Category Archives: rights

Wrist Slaps and Unequal Justice

Posted on by
Reply

Navy sailor Petty Officer Wenheng Zhao was caught passing classified information concerning an Okinawa radar system, along with plans for a large-scale maritime training exercise in the Pacific theatre, to a spy for the People’s Republic of China. [OPSEC note: the exercise plans would allow, among other things, the PRC to watch the radar system in action during the exercise.] Zhao has been sentenced to 27 months in prison. A whole 27 months. A wrist slap.

Meanwhile, the 6 January rioters—those who have actually had trials three years(!) after the event and whose trials have actually run to completion—have been sentenced to 3-6 years, and some have been sentenced to as many as 20 years.

Meanwhile meanwhile, insurrectionists rioters in Portland and Seattle have, in the main, gone wholly uncharged at all, with a few scapegoats getting a few months.

It’s long past time to clean out the DoJ, from top to bottom, including the FBI. In parallel with that, it’s long past time to clean up our sentencing laws and sentencing guidelines.

If a Navy traitor can get off with a wrist slap, so, too, should the rioters at Capital Hill. That precedent was set prior to Zhao’s case, with those “rioters” who seized Seattle territory, drove out the Seattle government, and held the territory for weeks getting off with wrist slaps or going scot-free, and with those “rioters” in Portland who attacked and tried, for weeks, to burn down a Federal building with Federal government security personnel inside also getting off with wrist slaps or going scot-free.

Alternatively, the Navy traitor should have gotten tens of years in jail, even a life sentence. The 6 January rioters—a truly mostly peaceful affair, just noisy and boisterous (the only true violence was a security officer shooting one of the rioters and a security officer getting bashed over the head by a rioter using a fire extinguisher)—should have gotten off with sentences for the trespass they were committing, and the occasional petty theft they were committing in their souvenir hunting. The insurrectionists in Seattle and Portland should have gotten intermediate sentences in the fives of years in jail range.

It’s long past time to clean out the DoJ, from top to bottom, including the FBI. In parallel with that, it’s long past time to clean up our sentencing laws and sentencing guidelines. Whether or not you, dear reader, agree with my sentencing suggestions for these particular cases, the rules need to be adjusted to produce truly similar sentences for substantially similar actions, and—especially—existing personnel completely replaced with those who actually will apply and enforce the rules.

“Very Contentious Issue”

Posted on by
Reply

Republican Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has vetoed the SAFE Act, which would have barred biological males from women’s sports and protected Ohio’s children from mutilation in the form of sex hormone…treatments…and related sex change surgeries until those children reached 18 years old. DeWine had had this bill on his desk since 15 December, yet he waited until the last moment to veto it.

DeWine called the debate over transgender youth a “very contentious issue….”

Riley Gaines was direct on the matter during those two weeks:

He hasn’t signed it yet. He has 2 more days to sign before it becomes law without his signature. Why the hesitation, [Governor DeWine]?

No—there was, and is, nothing contentious at all in moving to protect children. There’s nothing contentious at all in moving to protect women’s sports and the women who compete in them. Contention exists only in the minds of extremists on the Left and of cowards in public office.

Riley Gaines is right: of what was Mike DeWine so terrified?

Or was he just putting his political position at the top of the Ohio heap ahead of the safety and welfare of Ohio’s children and women athletes?

It’s embarrassing that DeWine is a member of the Republican Party.

A UN Official…

Posted on by
Reply

…gets one right.

Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden, through organs of his administration, is moving to expand Title IX’s definition of sex and sexual discrimination to include “gender identity” and to bar schools, colleges, and universities from banning transgender athletes from women’s sports.

Even an agency of the UN sees this as…foolish.

Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls:

I share the concern expressed by women and girl athletes and women sports associations, as well as women and girls on sports scholarships, that the proposed Title IX rule changes would have detrimental effects on the participation of biological women and girls in sports, including by denying them the opportunity to compete fairly, resulting in the loss of athletic and scholarship opportunities[.]
More importantly, it would lead to the loss of privacy, an increased risk of physical injury, heightened exposure to sexual harassment and voyeurism, as well as a more frequent and accumulated psychological distress due to the loss of privacy and fair and equal sporting and academic opportunities[.]

Right on all counts. A better solution, and it is a problem that wants a solution, even as the Biden administration refuses even to consider the alternative, would be to modify Title IX to create a transgender section and separate transgender athletic programs.

A Critical Item

Posted on by
Reply

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on the right track. In his Christmas Wall Street Journal op-ed, he laid out Israel’s three criteria for achieving real peace in the Gaza Strip:

Hamas must be destroyed, Gaza must be demilitarized, and Palestinian society must be deradicalized. These are the three prerequisites for peace between Israel and its Palestinian neighbors in Gaza.

Netanyahu is well down the right track, but I disagree with him to a slight extent.

The destruction of Hamas (and of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, I add) is the Critical Item in this trio, and so it is the sole prerequisite to peace in and with the Gaza Strip. Without this, the other two, necessary as they also are, become irrelevant.

Gaza will never be demilitarized so long as the terrorist organizations exist.

It is possible to deradicalize Palestinian society, but that at best will be a multi-generational task—and the Palestinians themselves must be willing, beginning with their letting go of their deeply emotional hatred of all things Jewish.

NACs and the Takings Clause

Posted on by
Reply

The SEC is looking at allowing a new class of enterprises, Natural Asset Companies, to be listed on the NYSE. NACs are companies that would raise capital via the Exchange and ultimately purchase land to prevent its use for natural resource extraction. That is, their sole purpose would be not to make money for their owners, vis., by developing that land or any minerals or other wealth in/below that land, but rather by simply sequestering the land and sitting on it, preventing any wealth creation from it.

In response to a broad-based hue and cry, the SEC has reopened and extended the comment period for this proposed action, but the fact remains, the agency is seriously considering such an action. Utah State Treasurer Marlo Oaks is one of a number of State officials from 21 different States who protested the rule and forced the reopening of the comment period, and who object generally to the rule and its underlying concept altogether. His take on this SEC foolishness:

The proposed creation of Natural Asset Companies is one of the greatest threats to rural communities in the history of our country. Under the proposal, private interests, including foreign-controlled sovereign wealth funds, could use their capital to purchase or manage farmland, national and state parks, and other mineral-rich areas and stop essential economic activities like farming, grazing, and energy extraction. Recreating on Utah’s incredible natural lands could also face significant curtailment.

Marlo could speak only for Utah in the particular examples, but the situation is the same in all 21 States, and in the other 29 States and the several territories of our nation.

However, this might be a venue in which the Left’s views of private property, given concreteness in the Supreme Court’s badly misguided decisions in Berman v Parker, Hawaii Housing Authority v Midkiff, and Kelo v City of New London could come back to bite them. In Kelo, especially, the Court ruled that it was perfectly jake for private property, a widow’s home, to be seized by the city of New London, CT, and turned over to a private enterprise, a mall developer, for his benefit, and further that such seizures need not be limited to public use: the developer wanted to build another mall, a private use, on land that included the widow’s home.

Were the SEC to follow through, and its rule to stand, then it could be that suitably situated State governments could then seize the NACs’ land holdings and turn them over to State agencies for public use, per the original text and meaning of our Constitution’s 5th Amendment Takings Clause, or, per Kelo, to private enterprises for private exploitations of the lands.

Here’s that Takings Clause:

…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 

Berman, Midkiff, and Kelo can be read here, here, and here, respectively.