Update no.1189

Update from the Sunland

No.1189

21.10.24 – 27.10.24

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

 

To all,

 

I continue my quest, perhaps naively and foolishly, to understand why so many good Americans citizens are and remain blind to the threat that [the person who shall no longer be named] represents to the future of the United States of America. Why do the MAGAts not care a hoot about who he is as a human being? Why do they not care a twit about the observations of General John Francis Kelly, USMC (Ret), former and longest serving chief of staff to the president in the previous administration?

I cannot delve into the minds and thinking of the MAGAts. I can only look at myself. From my experience and years of living as a midshipman, a leader of Marines, an experimental test pilot, and a manager in the corporate world, I have come to see leadership in very clear, distinct, demonstrable terms. To me, there is a threshold for successful leadership that can be defined by morality. In essence, does a potential leader carry and demonstrate the basic morality of respect for others and a commitment to principles of life that establish their behavior in private . . . when no one is watching. 

The best I can figure is the MAGAts, from the top on down, could not care less about character. They only look to policies they like, e.g., border wall, abortion ban, deportation, and imposing their beliefs on everyone else. Like an in-grained mantra, they tell us, “Don’t listen to what he says. Look at what he does.” When I hear that admonition, I think, ‘yep, they could not care less about character or morality; all they care about is the policies they like, they want, and they will take however they can get them.’

In contrast, I cannot get past the character issues to even consider policy. To me, character is as much a constitutional prerequisite as the Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requirements of the U.S Constitution—age and residency. The founders chose not to address the character threshold because they could not imagine any candidate for president would even be considered for the presidency with a felony conviction. They truly believed age was sufficient to demonstrate maturity and morality. Our collective experience of the last nine plus years has proven the Founders wrong, regrettably. Further, the attraction of individuals to a dictator is, in itself, a character flaw. It is not and has nothing to do with policy.

On this topic, it is very important to remember the wisdom of history. the 18^th-century Irish philosopher Edmund Burke is attributed but not cited with observing. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” A more popular variation of Burke’s observation is attributed to Thomas Jefferson, who noted, "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." They are wise words, and I heed them. I have no intention of remaining silent. I am prepared to endure the wrath if our ‘wannabe’ returns to the instruments of state.

At the end of the day, a dictatorship is the most efficient form of governance . . . as long as the dictator’s policies are your policies, and he does not decide to purify the blood of his people and you are not among the chosen pure of blood. At that moment, you will learn why the Founders chose a republic form of governance over a dictatorship. So, be happy with your focus of policy and pray the dictator never changes his mind.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1188:

“Yes Cap your coming election figures are high in our news bulletins throughout the day, our response is usually the same ‘oh no, we’ve just seen this’! Oh well it’ll soon be over and done with. For the peace and future of our blue planet please do put the right person in the chair. It’s your decision not ours.”

My reply:

Quite understandable, my friend. It is most unfortunate that our silly season has dominated your media, but I suppose that is life. Certainly, the importance of this election to all our allies cannot be overstated. If the Orange Menace makes it back to control the instruments of state, there will be no guardrails this time, and he will surround himself with loyal sycophants (no more saner minds). It will be Katie bar the door. Two weeks from today, the nation will start to count the ballots. We may not know the results for days. I so deeply want to put the correct person in the Oval Office. Jeanne and I have done our part to that end precisely, but it is not up to us. There will be something like 150 million votes to count, and those votes will decide . . . well, actually, the Electoral College will decide because states will have their say. Yes it is our decision, but we try to the best we can for all our friends. I have to have faith the system will work properly, and the correct person will be sworn into office on January 20^th. Hang in there, my friend.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Thanks Cap. Halfway through ‘Explosion’. Something odd that piece when he was apprehended by the police as his current lady friend has been arrested as a suspect spy. There was something about that that I had seen before. Perhaps some time ago you sent that piece to me as a sample of what you were writing!”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

Ah yes, you’re getting into the thick of it. Yes, I do believe you have reviewed sections. I hope you enjoy the printed version. BTW, while my representation of the female spies arrested was fictional, they were actual events in history. A number of serving officers were implicated, and Brian is the fictional manifestation of those hapless officers.

Enjoy all the books. I just passed the halfway mark in first draft writing of Innocence Lost (IL). Next up after IL is the next volume of the To So Few series . . . takes the characters off to the Korean War.

 

Comment to the Blog:

“We’ll see what news the Europa Clipper brings, eventually.

“Sociologists have found patterns in authoritarians. One of them is convincing enough people to trust only the self-chosen leader by causing mistrust of existing institutions, so that the authoritarian may assume authority over the institution. Harris offers a good counterpoint to that, but only if the followers can be convinced to consider a source other than the ‘leader.’

“In our current case, authoritarianism also is a goal of the capitalists supporting the Orange Menace. (Not all capitalists support him, but it’s enough to be important.)

“I’m an advocate of the ERA and of equal rights for all Americans. That’s one of the grounds for me opposing the Orange Menace. Such a person eventually seeks to take away everyone’s rights but his own.

“I’ll note that the U.S. taxpayers already pay for Israel’s war (and many others) via the ‘defense’ budget.”

My response to the Blog:

Unfortunately, it will take six years or more to receive mission-oriented results. I eagerly await the insights we gain from this mission.

I remember watching a documentary series on Netflix I do believe. As I recall, it was an eight-part series that studied multiple dictators through history, and as you note, found common traits among them all. Rejection of existing governmental institutions and replacing them with the idolatry of faith in him was one of many traits. Hmmm, what has the Orange Menace been doing since 2015? Worse, millions of citizens believe him because he said so. The latest is the outright, blatant lies about FEMA in North Carolina. His believers believe because he said so.

Yes, some corporate types see him as a necessary evil. They want him to remove governmental regulation and perceived interference in their business. They want no guardrails, just like he wants for the federal Executive Branch.

Like you, I have been a long term (since the beginning) advocate for and supporter of the ERA. One of the distant women I was debating and was reflected in last week’s update cited JFK and LBJ as serial womanizers. In essence, powerful men do it so there is nothing wrong with the Orange Menace. I was gobsmacked. That argument was so myopic as to be blind.

You note correctly. Just to be clear, we pay for defense companies to produce weapons and ammunition, which the government in turn gives to Israel, Ukraine, and other nations.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“The Orange Menace, consciously or not, follows the path of all tyrants. Those can exist on a household scale or an international scale, and a resemblance binds them. I’ve seen a suggestion that this one follows the example of his father, but there are many others to observe.

“Many corporate villains see the Orange Menace as the best tool to overturn barriers to their unlimited greed. Like attracts like.

“I’ve become more and more curious about Israel’s grip on the USA. Both major parties seem easily bent to Netanyahu’s will, more so than his own people.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

Yes, exactly, because he has been a wannabe dictator all his adult life. He kind of achieved that status in how he ran his businesses. It is anti-constitutional in a president. Like father, like son . . . and he has passed that malady to his sons.

I do believe you pegged that precisely and correctly. Regulation is present to protect the common good, not corporate profit lines.

I suppose Netanyahu is ‘better the devil you know.’ I find him a detestable human being . . . much like his buddy.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1188

 Update from the Sunland

No.1188

14.10.24 – 20.10.24

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

 

To all,

 

Yet another space launch accomplishment for SpaceX occurred on Monday. Liftoff occurred at 12:06 [R] EDT (1606 GMT) {09:06 [T] MST}, from Pad 39A of the Kennedy Space Center. A Falcon Heavy launch vehicle propelled the 3.6-ton, NASA, Europa Clipper spacecraft into a gravitational slingshot trajectory on its six-year transit to Jupiter. The spacecraft will explore Europa to gather far more detailed data on Jupiter’s ice moon. In a bit of a rarity, SpaceX had to expend all the propellent in the three, stage 1 booster cores to achieve the necessary escape velocity for the spacecraft, which means they had no fuel to recover the two outboard boosters. It was another picture-perfect launch sans booster recovery. I look forward to big things from the Europa Clipper spacecraft.

 

The enablers, protectors, and sycophants of [the person who shall no longer be named] persist in telling us, “Don’t listen to what he says. Look at what he does.” They also use phrases like: “That is not what he meant”; “He was only kidding”; “You took his words out of context”; “What he meant to say was . . . .” He is hereditarily prone to exaggeration, inflation, conflation, and outright falsehood. There are far too many such statements of rationalization to be recounted in this humble forum, but I do believe the above is sufficient to convey the applicable message. I must ask, “What do such rationalizations say about a man who was and wants to be president of the United States of America?” This reality has been consistent with his behavior through his entire adult life; this peculiar trait is not new or an artifact of his late-in-life participation in politics. In stark contrast, Vice President Harris is a degreed and licensed attorney who has made her livelihood on the precision of her language, choice of words, and diction. She knows better than to exaggerate her words, and a false statement could render her to jail and revocation of her law license. The differences are dramatically stark. If we cannot believe and trust what our president says, why should be trust anything he says or does?

At the end of the day, he has disqualified himself.

 

Normally, I have left folks to their freedom of choice. They are entitled to vote for whomever they wish, for whatever reasons (or lack of same) they wish. Recently, I participated in a thread that I could not resist with two intelligent, educated, mature women who are staunch supports of [the person who shall no longer be named]. I cannot reproduce the exchange for the full effect, so my expressed opinion shall have to suffice.

I have been an outspoken advocate for Equal Rights for women . . . and all other citizens regardless of the social factors. Equal Rights for women have yet to be solidified in the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. I have witnessed misogynist men ply their vile ways all my adult life. I have had little tolerance for men who do not respect women. Then, along comes [the person who shall no longer be named]. His rampant malignant narcissism has led him to be an unapologetic misogynist all his adult life. Simply look at the way he refers to and treats women. E. Jean Carroll was simply the snowflake on the tip of the iceberg—Carroll v. Trump [USDC NY SD case no. 20-cv-7311 (LAK)] [1150]. Need I remind any one of the vulgarities of the Access Hollywood tape? [979]

What is markedly different from the context of his behavior is the position he seeks. It is one thing for your neighbor to treat women badly, or even CEO of a corporation or a senior officer in a military squadron. It is monumentally different for any potential president of the United States to behave that way. We can rationalize his conduct by the simple observation that he has been that way all his adult life. What is so bloody baffling to me is how any respectable woman of any station would condone such behavior, and worse, vote for the man. He and his abhorrent conduct must be emphatically condemned and rejected.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1187:

“My word there’s a lot of reading in your update but I managed it! Still reading your books and could be for some-time! Still on the third one-I’m having a busy pre-remembrance period at the moment.”

My reply:

Yeah, well, sometimes the urge strikes me.

Enjoy the books as you are able. On the 3rd, you have a way to go following the adventures of Brian and Jonathan.

It is that time of year. I trust your Remembrance Day preparations will proceed satisfactorily. Lest we ever forget!

 . . . follow-up comment:

Thanks Cap. Do you have a remembrance period in the US? I’ve never heard it mentioned.

 . . . my follow-up reply:

Certainly not like the British and French do. In this country, it is called Veterans Day, which is a federal holiday on the 11th of November, to remember and honor the service of our veterans.

 

Comment to the Blog:

“The SpaceX booster retrieval is a major feat of engineering.

“MAGAts attack as their sole strategy. That comes down from Roy Cohn, the Orange Menace’s mentor, who was a prosecutor in the McCarthy hearings and committed many other wrongs. Trump didn’t notice that Cohn was eventually disbarred.

“I have my ballot here. I won’t vote for evil, whether greater or lesser. We have a ballot initiative to end gerrymandering. I’m voting for the initiative.

“I can’t imagine Orange Menace actually completing another term. Ultimately, I’m more afraid of Just Don’t Vance. Vance resembles a militia man with a Yale Law School degree. That is, he can say insane things and make them sound almost rational.

“I noticed a reference to a movie from last week. If a movie is a well-supported documentary, it could be relevant. Fiction is not.”

My response to the Blog:

Yes, indeed! I eagerly await greater accomplishments from the SpaceX team. I have watched the replay of that booster catch countless times since the event, as new perspectives become available. It remains an awesome demonstration of engineering and physics.

I agree with your observations and assessment of Roy Cohn and his acolyte. We must end this nonsense and work toward the brighter uplands.

I would love to know how Ohio plans to end gerrymandering. I am working on my ballot as well—judges and propositions are a lot of research work. Make sure you post your ballot in plenty of time ahead of the deadline. I will do the same.

I share your view of Vance. He has a Trojan Horse feel to him. We must ensure neither one of them get even remotely close to the instruments of state.

Fiction can and does stimulate critical thinking and offers a “what if” view of important issues. “Seven Days in May” was another one.

 . . . Round two:

“I’ll give the SpaceX engineering team credit. Their boss only wants to escape Earth before the climate is completely ruined.

“Ohio’s working on a plan that involves no elected officials or lobbyists in the process. That might at least help. Meanwhile, there’s a site to help one with choosing judges. I’ll look at it; if it’s legitimate, it will help quite a bit.

“Over time, I’ve gone away from consuming fiction. I studied fiction writing methods and concluded that it can’t be as valuable as non-fiction.”

 . . . my response to round two:

Yeah, we kinda have to separate the SpaceX team from their boss; he does not design and build things; his employees do.

Sure, it should be better until one side or the other tries to contaminate membership. On judges, I research each one, not as thoroughly as I should but to the best of my capacity.

Fiction can be and often is far more thought provoking, e.g., Nineteen Eighty-four and Fahrenheit 451. I could name many others. My main body of work is historical fiction. I have written a few purely fictional books that I certainly tried to make thought provoking. Others will judge whether I was successful.

 . . . Round three:

“That site was useful and neutral, although it didn't give any analysis of judicial records. Two judges are members of the Federalist Society; that's a ‘no.’ Others have multiple union and other endorsements that lead me to support them. I couldn't find a similar resource for Arizona.

I read Nineteen Eighty-Four and Fahrenheit 451 in a public high-school class. They added to my fears but gave me little concrete information. Historical fiction can be useful if it's researched well, but I still have to check actual historical sources before I incorporate them into my thinking. I read one of the ‘Anod’ series. It was an interesting thought experiment but I didn't find it relevant to current reality. I just bought that one on Kindle; I'll re-read it soon.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Thanks for thinking of me. So far, I have finished judges. I use a half dozen or so useful websites to gather information on whether to retain judges. This was a rare period where I have read the rulings of some of the judges, so I had a clear opinion regarding retention. I also look for adverse press reports and clear political affiliation. The latter was an immediate disqualifier. Judges must be neutral; if they are not, they do not deserve to remain a judge in my book. I am still working on propositions, which I should finish today. Hopefully, I’ll post our ballots tomorrow.

Those books should have induced a plethora of questions. The Anod series was never intended to be commentary on current events. The 3rd Book of Anod is due to be released next month; again, it is the future, not contemporary.

 . . . Round four:

“I have considered my prior comment about Fahrenheit 451 and Nineteen Eighty-Four further. To be more precise, I'd already encountered the issues in studying history. Those books amplified my fears without giving me any tools to meet the situation.

“I have read dozens of science fiction books. Most were intended to depict current situations or trends in a different context. I think of Isaac Asimov's science fiction detective stories. At least one of those predicted that technology would increase isolation. Likewise, my takeaway from the Anod book was that you discussed sexual manners and mores as a control issue. Fiction always comments on reality. There's nothing else to work with.”

 . . . my response to round four:

Well, that is one perspective I cannot argue with. That is the beauty of freedom of choice. We each see what we wish to see based on our unique life experiences. Let it suffice to say that I see those books differently.

My oh my, I did not see Anod no.1 in that light. I intended it to be a conflict of what it means to be human. There are two published Anod books with the 3rd book due to be released next month. Each brings a different examination of what it means to be human.

At the end of the day, it does not matter what I intended as the author. The only thing that matters is how you read my words in your mind’s eye. I learn from your perspective.

I intend to keep writing the best I can, full stop.

 

Another contribution:

“As a 25 yr ‘Flaming Conserviberal,’ having long ago given up on the GOP, I shall vote early in person absentee, now for a Democrat POTUS for first time.

“If I were King, I'd ask volunteer American mercenaries and corporations to defend Israel w/o the U.S. taxpayer this time, unless NATO labels this nightmare the ‘war’ it is.”

 . . . my reply:

I join you in the vote. To me an absolute disqualifier is an election denier or Jan6 supporter; they have demonstrated their anti-Constitution politics and thus are disqualified from elected office.

Interesting approach. We used mercenaries during the Revolutionary War with positive results.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1187

 Update from the Sunland

No.1187

7.10.24 – 13.10.24

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

 

To all,

 

I must thank everyone for their kind and generous words of condolence to Jeanne and I for our loss of our precious Bella Rae. She had a delightful personality that was so joyous to play with. She is sorely missed. God bless you, Bella Rae.

 

I am speechless and beyond words! Sunday morning, at 07:25 [S] CDT, 05:25 [T] MST, SpaceX launched its Integrated Flight Test number five (IFT-5) with its massive first stage booster and Starship reentry vehicle stacked on top. Liftoff was flawless with all 33 Raptor engines lighting off and performing nominally.

The awesomely amazing part was the first stage boost returned to base and was caught by the launch tower chopstick. Watching the whole sequence literally brought tears to my eyes at the phenomenal demonstration of engineering and physics. It was picture perfect, even better than the advance animation. The landing gear on the booster was two small studs on opposite sides of the booster just under the grid fins. I exclaimed to myself, “I’ll be damned! They did it!”

The Starship continued on its suborbital trajectory to splash down in the Indian Ocean just off Australia. We were able to watch the entire reentry. The thermal protection system appeared to work perfectly except for one root hot spot on one of the four fins. All of the fins performed properly and maintained attitude control of the vehicle to splash down.

Given the success of IFT-5, I suspect SpaceX will attempt to catch both the booster and the Starship on the next test flight.

Profound congratulations to the SpaceX team for their accomplishment! We looked forward to great things in the future.

 

In an important local Arizona election race, Wednesday evening, we watched the one and only debate between the two principal candidates—Ruben Gallego and Kari Lake (who by the way still beliefs [and public says so] that she was elected governor in the 2022 election; sound familiar?). The debate was hosted by the nonpartisan Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission. There were plenty of insults and not much new in their one-hour debate to fill the U.S. Senate seat of Kristen Sinema, who turned independent and decided not to run for re-election. Gallego tried mightily to keep the debate respectful and orderly. But, the junior “you know who” was going to have none of it. Repeatedly, I found myself shouting at the television, “Shut the F**k up!” Like her hero and oh dear leader, Lake will accept the result if she wins, and condemn the election as rigged against if she loses. You can probably figure out who I will vote for. 

 

We finally received our official mail-in ballots—two full pages, front and back, of candidates for public office, confirmation of state judges at all levels, and 15 propositions of one form or another. It is the latter two categories that will take the most time.  We have only two weeks to submit our mail-in ballots, so I will have to take time away from my writing to research each judge and each proposition. I’ll get it done.

 

I suppose we have at least one matter to be grateful to [the person who shall no longer be named] since he entered politics in 2015. He has brought the far-right-wing within our society into the bright sunlight. We can see them in all their forms—white supremacists, militia anarchists, Christian nationalists, staunch moral projectionists, and all the other variants. We can see them. We can hear them. Now, we know who they are. For so long, that body of citizens within this country existed largely in the shadows. Every so often, we would see glimpses of their existence, but they remained largely away from controlling the instruments of state, expect perhaps in isolated local areas. They were predominantly contained. Little Fingers changed that status quo for a very long time, perhaps for a generation or two. We have long known, and most of us have recognized, that that man suffers from malignant narcissism, is an unrepentant confidence man (AKA conman), and only cares about himself, not another living soul, including his children and family. So, thank you Donnie . . . at least we can see those who do not believe in the U.S. Constitution and seek an oligarchy, autocracy, or dictatorship to give that far-right-wing a sense of status quo ante, when more of their ancestors in fact controlled the instruments of state through Jim Crow laws, morality laws, segregation, and all the other means available to them to dominant others not like them. We will find out in a few weeks whether the majority in the country intends to protect the U.S. Constitution and the noble principles reflected in the Declaration of Independence. I know precisely where my interests lay. I will vote accordingly.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1186:

Comment to the Blog:

“This vice-presidential debate mattered more than most, because Vance will succeed the Orange Menace if he wins. Vance/Hamel/Bowman has hatred and a Yale Law School presentation. Walz has one of the best personalities in politics and a sound history governing Minnesota. 

“Are you looking forward to World War III? I’m not.

“No logic excuses charging property with crimes as if it were a person, history or no history. Meanwhile, people not charged lose their property. Sometimes, real estate or cars have been seized from family or others by a claim that the property was used for criminal purposes even though the owner was not even suspected of any crime. Civil asset forfeiture supports small-town law enforcement—or the crooked people involved in it. The Sheriff’s Department of a county I know used at least two forfeited vehicles openly when I lived there. In other cases, the assets just go away.

“The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, sponsored by Strom Thurmond and Hamilton Fish IV, still harms our nation today in several ways.

“We have a Senate campaign here in Ohio that has me wearing out my mute buttons.”

My response to the Blog:

Thank you for your kind words. She has left a big hole in our lives.

Agreed . . . for reason you offer. Agreed on Vance; he comes across far smoother and ‘presidential’ than his running mate, but he bears disqualifying traits, not least of which is his advocacy of the BIG LIE. Also agreed on Walz.

No, I am not. War is the choice of last resort. But, sooner or later, we must stand up to the Bully.

We watched an interesting movie about that very topic last night—Rebel Ridge. The law, as invoked by President Reagan, unleashed a torrent of abuse without due process of law. It was originally intended to fight the war on drugs against major drug lords and dealers. The law has been extended far beyond the original intent, which is abuse in itself.

Agreed absolutely. I would change ‘several’ to ‘many’ in your statement. Like so many (if not all) morality laws, they may have been well intended, but they quickly become very ugly instruments of state. We must rein in all morality laws to maintain our freedom of choice.

I can only imagine. We have a different but similar version in Arizona.

 . . . Round two:

“(Long sigh) That whole us versus them mentality always bothers me, and I see its source as either Abrahamic or Viking (Asatru) religion. Please tell me who the ‘Bully’ is that you refer to in justifying war.

“Last night, we had a news report about a street racing and “stunting” bust here in Columbus. I could see that as justification for seizing the cars in question, but taking them from the drivers, not attacking the cars themselves.”

 . . . my response to round two:

I am not keen on the ‘us vs. them’ nonsense. Cooperation and compromise are essential to the workings of any democracy. I do recognize that there are bad men among us. The fact that they choose to do bad things makes them a ‘them’ I suppose. That division is unavoidable, and it is the choice of bad men who induce and sustain that division. In the context of my previous remarks. Putin is a Bully in this context. Xi is a Bully. It is a little more difficult to label Hamas and Hezbollah as Bullies, because Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition complicate the discussion. When a burglar enters my house, he has chosen to be a bad man; he will be treated accordingly and not likely to walk out alive. The violence and violation of bad men must be checked and stopped. If we do not do so, we have chaos and anarchy—everybody for themselves; survival of the fittest.

To your second paragraph, I will only say, the car is not the problem, the driver is. As a citizen, the driver is entitled to due process of law.

Round three:

“That whole ‘bad men’ discussion comes from moral judging rather than problem-solving, like the people you call ‘moral projectionists’ on a different scale. I occasionally quote the Bible verse, ‘Judge not lest ye be judged,’ but it falls on deaf ears. It seems to me that if people can find someone to blame for troubling events, they feel they escape their responsibility to participate in the human race. That applies to society at large as well as personal situations.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Wise words. I am not deaf. I use the same quotation among others from the Great Book. However, sometimes it is very difficult to abide when a masked man is in your living room in the middle of the night with a train tunnel pointed at your chest.

Your observation is appropriate. Such empathy depends upon a minimum level of safety to enable the empathy to shine through. “Turn the other cheek” and “love thy neighbor” are also wise words but again require a minimum level of respect or at least reciprocity.

I use the term “bad men” not to divide but only to describe individuals who choose to offer no respect or reciprocity. When faced with such men, some action is necessary unless you intend to submit and sacrifice your life for an ideal. I’m just sayin’.

 . . . Round four:

“Problem-solving is the only sane response to an intruder, and I don’t apologize for self-defense. I wouldn’t judge myself for a fatal response, although others do. That has nothing to do with the moral judgment involved in condemning others for not measuring up to your standards of words or behavior, especially when you can’t know their lives or minds. For example, assuming the homeless are addled, addicted, or lazy is a moral judgment. 

“To return to the original topic, assuming all Palestinians or Israelis are evil based on current news reports about Hamas or Netanyahu is also a moral judgment. I’ll note, though, that the individuals you label ‘bad men’ don’t exist in a vacuum. Their power depends on others helping them do the deeds that get your attention. Problem-solving/empathy would involve a sober look at the entire situation, including its long history, and then deciding the least harmful course of action.

“If your moral values depend on others’ actions, examine that. I use that ‘love thy neighbor’ precept, but I’ll note that “love thy neighbor as thyself” depends on my first loving myself.

“‘Respect’ is a grossly overused term denoting ‘high regard’ for its object https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/respect. There are any number of people and organizations that have not earned my high regard. Reciprocity is a concept you ought to use with great caution about Netanyahu and his kind.

“This morality is the foundation of all my positions.”

 . . . my response to round four:

I am all for problem-solving, negotiation, compromise, and saner responses. I am also a line I found very poignant from the movie “The Darkest Hour.” Under considerable amount of pressure to seek terms with Hitler as France was on the verge of collapse, Prime Minister Winston Churchill [Gary Oldman] admonished Lord Halifax, “You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth!” That is exactly my point. For problem-solving and negotiation to work, a minimum level of safety and respect is required. Short of that threshold, we are trying to reason with a hungry tiger. I do not generalize for homeless any more than I do for MAGAts. Generalization is rarely appropriate. As I tried to portray in my book “Indulgence,” I try very hard to respect the freedom of choice for a MAGAt fanatic or a homeless, addled, addicted citizen. I respect their freedom of choice as long as they do not cause injury or harm to any other person or property. I want the homeless person to be as safe as the billionaire. Unfortunately, at least for now, it does not always work out that way.

I cannot ascribe “evil” to either the Palestinians or the Israelis. I can do so to the leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIL, the IRI, Russia, the PRC, the DPRK, et al. They do not respect the rights of other people. All of them seek to impose their will on other people who do not wish to submit. I have met and broken bread with more than a few Russians. They were all generous, amicable, and respectful. I cannot extend those attributes to the current leaders of Russia, or the Palestinians, or the Israelis.

Nobody exists in a vacuum. Most citizens respect the rights of other citizens. I laud those who do. My concern is with those who do not. Chamberlain tried desperately to feed the tiger. We know the result.

All that said, I am with you. I would prefer solving the problem. Yet, I am reminded by the reality that negotiation and compromise are a two-way street. Unilateral demands or dictation are not negotiation.

My point was “love thy neighbor as thyself” depends upon at least a minimum level of respect and safety. Moral values have very little meaning when your head is in the tiger’s mouth.

Perhaps I am overusing the term “respect.” If you have a better word, please offer it for this discussion. I also use “reciprocity” with considerable caution. It still comes down to a minimum level of “whatever,” for negotiations, problem-solving, and compromise to yield any positive return.

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

 . . . Round five:

“I'll let the philosophical discussion rest for now with my first point that ‘good versus evil’ is not a useful lens through which I can see reality.”

 

Another contribution:

“Cap, I am sure most of your fans can and do relate to and even feel your well described pain at the loss of a friend. Most of us have loved and lost loyal pets. Thanks for sharing such a personal and beautiful life experience.”

My reply:

Yes, indeed, we are not alone in such loss. We have a garden of stones in tribute to recent fur babies lost. For all of those who have suffered such loss, I say God bless you for having loved those who love us unconditionally.

You are most welcome. I try to offer well-rounded comments. As always, take what you wish.

Thank you for your contribution. It is always appreciated.

 

A different contribution:

“She was a large hound and a good pet for sure. 

“My RAF career made having pets somewhat problematic when on the move. Although once in Cyprus we did inherit a large bird cage with 20 plus budgies who would wake up the street in the mornings! We found a home for all those with our fire department! Since then we’ve just admired others.”

My response:

Yes, she was a big girl . . . but so special, unique as they all are.

Quite understandable. It is very hard to take proper care of a pet while on active duty with the incessant travel and deployments. So glad you found a worthy solution for the birds you inherited.

Yes, we join you in that admiration. Some are far more capable to rescuers. We do the best we can. One thing for certain, we love what we have.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1186

 Update from the Sunland

No.1186

30.9.24 – 6.10.24

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

 

To all,

 

We lost our youngest fur baby! At 12:19 [T] MST, Friday, 4.October.2014, Bella Rae passed over the Rainbow Bridge. She was only six years young. Bella put up a valiant fight but went down hill swiftly. Her chest began to continuously fill up with fluids that squeezed her heart, lungs and stomach. The emergency room vet drained the fluid numerous times for some little temporary relief, but the vice kept closing. The vet eventually called late Friday morning and said it was time to say goodbye. Jeanne, Sadie, and I went to be with her and say goodbyes. At the end, Bella could not walk, eat, or drink, and her breathing was very difficult and pronouncedly labored. They brought her in on a gurney, laying on her side. It was a tragic loss for us and happened far too quickly for us, but those are the cards life dealt us. Now, we grieve the loss of a loving companion. Bella’s passing has left an enormous hole in our lives.

 

Vice-presidential debate occurred Tuesday evening, moderated by Nora O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan of CBS News in New York City without a studio audience and used the new rules (microphone off when not your turn). In general, the affair was a more orderly, respectful, dignified debate. The candidates did not agree on a number of issues. I did not agree with some their opinions, more so Vance than Walz. I not that vice presidents do not establish policy; they are the presidential reserve . . . just in case. From a dignity perspective, I could accept either candidate. Unfortunately, Vance is clearly and demonstrably a MAGAt, election-denier, which by itself is a disqualifying trait. I am not sure whether Vance actually believes the BIG LIE, or just his ‘opinion’ of convenience to satisfy sein Lieber Anführer.

 

The Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) fired roughly 200 ballistic missiles at Israel in retaliation for the Israeli air attack in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed Hezbollah Secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah. Some of the rockets got through the Israeli missile defense system. Multiple videos of the attack are impressive from the sheer magnitude of the attack. Also, multiple impacts could be observed. The targets were apparently an airfield near Tel Aviv and Mossad headquarters. Damage reports are scare, and if I if was my decision, I would not make public the damage assessment, or anything that would give the IRI satisfaction for their attack.

The Israelis will quite likely carry out a serious strike of some form against the IRI or inside Iran itself. The IRI made a grave mistake attacking Israel. The IRI may have irrevocably escalated and expanded the conflict.

There is no telling where all this will end, but it looks like we are headed for worse before it is gets better.

 

A friend and consistent contributor to this humble forum raised an important issue—civil asset forfeiture. The stimulant for this discussion was the following article:

“'The truth is the truth': How civil asset forfeiture nearly destroyed an Ohio couple – Carl Nelson, a former Amazon employee, was never charged with a crime. The FBI told him he was under investigation. He was never arrested, but his money was.”

by Kevin Landers

10WBNS News

Published: 6:56 PM EDT October 1, 2024

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/how-civil-asset-forfeiture-nearly-destroyed-an-ohio-couple/530-00413858-6ddb-48ef-8adb-adf0c0ecd95b

I was interested in the matter of civil asset forfeiture long before this article. I have watched reports of different events that seem to have become more prominent in the last 40 years. The principle and process can be traced back at least 500 years. The process has been used and even tested in court, notably a Supreme Court ruling—United States v. Forty-Three Gallons of Whiskey [108 U.S. 491 (1883)]. The use of civil asset forfeiture changed dramatically from my perspective in 1984. Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law A joint resolution making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1985 [PL 98-473; 98 Stat. 1837] on 12.October.1984. That was a funding bill to keep the government running. Buried within that funding bill was Title II – Related Agencies: Chapter I, the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 [98 Stat. 1982] that dramatically alter the use of civil asset forfeiture, ostensibly to enhance the federal government’s ability to fight the so called ‘war on drugs.’ Numerous states followed suit adding comparable laws. Unfortunately, as with all such morality-based laws, they were subject to abuse by zealous prosecutors. For nearly two decades, law enforcement ran wild, virtually unchecked with little judicial oversight and an almost impossible appeal and recovery process. In 2000, Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act(CAFRA) [PL 106–185; 114 Stat. 202; 25.April.2000] that provided more judicial oversight and a more streamlined appeal and recovery process. But, that did not necessarily propagate to the states, which were still prone to abuse. 

Unfortunately, as I read the instigating article, I see one side of the story only. I have not been able to reach the government position. From the article, the case against Carleton ‘Carl’ Nelson appears to be a serious over reaction in a potential fraud investigation. Again, to me, it looks like a classic overzealous action against an accused and potential defendant in the case. To cause that level of damage and injury to the subject of the investigation was just wrong.

I am fairly certain civil asset forfeiture has had appropriate applications. But I also know it has had grossly inappropriate employment as it is far too prone to abuse by overzealous law enforcement and prosecutors with very thin judicial oversight. The Nelson case may well be one of those examples of such abuse.

From my perspective, civil asset forfeiture should be required to show probable cause and acquire a judicial warrant before execution, just like a search warrant. If there is risk of the flightiness of the subject assets, perhaps a 24- or 48-hour temporary action might allow law enforcement to secure the subject’s assets but demand the showing of probable cause to a judge in that period to remain in effect.

While I would like to hear more of the government’s case against Nelson, at this stage, I must label the Nelson case as gross governmental abuse. These are the cases that give me enormous concern and pause for adding greater power of unchecked, unilateral, governmental action.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1185:

“Thanks Cap. All good this side-apart from politicians arguing and telling us all that the current opposition ran the country very badly and they will put it right! Politicians ---yuk, us ex-military types have little or no time for those who continue to pass the buck elsewhere. If you got it wrong then you put it right soonest blaming no one but yourself.

“damp U/K, sorry that’s an understatement like many other countries we in places have recorded the wettest season everrecorded and that goes back a long way.”

My response:

Oh my, record precipitation in England is saying a lot. Hope the flooding is not too bad.

I guess politicians are the same everywhere. We need a good, contemporary, Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus. This silly season has worn me out. Unfortunately, we have another month of agony to endure. This too shall pass.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)