To the men with whom I served

To Recon and Charlie Company:

On this Veterans Day, 2010, we each have memories of comrades, friends, family and neighbors who while serving made the ultimate sacrifice or, having served, have passed on. We above all others, as combat veterans, must continue to remember them. We may not know the detail of their military service but we have shared comparable service experiences in training, displacement from home, emotions of fear and relief and other that bring us all together as a unique group called simply "Veterans." That same unity stands ever more strongly when the service was in either of the World Wars, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq or Afghanistan or any conflict or action while defending America.

About a month ago I made a visit to the Wall in Washington, DC. I was actually locating Lt. "Skip" Murphy's name when a young man tapped me on the shoulder and asked if he could have his picture taken with me. I was wearing the "Triple Deuce Viet Nam" cap with a small Combat Infantryman Badge but had no idea why he was asking for the picture. He explained that he was a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and when he saw the CIB and Nam cap he thought there might be a camaraderie of shared similar experiences amongst all the tourists. As many other young service men and women I have met, he also expressed a regret that Nam veterans had been so badly treated when they came home. We spoke for a time about the generalities of combat and service. We didn't speak of specifics or share "war stories." We walked side by side, spoke quietly and, looking into his eyes, shared more than words could have given us. Having left active duty, this Sergeant was assigned to a Special Forces National Guard unit and expecting deployment to Afghanistan. We met and parted "brothers."

A week or so prior to this encounter I was on a flight arriving at a DC airport while another plane was taxiing to a near ramp. I watched as a fire truck on each side of it shot water in an arc over the plane. Once in the terminal I saw a small group of passengers, military and civilian, blocking the walk way in front of an adjacent gate and an honor guard of flags arrayed near the gate rampway. Cheers and applause began as WW II veterans exited this "Honor Flight" carrying them to a visit to the WW II Memorial. They walked with a combination of humility and pride, each wearing a cap with unit insignia. I saw the 25th and 4th Divisions and a Semper Fi or two on the caps. As young men and women in uniform moved forward to shake their hands, I was struck that the young were in the course of a journey into war while the old were near their final journey to remember a war long passed. Yet for those brief moments, they assembled as a "band of brothers."

We are bound by a sense of honor to those who preceded us and those who have continued in service to our country. Whether we join with a veterans' organization at a ceremony or walk individually with our grandchildren to visit a memorial on November 11th, we should do so with pride and recognition that we are one, as a "band of brothers."

"Remember and Respect"

Election November 2010

For the record, I see not a revolution of ideas in the election results, nor a mandate for the Conservatives nor a need for the President to change direction. One might conclude, reasonably, that "fear itself" is the basis of the election result. If the Democrat Party, from today, moves aggressively to assuage "fear itself" it will gain the support of the majority. On the other hand, should the Republicans be successful in continuing to feed "fear itself" to a receptive public they may call success in 2012 a mandate though that authorization would be for what is now undefined policy. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was quoted today as saying that the Republican objective now is to insure President Obama's defeat in 2012. The objective of their Party over the last two years in Congress was to insure that nothing of substance was done for the American people to the end of success in this past election. Again, their objective will be to negate and block rather than build consensus and compromise. They want a single party oligarchy protective of a plutocracy.

The "Real" Threat Surfaces

This is not the time for sleep. Those threatening our survival are coalescing into organized cells which throughout history have shown the ability to wreck havoc. From the Temperance Union, the Suffragists, the infamous NOW's, to Soccer Moms, history has shown that once women begin to organize the threat of their success to existing structures (election processes, happy hours, bras, etc.) and paradigms (a few drinks enhances driving ability, combat flying is for men only, etc.) must be dealt with.

No doubt that the concerns continually raised by vigilant patriots in this country are enhancing our security. Just today the Wash. Post reported: "Hip Muslim Moms group undone by D.C. Metro bomb plot."* Following the arrest recently of one husband on terrorism charges "a freewheeling group [[organized by his wife]] of 50 or so young ... coupon-clipping, play date-arranging suburban mothers ... [was] thrust into the national spotlight, [when] associated with [the] horrifying plot...." The group, calling itself "Hip Muslim Mothers," according to one member who brazenly admitted that the activists were "spontaneous, open-minded, savvy, educated, fun-loving, [and] into organic stuff." Obviously as part of the group's cover "[t]hey typically met in small groups and exchanged recipes [[Molotov "cocktails??]] and child-care tips [[diaper bomb strapping??]] as their children played [[war games??]] ....[and] served iced cappuccinos [[something wrong with American whiskey??]]."

Although the Post reported that "Hip Muslim Moms is being disbanded" the American patriots should now look to their own suburbs, block parties, Zumba classes, and yard sales to insure America remains pure...sorry... remains safe. Large numbers of strollers and mini-vans outside a home in mid-day should raise suspicions.

We must continue to sacrifice the freedom of "those" Americans for the paranoia of the few.

*

Flight 93 and 9/11

The article tonight is captioned "Michelle Obama and Laura Bush commemorate 9/11 at Pa. site of Flight 93 crash." The loss of life at the Pentagon and the Twin Towers, particularly the loss of the Responders, was horrific as was the crash of Flight 93. A deference to the numbers and identities lost in New York City and at the Pentagon is understandable and memorial services will and should continue. As well, there were a thousand individual acts of heroism in New York and Washington in the wake of the attacks that should be remembered and honored. Yet, the fall of the Towers created a symbol the terrorists continue to benefit from and until their space is filled it remains a negative representation of our vulnerability. There was a dimension of strength and courage in Flight 93 that deserves a defined emphasis that seems grossly lacking. Those citizens on Flight 93 were aware of the intent of the terrorists holding them and, like the New York Responders, a level of danger they would face. Flight 93 represents, through the knowing and deliberate actions of some on the flight, the fighting spirit of our citizens that, more than the Towers or the gash in the Pentagon building, should come to symbolize 9/11 for America.

The McChrystal Attitude

Some writers have suggested that the experience of ten years of continuing conflict under fluctuating levels of direction, support and leadership within the military and civilian chains of command have created, at the least, impatience and frustration, more often disgust and, within a relative minority, reckless disdain within the military officer corps. I find the suggestions persuasive. I recall my own attitude, one shared and frequently discussed among many, about military and civilian leadership as Viet Nam continued.

I would also suggest another possible basis for the reckless expressions of opinions in the McChrystal episode. The U.S. military continues to draw from the broader polis. The officer corps and the volunteers in the military constitute, to an extent, a special breed of citizen-force, to be sure. However, they are still the product of our culture and with modern technology providing generally unfettered access remain significantly influenced by that culture. Beginning during the latter years of the Bush administration and substantially increasing during the Obama presidency, the rhetoric of politics has encompassed and encouraged open and repeated expressions of disdain, insult and antagonism directed at the highest levels of civilian control to a level unprecedented in its reach if not its vitriol. It seems to me that this environment may well have relaxed the professionalism and good sense of those actors in the McChrystal affair.

I had said it early in this and other forums that the vitriolic rhetoric and permissiveness of the highest level of elected officials in this country could eventually create a force destructive of our political institutions. I would now add the military as another unintended victim.

General McChrystal Disserves

The conduct of General McChrystal and his staff, for whom he bears full responsibility, is a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of any officer in the United States Army. He should be relieved of his command immediately. However, to dwell further on McChrystal is to further feed an arrogance that was at the core of the conduct. General McChrystal, by the reported conduct, has created a situation that may undercut the mission of our forces in Afghanistan and thereby devalue the gains made through the suffering and deaths of our men and women. The impatience of an American people distracted from the reasons we are fighting in Afghanistan will only be enflamed by the appearances, if not actualities, of disunity at the highest levels of our efforts. The General and his staff have dishonored themselves and the men and women valiantly serving in that theater of war.

The reported conduct does not reflect on nor diminish the years of extraordinary service and personal sacrifice he has shown in the performance of duty. The President could still draw upon McChrystal’s experience and military insights by ordering him to work at the direction of his replacement in a staff position outside the operational area. I recognize the inherent difficulties of such an arrangement but, the mission being paramount, the egos will just have to suck it up or resign.

Memorial Day 2010

Remember what Memorial Day was meant to honor and DO SOMETHING to make it meaningful and respectful. As I write this I know that someone will have died in the service of our country by the time you read it and a child, a father, a mother, a brother, a sister, a family, a friend will mourn - forever. Do something. The lapel pin, the rhetoric or the yellow ribbon on the car mean absolutely nothing. Do something to honor the sacrifice.

Combat Courts

Veterans' courts: I have doubts about the wisdom of such courts. In my opinion as a combat veteran and former prosecutor, the participants in the existing criminal justice system, prosecutors, judges, probation officers, et al., should be educated and empowered to act in individual cases. I remain, however, doubtful that existing systems consistently produce judges who have the capacity to bring justice to an individual case. That aside, to distinguish any group within society and treat them as special within the criminal justice system because of perceived life experience, in patriotic service or not, diminishes the validity of and belief in "Equal Justice Under Law."

http://www.military.com/news/article/many-vets-find-service-helps-in-court.html?ESRC=eb.nl

My Lai: a documentary.

On Sunday, April 25, 2010, PBS presented a documentary on the crimes at My Lai during the Viet Nam War. My Lai is not the story of American fighting men in Nam. It is the story of homicidal, incompetent, immoral U.S. Army officers in the field and incompetence and lack of honor and integrity up the chain of command to the general officers in command. As a Viet Nam veteran who led an Infantry platoon and company in combat, it is disgusting even now to listen to the baseless and phony excuses and explanations of the former officers and soldiers at My Lai. The crimes, the cover-ups and the results of the court marshals should forever force a demand for leadership with honor and competence from the Commander in Chief down to the platoon leader in direct combat in the field.

Get Real America

My friend sent me an editorial from today's on-line edition of the Detroit News regarding the passage of the Health Care Reform.

I acknowledge that there are individual aspects of the law that are certainly problematic and should be revisited soon. Yet, the diatribe is relentless in projecting the demise of our country, our freedom, our bank accounts. The lead to the editorial states that the new law is "one which the people despise....[passed] against the public will" The "public," in fact, wants most of the changes that are included in this law. They just have been primed to distrust and possibly even "despise" "The Obama Health Care Plan." Polls are grossly flawed indicators of all but how a small group responds to carefully biased wording. Above all else and as I have argued for months, the rhetoric before the public has been dominated by the neo-conservative/Republican, purely political agenda of fear-mongering. From the "death panel" assertion to the "baby killer" accusation during yesterday's session in the House and the rabble rousing from the windows of Congress to a crowd below that had already spat on and personally insulted members of Congress, this, rather than truth, has defined the views of many. The only "will" defied by the passage of this law is the will of a political party unable to extricate itself from the legacy of eight years of failed economic and geo-political policies and substantively redefine itself. The vehement attacks on a law that contained some 200 of the Republican offered amendments from committees and was fundamentally very close to an initiative put forth by the Republican Party in a bill back when they were conservatives in deeds as well as words is grossly disingenuous at best.

ALL intelligent, qualified economic experts, it seems to me, agree first, that in a recession as substantial as this legacy of the Bush years, a reasoned, legitimate and, to many, necessary reaction is for government to step in. The single greatest element, by far, of the dangerously rising deficit and national debt is and will, increasingly, be health care costs. All experts knowledgeable of the existing circumstance's seem to agree. Picking at the system would be meaningless. Isolating specific sub-issues (such as pre-existing conditions) would be impossible without correspondingly modifying other aspects of the system that are dependent and directly impacted. It is a bold but necessary effort to bring the system under control. I hope that each political party fights vigorously and directly on substance in the coming months. The "public" approving, as I believe they do, most of the major elements of the law need to be educated about other aspects of the new law that are directed at overall cost reductions and intended to address the long term deficit/debt crisis.

"The bill also stands as the most impactful legislation ever passed without a single vote from the minority party." Those Democrats voting against the bill, to me, evidence a properly functioning political party within which reasonable individuals with reasoned judgment may differ. The fact that not one Republican could apply and assert individual judgment does not manifest the "evil" of the law as much as it evidences a political party void of substance willing to destroy legislative compromise and integrity for the sake of a pure election strategy. They will continue to fight this not with Reason but to gain a "Waterloo" victory destroying the public will and choice of November 2009.

The referenced editorial may be found at http://www.detnews.com/article/20100322/OPINION01/3220350/Editorial--Unpopular-health-bill-no-win-for-country

Thoughts on Dealing with Terrorism

To begin with, the comments that follow exclude consideration of the armed conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq since I believe there are established rules with which many agree. There is little stretch, in my view, necessary to effectively apply the existing criminal law and procedures in the United States to deal with terrorism directed at Americans outside of these two conflicts. I will discuss some of the relevant elements that seem to be used to define "the threat."

I am not persuaded that the religious identity and religious motivation of the actors affects the consequence of their conduct. The intended or resulting death and destruction are already defined by criminal sanctions in existing law. Religious fervor motivating criminal acts does not necessarily create a substantive category (unless we chose to elevate it so) as much as it may merely indicate the relative intensity of the motivation. We all recognize other motivations in criminal conduct such as greed or revenge. These stimuli also vary in intensity from impulse to the point of rage so intense as to void all reasoning. Nothing about religious motivation or identity suggests to me that existing criminal laws could not or should not be used to punish the offenders. It is not insignificant to continue to ascribe terrorist conduct to a particular religion. We began and continue to hold the concept of religious freedom a core value within our system. “Islam” has become almost a pejorative classification in our conversations. Not that long ago the IRA was simply the IRA and not the Irish Catholic Republican Army. There is no justification to equate Islam as a religion with terrorism. I have pointed out that Mongols, Jews, Muslims, Christians and other groups have committed genocide under direction of their god. We need to back away from generalization of Islam because it is right to do so and because it is in our best interests. I'll address political motivation below.

Nor does the circumstance that acts are committed against selected national identities change my view. Importantly, we are one of so many that there may be little substantive distinction among the targets of terrorism. "Islamic terrorist" attacks have been directed against citizens of Australia as well as European, African and Middle Eastern countries, India and even (broadly defined) China. To my knowledge, each of these other nations has dealt with the terrorists within their own justice systems. Nothing about the fact that Americans are the target of the crimes convinces me that we need to establish a new process to bring them to justice. It is important to remember that Justice is the objective; not revenge; nor solely deterrence; nor solely intelligence gathering; nor gulag confinement. The Soviet State imprisoned Polish, Lithuanian, German and other foreign nationals along with their own citizens by establishing a separate process within which they defined categories of individuals as continuing threats to the Soviet State. Frankly, many were threats to the existing Soviet State. To dismiss the comparison because our motives are self-defensive and “righteous” is to ignore the substantial danger of abuse once the precedent is established. There are too many examples within our own national experience to deny the threat. During past periods of threats to national security our freedoms have been curtailed. To be sure, our national values were "reinstated" at some point. Each of these instances were circumscribed by circumstance and experience to have a defined duration. The "war on terror" has no defined point of termination barring an early "second coming." Most importantly, these past cycles are no evidence that a reestablishment would follow any usurpation of our freedoms.

Nor am I persuaded by contentions that existing procedures for interdiction, seizure and prosecution are inadequate. Existing U. S. law provides and allows for relatively efficient mechanisms to extradite or return by other methods those who have committed terrorist acts, conspire to do so or direct their conduct. The coordination of all nations in intelligence gathering, interdiction and seizure is, of course, essential. This coordination also tracks the ongoing parallel efforts in coordination to effectively deal with growing international fraud, drugs, extortion, etc., that is, criminal conduct.

The highest levels of any, including “Islamist,” terrorist organizations are driven by political motivation. However, the makeup of cannon fodder has not changed through human history. Whether running at the opposing cavalry or running with sword into the guns or pressing a self-destructing button, the political objectives are not paramount in the actor's mind. Certainly, the upper echelons recognize and utilize the coercion explicit in the act toward political objectives against us as a sovereign power. However, it is the “act” and the resultant death and destruction and not the political cause that constitutes the harm. If we acknowledge a need for a new process to deal with “Islamic terrorism” we inject their “political cause” into the process. Once we accept cause as a qualifying element we open current and future situations to subjective qualification. Let’s assume that American students housed in a hotel in Gaza City are killed by a bomb set by a group of radical Israeli settlers who had targeted a Hamas leader in the hotel. The act is clearly one of terrorism but many, I suggest, when hearing the facts would begin to distinguish their “political cause.” Even were we to discard the “Islamic” qualification it would be manifest in the conduct of the new process, the targets and our manifest objectives that we were out for the Islamic terrorists: a distinction with no difference.

"What me worry?"

Whether what we have now is the result of the natural development of all mature representative democracies, or the natural evolution of capitalism or other, it strikes me that we are well on our way to losing our national identity by the unrestrained encouragement of "self interest." Though, there must be a sacrifice "by everyone," there seems to be no acceptance of nor value acknowledged for the unity that is to be saved by such sacrifice. The efforts of the majority of civilian citizens during WW II, the unity following 9/11, the combined strengths of the people during the depression and even "our" team beating the Russian's in hockey, as examples, seemed to speak to a national identity that has now seriously deteriorated. The unity of 9/11 was lost in the vehemence of politic rhetoric and failures of national leadership. Significantly, free market globalization, including the movement of the labor force, is removing any continuing connection to the country of origin. Entitlements are not only expected, they have come, because of that expectation, to be necessary for "basic" quality of life. In some measure, the low regard for our "government" is the result of the government placing itself in a position subject to blame even if not responsible for events prompting the blame. And in sports as in many parts of our culture we celebrate the individual celebrity and accomplishment over a national identity or a collective success. (For DC residents: How often do the Caps succeed as against how often Ovechkin overpowers the opponent?) Finally, if national leaders cannot sacrifice through compromise for the good of the United States how can we expect the citizens to do so. As long as the national leadership speaks and acts not in the name of the United States but speaks and acts in terms of one Party or the other as only worthy or unworthy of support, the people will not sacrifice for a political party.

Without leadership willing and able to effectively articulate to and convince the citizens that their self interest is best served by sacrifice toward solving the national debt, national health or whatever and that the United States of America is capable of and worth saving we just might end this experiment in the manner of the Soviet Union. The world may yet have two countries named Georgia at future Olympics.

A Shifting Independent

A year ago I was comfortable as a life-long Independent with a mix of leftist tendencies and conservative beliefs. The strident and often baseless attacks on a sitting President from the conservative right have stimulated me in his defense and moved me further to the left in substance and, assuredly, in appearance in my writings. As I sit here now, and unless I see some major shift in the rhetoric and adjustments in the asserted policies of the Republican Party, I feel compelled to do everything that I can to see that no Republican is elected to any office in my state or our country. Since I have no clout in or out of politics in Virginia this too, regrettably, is a baseless though strongly felt assertion.

Now, when every relatively minor political or economic event is spun, magnified and mixed with baseless assertions attacking every effort of the President, the result is destructive to the fabric of our democracy. Those looking for real threats from within our country needn't conjure up false labels for the President. They need merely to listen to the devaluation by the conservative right of our national and international strength.

A Wrongly Titled Article

I take issue with the use of the title "Obama's War" by the Washington Post in a continuing series of articles. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/afghanistan-pakistan/index.html The conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are, like it or not, our country's war. The disassociation of the country from these conflicts by such labeling disserves our country's fighting forces. They are dying for our country not for Obama, Bush, Congress or capitalism. The Washington Post's political labeling is inaccurate and offensive.

The Diaper Bomber Comes Clean

On January 5th in an on-line discussion forum I said: "From my experience, the FBI (and CIA) and experienced federal prosecutors are more than capable of gaining full cooperation from defendants who have lawyers within the criminal justice system."

The major news outlets are now reporting: "Christmas Day bombing suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab has been providing FBI interrogators with useful intelligence about his training and contacts since last week, a law enforcement source said Tuesday."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/02/AR2010020202995.html?hpid=topnews

There remains legitimate concern that intelligence of imminent threats within the U.S. was lost following the initial interviews (he actually stopped talking before Miranda rights were read to him) and prior to this later cooperation. However, there have been no successful attacks against us since the crimorist's (combining "criminal" with "terrorist" to avoid the label argument) arrest. Apparently the FBI took time to develop cooperating family members to assist in the "conversion" process. This effort coupled with the inherent threats to him as a very young man within the criminal justice process: life sentence, max-security isolation, etc. appear to have opened him up. A defense attorney must look to what course of action would result in the most favorable outcome for the client. In most cases with solid evidence of guilt (the "smoking diaper") cooperation is the best course. However, it remains with the defendant just how much to reveal or cooperate. One of my approaches was to point to a statuette of the scales of justice and tell the defendant that I had his balls on one of the scales and just how much he placed on the other scale by his cooperation determined the ultimate balance of justice. Whether one is attempting to obtain cooperation of a criminal defendant or to recruit someone to spy, the more one can develop (or manufacture) deep psychological connections leading to trust in a cooperative rather than confrontational effort, the greater the probability of truthful, full and continuing disclosure and assistance. The youth and apparent conservative family background of this guy should have been a solid foundation from which to reverse his extremist connection.

The central issue I present is that this cooperation developed within the criminal justice system. How valuable will be his cooperation? We may never know. I do know that the CIA, FBI, Spec. Ops and others below the political line are patriots who will work with all source intelligence silently in the shadows to protect us. The only need to know the successes or failures is with the elected politicians who can provide assistance to their efforts. There are even a few patriots among those elected. The public has never had and does not need a valid scorecard.

Response to Friends: Say No to a Holy War

For some time in recent months I have exchanged views on various issues with a number of friends for whom I hold the highest respect for their inspiring and challenging intelligence. I plan to add to this Blog those of my responses which may still be relevant to current issues. I recall making this same statement of intent in an earlier entry. I mean it this time. This entry is just one regarding Islamic terrorism from a discussion today. My friend said, in the course of his argument, “This is a war, and it will be a really long war….. Given 1400 years of history, it may never end except for an unlikely collapse of will by the combatants or a catastrophe of world scope.”

My response: You seem to be espousing a crusade, a Christian Holy War against Islam. I believe history does not support your premise nor will history have to come close to your apocalyptic projection. However, one way to assuredly make this future more likely is to agree to definitions of nations as single repositories of the one true religion to the physical expulsion or cultural/political condemnation of any one or all others. This seems to me particularly stupid in the long run when the religions share the same God and only the current interpretations of the “founding books” by a minority of believers are initiating the current violence. The following is an interesting twist from “Democracy in America” by de Tocqueville.

"Mohammed professed to derive from Heaven, and has inserted in the Koran, not only religious doctrines, but political maxims, civil and criminal laws, and theories of science. The Gospel, on the contrary, speaks only of the general relations of men to God and to each other, beyond which it inculcates and imposes no point of faith. This alone, besides a thousand other reasons, would suffice to prove that the former of these religions will never long predominate in a cultivated and democratic age, while the latter is destined to retain its sway at these as at all other periods.

"In continuation of this same inquiry I find that for religions to maintain their authority, humanly speaking, in democratic ages, … they confine themselves strictly within the circle of spiritual matters, ….

"The preceding observation, that equality leads men to very general and very vast ideas, is principally to be understood in respect to religion. Men who are similar and equal in the world readily conceive the idea of the one God, governing every man by the same laws and granting to every man future happiness on the same conditions. The idea of the unity of mankind constantly leads them back to the idea of the unity of the Creator; while on the contrary in a state of society where men are broken up into very unequal ranks, they are apt to devise as many deities as there are nations, castes, classes, or families, and to trace a thousand private roads to heaven…..

"It seems evident that the more the barriers are removed which separate one nation from another and one citizen from another, the stronger is the bent of the human mind, as if by its own impulse, towards the idea of a single and all-powerful Being, dispensing equal laws in the same manner to every man. In democratic ages, then, it is particularly important not to allow the homage paid to secondary agents to be confused with the worship due to the Creator alone. Another truth is no less clear, that religions ought to have fewer external observances in democratic periods than at any others….

"Those who have to regulate the external forms of religion in a democratic age should pay a close attention to these natural propensities of the human mind in order not to run counter to them unnecessarily….” http://xroads.virginia.edu/~Hyper/DETOC/ch1_05.htm

A Thought on the Hasan Matter

"WASHINGTON -- Military officials investigating failures in the wake of the Fort Hood shootings may recommend that individuals be held accountable for failing to perform their duties."

Individuals, if such failure is shown, should be held accountable with direct and strong disciplinary measures. The aftermath of the investigation should also include the issuance of clear and concise guidance on vigilance and reporting. However, it appears to me that there could be an overreaction more detrimental to order and discipline than necessary. Soldiers, without question, need to have trust in each other and in their commanders. Security demands that actual threats be recognized and eliminated. Yet, any official reaction that suggests, in any manner, the need for reporting of all political views possibly contrary to existing policy might establish a form of "political police" not unlike those in the military of the old communist regimes. Commanders in good ol' "CYA" manner might feel compelled in the future to report every rumor or accusation no matter how baseless up the chain rather than apply their own reasoned judgment. I only suggest that the military needs far more than knee jerk rhetoric in responding. I am not sure where the balance point should be.

West Point Honor Code

As you have framed the issue, my friend, I believe the topic [the viability of an honor code] is the most important one we can discuss as grads and I hope it generates a broad response on this Class forum. You wrote that “[t]he goal of absolute honesty would not seem to be debatable.” In another context, self-interest in the market, on the Class forum, I said “Idealism in an aspect of human conduct may be an admirable goal where it has a viable foundation in the nature of man.” Is it in the nature of humanity (more encompassing than “man”) to be able to subdue desires and suppress self-preservation to the point of absolute honesty as defined by a code not to lie, cheat or steal? I believe that it is difficult yet attainable and maintainable.

Putting aside for the moment the concept of individual virtue in an ideal man, absolute honesty under a code seems to me maintainable over individual interests within a community of committed individuals. I have personally (anecdotally) found this to have substantively existed while a cadet and while dealing with fellow grads. To a slightly lesser degree, I have expected and been satisfied to find, in the practice of criminal law, a community of lawyers and judges practicing and applying law in the courts under a strict, statutory code that sanctions lying, cheating and stealing. To this point, I believe that sanctions are a necessary part of any human community code of conduct. The conscience of an ideal man may provide a sufficient punishment within, but I know of no “ideal man.” Accordingly, a “System” has to exist to enforce compliance with the agreed upon code.

I would think that a community of eighteen to twenty-three year olds could have the capacity to judge and sanction one of its own. The peer consciousness should be supplemented with training in, as examples, bias recognition and elimination, due-process concepts, and reliability in evidence. The objective would not be a mini-law school experience but education sufficient for them to provide a just (not necessarily fair in the bigger picture inclusive of life outside of the community) resolution to enforce the code and sanction the transgressor. As far as any application of “wisdom,” I haven’t seen it applied enough (if at all) to be able to argue for it as a prerequisite for any sanctioning entity. If ever attained, it would come, I expect, with maturity which I agree is a limited quality in young people. The Corps now however has within it a significant number of combat veterans who, presumably, have attained a higher level of maturity (more, I would argue, than any number of young jurists now sitting on the bench meting out relatively draconian punishments in the outside world). I would support, however, a gradual application of standards and sanctions to insure that the understanding of and appreciation for the Honor Code and the need for absolute honesty in the service to follow is first instilled in each cadet.

As far as the comment of Gen Maxwell Taylor, I disagree that the formative period need include exceptions to the Honor Code to teach them “early in life to inject toleration, judgment of human factors, and appreciation of sincere repentance into their decisions affecting the careers of their fellow cadets.” There will be ample opportunity in their growth at the Academy and beyond to build on earlier values and experience to that end. The Honor Code should become within their Academy experience an absolute standard. Truth is elusive, as you said, and the justice system deals more in probabilities than in the delivery of “truth.” But it does work to produce a just and often fair result at least often enough to continue to refine it.

It seems to me that the difficulties in enforcement within the Honor system arise with imposition of political and legal intrusions from outside the community of cadets whose code this is presumed to belong to. I do recognize that the Academy is a public entity bound by Constitutional and statutory constraints. Yet, as you point to my friend, “the military profession is fundamentally different.” More so than in the market or social or other civilian communities, absolute honesty is essential, demanded and expected. As you said there are no second chances in combat. Accordingly, the Academy and other leader development venues should be permitted to set and enforce the standard of absolute honesty.

Yesterday's News

Day One – Hour One: Cable news reports “CHICAGO ELIMINATED FROM CONSIDERATION TO HOST 2016 OLYMPICS”

Daniel Shore, Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite resurrected and to report for makeup prior to anticipated “News Specials” to air continuously over the next week analyzing the profound effects of President's failure.

All network and cable news directors order bureaus and affiliates to prominently display photo of President Obama during all programming on the issue. Fox News adds display of “Unbelievably Devastating Failure for Obama” with photos.

“Country in shock!” CNN Reports. Fox attempts to revive Limbaugh though able to quote his exhaling as “I knew it. I said it. The President has destroyed Chicago and next will be Moline!”

White House sources reveal the President on his way to daughter’s classroom to begin extended reading of Dr. Seuss prior to official announcement. Vice- President Biden seen standing on lawn waiting for someone to listen to him.

Day One – Hour Two: Congressional Budget Office reports ten billion dollar projected increase in Medicare payments due to epidemic of depression among elderly couch potatoes .

Department of Transportation projects substantial revenue loss to domestic airlines due to cancellation of reservations from hookers across the country. Bailout money discussed in congressional offices (for hooker “associates” of congressmen not airlines).

Mexican border crossing “guides” in protest along the border reported to have hired a prominent New York lawyer to sue the city of Chicago due to substantial decrease in labor requirements. At least two Columbian drug cartels to join suit alleging decreased cocaine demand.

Day One – Hour Three: Fox still unable to revive Limbaugh.

Spokesperson for Republican Party contends President incompetent. “How can we trust him on health insurance when he fails at something so simple?”

Austin Times/Fox News Poll just released confirms President’s approval rating drops to single digits.

Senator John Kerry issues a statement saying he plans to throw his Chicago Bears muffler over some, as yet unchosen, fence in protest. Jane Fonda reported confused.

Senator Mitch McConnell calls for the President's resignation and is quoted as saying "Hell, he wasn't legal anyhow."

Day One – Hour Four: Mayor Daley of Chicago attempts to call Mafia political backers but prison regulations preclude. Democrat precinct captains issued “Plan F’em” and begin arming the two hundred thousand no-show city employees in anticipation of invasion of winning city. Teamsters join effort.

O’Reilly and Hannity seen dancing naked together in Central Park. Fox News in turmoil when unable to locate key to Glen Beck’s cage.

White House cancels all meetings scheduled with anyone who had visited Chicago in last three years. Secret Service given classified instructions regarding Mayor Daley of Chicago.

Fox broadcasts interview with Republican John Boehner who charges the President “Never wanted America to win!” Boehner says he cannot dismiss allegations the President actually working for Muslim country in Olympic selection.

Mid Day – One: Rio announced the winner of 2016 Olympics - White House issues statement “Yeah, like they needed another reason to party!” White House source says firing of Acorn in recent weeks destroyed any chance for “Chicago-style” victory.

Day Thirty: Cable News interest in Olympics issue falls and all revert back to Michael Jackson stories.

A Rally by Any Other Name

A friend writes from his rally experience in Santa Fe: " Contrary to media reports, it was not an anti-Obama rally. It was overwhelmingly attended by average folks concerned about the runaway deficits and the growth of government."

I readily appreciate the probability that the majority of the attendees at these rallies are voicing their own legitimate concerns about national policy regarding deficit spending, growth of government, and medical insurance primarily. What troubles me is the stimulus (no pun intended) to this movement. It has appeared to me that the initiating cause for these gatherings was the rhetoric of Republican/conservative fear mongering premised on baseless hyperbole and lies. Now there is room in my philosophy for "the end justifying the means." And the Great American Public should have been and should remain concerned on all issues of importance to the country, including those now being considered (I started to say "being debated" but there is relatively no public or parlimentary debate). First, many if not most of the citizens attending, I'll concede for argument, are honestly concerned. Yet, having watched parts of the DC rally on C-Span (I'll defer wholly to my friend on his Santa Fe experience) two observations concerned me. I did see signs that were not issue statements but personal attacks on the President. And there were quite a few. Interestingly, these poster boards did not at all appear professional or preprinted but rather home made. I do not see this fact as a positive. Secondly, the leadership as evident from the identity of sponsors and the speakers were anti-Obama. So, I can accept a media report so stating as to the DC event.

I see the Republican Party using the "best" Machiavellian tactics to rebuild a base. The fact that the Party is being hypocritical is not noticed by this popular awakening because most of them slept through earlier years of skillfully managed obscene spending (both parties)and tax cuts blindly ignoring, among other facts, the reality of two ongoing wars and the associated costs. The reality of the depth of the world-wide economic crises and the necessity of limited government intervention as recognized in every developed country seems to have escaped the popular education. They, the majority of those rallying now yell out of fear and ignorance. The posted objectives I saw to "save the Constitution," stop socialism," stop communism," stop fascism," and Obama "the liar," the Hitler,"the enemy" are frankly ridiculous on the basis of any reasoned view of this administration's eight months in office. It is the strategy of the Republican conservative movement to negate the results of the national presidential election and prevent the developement of the policies and objectives desired by majority of voting citizens.

The DC rally was instigated by well established conservatives and encouraged and guided by Republican Party and elected representatives both of which have a specific, unified agenda not consistent with nor in the interests of these assembled masses. In the not to distant memory, there were rallies of workers protesting often legitimate and important issues and policies. There was then a distinction when such rallies were manipulated by the Communist Party toward ends not consistent with nor in the best interests of the workers. In November 2008 the country voted and rejected the policies of the Republican administration. Their objective to return to those policies is hidden by them with tarantinoesq fears and the flag.