Tag Archives: responsibilities

Advice

Posted on by
Reply

Rebecca Grant, DC-based national security analyst, had some for President Joe Biden (D) vis-à-vis Russian President Vladimir Putin on the subject of the latter’s threatened invasion of Ukraine. The venue for that advice is the summit between the two men that occurred yesterday.

Grant is naively optimistic, though.

The 30-nation Euro-Atlantic alliance is primed to deter and counter rash Russian actions.

No, it’s not. Johnson is just posturing, and the UK, a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum (as is Russia), already has betrayed Ukraine by acquiescing to Russia’s occupation of Crimea and eastern Ukraine rather than enforcing the Memorandum. Beyond that, Germany is already in the bag for Russia, and France is carefully quiet.

America is already involved.

Indeed, we are. We’re also a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum, and under the Obama-Biden administration, we’ve also betrayed Ukraine by declining to enforce that memorandum. Beyond that, ships in the Black Sea are ducks in a pond for any force on the shores.

Biden and NATO can do more to deter Putin.  Start with immediate air exercises in Ukraine with US and NATO aircraft.

It’s a start, did Biden have the integrity and moral courage to do so, but more is needed, a yet sterner test of Biden’s…strength. Economic sanctions are insufficient and unlikely to be enacted, anyway. The more that’s actually needed is moving US (because we can’t count on a NATO whose European members won’t even honor their own commitments to fund and equip the alliance) troops into Poland, south toward Ukraine and north toward Kaliningrad, and moving US naval forces to within air strike range of Kaliningrad.

Grant closed her advice with this:

Heat up one tank engine and we’ll know about it.

Certainly. But what will Biden do about it? Grant opened her piece with this:

Ukraine’s borders are a parking lot for Russian tanks, trucks, and artillery ready for a three-pronged blitzkrieg.

Even after that first tank has lit off and crossed the border, that parking lot, for the next number of days, will remain a parking lot of targets. Von Moltke learned that problem in 1914, and even though Putin’s generals likely will have learned from that, the same or worse bottlenecks exist in western Russia and eastern Ukraine.

Biden is unlikely to do any of that, though. He got his marching orders from Putin via Colonial Pipeline, and he already has kowtowed to Putin via Nordstream 2.

Biden will only kowtow again.

In any event, we’ll be hearing, today and in the coming days, the claims of the two participants. We’ll learn empirically, in the coming weeks and months, the outcome of the summit.

Cowardice

Posted on by
Reply

Nadia Murad, sold into sex slavery by Daesh when she was 14, escaped that existence and wrote a book about it: The Last Girl: My Story Of Captivity (due out next February).

She was scheduled to speak with students from some of the 600 schools that are part of the Toronto District School Board about her book and the life it describes, but her presentation and discussion were canceled by Helen Fisher, one of the board’s Superintendents of Education.

But, according to Fisher’s concerns, the event might actually foster Islamophobia. Because Canadian schoolboys and girls are all a bunch of snowflakes who can’t understand such things. Of course, to the extent that’s actually true, that would be a coarse illustration of what Fisher’s Education facility is turning out.

Tanya Lee, proprietor of a book club for teenage girls, A Room Of Your Own—and mother—had a different take:

This is what Islamic State [Daesh] means. It is a terrorist organisation. It has nothing to do with ordinary Muslims. The TDSB should be aware of the difference.

But apparently Fisher’s terror has clouded her awareness. Indeed, even though a statement put out by the school board’s Director of Education, Colleen Russell-Rawlins, claimed to apologize to Murad (and to another, whose event was similarly canceled), the board has not un-canceled or rescheduled Murad’s speaking, even these two-plus weeks later.

Never mind that Murad also is a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, UN Goodwill Ambassador, and “a leading advocate for survivors of genocide and sexual violence.” And that she might know something of her subject and that subject’s implications outside of terrorism.

This isn’t just rank political correctness. This is raw cowardice by the Precious Ones of the Toronto school board.

These are not the Canadians who fought with such courage in WWII. Or only yesterday in Afghanistan.

In Which VP Harris Has It Right

Posted on by
Reply

Just not in the way she means. Following the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse of all charges in the Kenosha riot shooting case, the Kamala Harris (D) half of the Biden-Harris Presidency said this:

The verdict really speaks for itself[.]
As many of you know, I’ve spent the majority of my career working to make the criminal justice system more equitable, and clearly there’s a lot more to do[.]

She’s right, of course. The shootings wanted, as a matter of course, a careful and thorough investigation. Either that was not done—a lot more to do in our justice system—or the prosecutors ignored the results of a careful and thorough investigation and brought the case to trial, anyway—a lot more work to do in our justice system.

As the evidence brought to trial clearly showed, Rittenhouse was there in the middle of the riot to render first aid to those injured by the rioters; to fight fires set by the rioters; and to protect a business, at the behest of the business’ operators, from rioters bent on its physical destruction. As the evidence just as clearly showed, Rittenhouse was hounded, stalked, threatened with murder, chased, attacked, and threatened with a firearm aimed at him by his attackers. Ultimately, he was forced to defend himself, and sadly, lethally so regarding two of his attackers.

Yet the prosecutors brought their charges to trial anyway. And in the course of their presentation, they attacked Rittenhouse for daring to not speak publicly before the trial, to not answer their charges before the trial. In the course of their presentation, those prosecutors attempted to enter evidence that had been barred from entry by the judge. In the course of their presentation, those prosecutors withheld evidence from the defense until after the evidence presentation portion of the trial was closed and closing arguments begun.

The verdict really does speak for itself.

There really is a lot more work to do to make our criminal justice system more equitable.

“Sexism and Racism”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what’s behind the recent criticism of the Kamala Harris half of the Biden-Harris Presidency, according to the Joe Biden (D) half of the Presidency.

I do think that it has been easier and harsher from some in the right wing who have gone after her because she is the first woman, the first woman of color. I’m not suggesting anyone will acknowledge that publicly[.]

That’s what Biden said with the voice of his Press Secretary Jen Psaki as the latter uttered the words at Politico‘s Wednesday podcast, Women Rule.

He went on, still using Psaki’s voice, as cited by Fox News:

Harris bears a heavy burden being the “first African American, woman of color, Indian American woman to serve in this job[.]”

Of course, it couldn’t be that Harris was selected by Biden explicitly and primarily because she is a woman and black; her actual qualifications not being very high at all on his list of selection criteria. (There was one other criterion that Biden ranked higher than actual qualification: the degree to which she was sympatico with him.)

Far from being part of a vast right-wing conspiracy, the racism and sexism here begins with Joe Biden and his explicitly sexist and racist selection criteria, and it extends to the Progressive-Democratic Party and the Left at large for their continued emphasis on Harris’ color and gender rather than on her abilities, talents, and actual performance.

What Is It About the Press Industry…

Posted on by
1

Even a press critic cannot avoid injecting moral equivalency sewage into her criticism.

Bari Weiss wrote what could have been a very good dismantling of her industry’s intrinsically dishonest portrayal of Kyle Rittenhouse and the events surrounding him that led to his being put on trial. She had this, in the main, for her piece:

To admit that the press, in the main, got just about every key fact in the Rittenhouse case wrong—that he crossed state lines with a gun, that he had the gun illegally, that he had no connection to Kenosha, that he was connected to white supremacist groups—has nothing to do with whether Kyle Rittenhouse should have gone to Kenosha that day. It has nothing to do with where one stands on the question of open carry….

But then she ruined the entire piece with this moral equivalency:

Or whether or not a teenager should be allowed to walk around with a semiautomatic rifle. No teenager should have been walking around the chaos in Kenosha with a semiautomatic rifle that night.

Why not? Based on what journalistic holier-than-thou requirement is that?

One salient fact Weiss carefully chose to ignore was that, as a 17-year-old, Rittenhouse was legally barred from possessing a handgun, but he could possess a rifle.

Another salient fact that Weiss carefully chose to ignore was that Rittenhouse’s purpose in “walking around the chaos” was to render first aid to people injured in the riot that Weiss hides behind her euphemism and, at the request of some of the folks there, to protect one of the businesses under threat from that riot.

Does Weiss expect anyone to enter that riot wholly unarmed and incapable of defending himself, much less those injured he’s trying to treat, or the business he was asked to protect?

Or does she expect no one to go into an area from which—as she acknowledged—the police had been withdrawn by the decision of a cynical city government to abandon its own responsibilities and allow the rioters to wreak their havoc?

Does she believe that no citizen has a duty to his community and his fellows in that community, especially when its government has abandoned it—that duty always is someone else’s, some other entity’s, to satisfy? Who might that other be, who might that entity be, when government has run away?

And so, here we are: Weiss can’t bear to criticize her industry’s assault without also criticizing her industry’s target.

…that gets people who join it to subordinate their integrity, their morality, to their telling of a story?