the House had passed as the Protecting Volunteer Firefighters and Emergency Responders Act by a vote of 415-0.  The Senate gutted everything beyond the bill number and passed what they titled as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, demanding Senate approval for any agreement with Iran, even though the “agreement” is not a treaty, under the authority of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution – “Advise and Consent” of the Senate for treaties.  The bill must go back to the House to be voted on in its new form, before it goes to the President.  Presuming the House passes it by a veto-proof majority, the proposed law will go to the President.  I would still recommend the President veto H.R. 1191 as a symbolic gesture against the overreach of Congress and force it to the Supreme Court as an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers.  This one could get very interesting.  Stay tuned!

The attempted jihadist terrorist attack in Garland, Texas, last Sunday, instigated some rather intriguing conversations and debates.  By my perception, the majority of the Press coverage and pronouncements of various talking heads chose to focus their inquisition on Pamela Geller for her “antagonism” of Islam via the “draw the Prophet Mohammed” contest conference she promoted.  The discussion seems to have taken on a rather disturbing tone – the consequences of “political correctness” taken beyond the threshold of tolerance.  The same Press has no qualms maligning the Catholic Church with respect to its political stance on a wide variety of social or moral issues, or its conduct in the priesthood sexual conduct tragedy, but heaven forbid we might offend Islam.  Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan or Indonesia, have every right to define acceptable public conduct in their countries.  If an American citizen chooses to visit an Islamic country (or any other country for that matter), he is obligated to observe and oblige the laws and customs of that country.  Americans do NOT have the right or moral authority to export our laws, our customs & practices, to other countries, Islamic or not.  Conversely, an immigrant’s or visitor’s religious proclivities absolutely DO NOT give them any right or basis of objection for public conduct in this country they find offensive.  I have lived and worked in a few other countries in my life, and I have visited many more beyond those.  I have always tried to obey the laws and customs in those countries, and further I tried within my, albeit limited, capacity to speak the local language.  The Catholic Church heavily influences life in virtually every aspect of public conduct in Italy, for example.  I was “offended” by some of that religious imposition, but I had no right whatsoever to disobey that imposition; my choices were obey or leave.  The same applies to Muslims living in the United States, or Denmark, or France.  Their religion does NOT give them special protections.  Geller did not incite violence.  Those two perpetrators chose to violently demonstrate their offense.  Thank goodness for the excellent marksmanship of the local police officers, both perps died before they carry out their violent intentions.  I find little value in Geller’s conference, but I will defend her right to do exactly what she did.  I may not agree with Geller, but I must say she has handle this controversy in a far more elegant manner than those who have condemned her in the name of “political correctness.”

News from the economic front:

-- The Reserve Bank of Australia cut its benchmark interest rate by 0.25% to a record low 2.00% –the second rate cut this year – as the central bank moves to shore up economic growth amid falling commodity prices.

-- The Commerce Department reported the U.S. trade deficit widened by 43.1% to a seasonally adjusted US$51.37B – the largest trade gap in nearly two decades – suggesting that international commerce was a significant drag on U.S. economic growth.

-- The National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China reported that exports fell 6.2% in April from a year earlier, after a drop of 14.6% in March.  Imports also fell more than expected, reflecting weaker domestic demand, down 16.1% in April from a year earlier, compared with a 12.3% decrease in March.  The data reflects broad global resistance to economic growth.

-- The Labor Department reported U.S. nonfarm payrolls grew a seasonally adjusted 223,000 in April, rebounding from an anemic March – 85,000 jobs revised down from the previously reported 126,000 jobs.  The department also revised the February payroll to 266,000, up from the previously reported 264,000.  The unemployment rate ticked down to 5.4% in April from 5.5% in March.  The jobless rate is moving closer to the Federal Reserve's expectation of ‘full’ employment, which it pegs between 5.0% and 5.2%.

-- The People's Bank of [the People’s Republic of] China cut its benchmark interest rate by 0.25%, its third reduction since November last year amid slowing economic growth.

Comments and contributions from Update no.698:

"Thanks again Cap. Been a little slack of late. Isn’t there always so much going on in our ‘retired service’ life’s! Too much.

"I remember your comment of some weeks ago talking of an impending election and its incumbent political hassle. ‘Hey Ho, let the fun begin’. The fun, as you called it I believe in a disparaging way, has been on the gas burner here in U/K for several weeks now. I believe the majority of the electorate are sick to the back teeth of the shenanigans of our politicians, two parties of which may well be neck and neck in the polls. Should one believe them. Well it will all be decided on Thursday next, the traditional day of our General Elections.

Claims and counter claims have been abundant. ‘’We will spend more on the Health Service.’ ‘We  won’t put up taxes’ etc etc. 

"We are as a nation are still, somewhat successfully, clawing our way out of the monetary sticking pit wrought upon us by the clowns ‘running’ the banks and that my friend is the only way to continue. My view is, as I feel yours might be, ‘if you aint got it don’t spend it’.

"However Cap, as you said, ‘Let the fun begin’. I’ll update you.

"Oh and don’t, whatever you guys do, cut the budget for NASA."

Regs, Peter.

My reply:

Peter,

            Re: slack of late.  I must confess, I have not devoted as much time to Update topics.  My “To Be Read” file of court cases continues to grow.  Since retirement, I have been more focused on my books of late.  I try to keep up, but alas, I am only a flawed and limited man.  As always, you are always welcome to advance any topic that strikes your fancy.

            Re: UK elections.  Yes, y’all are deep into it.  Only a few more days to go.  One blessing in the Motherland . . . your election seasons are established by law to be confined to a comparatively short time.  Vote well and be thankful for your blessings.

            Re: politicians.  They share traits world-wide it appears . . . they are quite adept at promising to spend other people’s money.

            Re: NASA funding.  I agree.  I am doing my part.

 . . . follow-up comment:

"Agree your points re retirement! I can only admire the devotion that you apply to your writing. I only wish I could knuckle down to it myself. There are certainly far too many distractions in my life and I suspect yours too.

"What do we do? Well not a politician!

"I’ve often wondered if we could run our nations without them. No I don’t mean a military government. Maybe a body of the elected and a sprinkling of voting Non-Elected but well qualified people to sustain the belief that we the people need to have in the governing body.

"A job for you young sir!"

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            Retirement, to me, is about enjoying life and engaging your passions.  For some, it is gardening; for others, fishing; for yet others, sitting on the couch watching television.  For me, it is writing.  I truly love the process from conception and research to telling the story.  I am not particularly keen on the editing process, but it is an inextricable part of writing.  Part of my “arrangement” with Jeanne is, the pre-dawn hours are mine; the workday hours are for writing, although necessary distractions do occur, and the evenings and weekends are together.  The process works for us, for me.  I am home, so close at hand, if needed, but I am not under foot.

            The key to writing is devoting / dedicating time, whatever time you can set aside – one hour, ten minutes, whatever, whenever – to just write.

            The problem we face with politics is money.  As long as so much money is “available,” corruption cannot be far away.  Human beings are flawed, weak creatures, and infinitely susceptible to the corruption of money.  We must figure out a way to separate governmental action – legislative, executive and judicial – from the money.  The only check we have is our vote.  I once thought term limits would be useful, but all that would do is make the corruptibility of staffers even more pronounced than it already is.  The re-election seduction yields flawed men who are more focused on re-election than doing what is best for this Grand Republic.  At the end of the day, we must resist becoming cynical as we observe the weaknesses of mankind.

            I would never succeed as a politician.  I have learned that my aversion to putting my hand into other people’s pockets is simply too strong and pervasive.  I struggle with marketing my own books for the very same reason.

Comment to the Blog:

“Justice Kennedy's argument against same-gender marriage based on ‘millennia of tradition’ is strikingly unoriginal. That exact appeal has been used to support slavery and many other injustices. Usually Kennedy knows better than that.

“The violence in Baltimore is perhaps inexcusable but is certainly understandable. A couple of additional points merit consideration, however.

“The first is the origin of the worst rioting, on the first day. A central factor in that is the police method of preparing for violence they were certain would occur. They shut down bus service, thus trapping students downtown who could not get home from school. Student frustration ensued, of course.

“Another fact worthy of consideration is that this was not an isolated incident. Over 100 people had been killed by Baltimore police since 2010. Nobody sane would want to continue that, but it continued anyhow. Perhaps the feeling in play was a desperate need to bring attention to this pattern.”

Comment to the Blog:

            Re: millennia.  Precisely the point.  Perhaps he was just baiting the plaintiffs to hear their arguments.  We will know, or at least we should know, by the end of June.

            Re: Baltimore violence.  I am afraid it is long past understandable . . . looting a local, pharmacy . . . really?  Perpetual resentment . . . well, then, storm the Bastille rather than loot the bakery.

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

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)