Thursday, January 24, 2019

Opuscula

What am I
Missing here?


RECENTLY THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL STORIES in the media that amaze me.
Two for being incomplete.
Several for the chutzpah of politicians.


DATELINE WASHINGTON DC A group of so-called “black Hebrew Israelites” — the only accurate part of their “name” is “black” as they are neither Hebrews nor Israelites — confronted a bunch of kids from a private Catholic high school in Covington KY. (I’m not sure if “private Catholic” and “Covington KY” are really relevant.) In any event, a geriatric Indian who also is a military veteran claims he tried to prevent violence between the two groups by standing between the two groups and beating his drum.
The ubiquitous cell phones came out and one student was seen standing in front of the veteran and, some say, smirking.

    According to CBS (http://tinyurl.com/ycrtafnd), Nathan Phillips (is) a Native American veteran, Does that mean he’s a veteran of being an Indian? Perhaps he is an Indian who served in the military? Does CBS really KNOW what its people write? Does CBS even CARE?
The student was excoriated in the so called “news” media and on “social” media.
Somehow, at least from what I’ve been treated to on tv, no one, other than the student who starred on social media — and who got his 15 seconds of fame on national tv — is suggesting that the “black Hebrew Israelites” are anything but innocent bystanders.
All this happened on the Washington Mall which lacks the usual police protection (due, in my opinion, to Nancy Pelosi’s grandstanding) — translation, the veteran seeing there was no man, stepped in to be the man to try to prevent physical violence. (I don’t suppose the “black Hebrew Israelites” ever heard of the Jewish sage Hillel who allegedly said: “Where there is no man, strive to be the man.”)
The truth lies somewhere.
The remaining questions:
    Will the whole truth ever be made public and
    Will anyone BELIEVE the truth if it failed to agree with their opinions?
I don’t have a lot of hope for either.
 
DATELINE MIAMI According to the Miami Herald (http://tinyurl.com/y96xwfdm), The young men on bicycles were protesting the affordable housing crisis in Miami’s Liberty Square community, where a large mostly private development is being built. They’d blocked part of Brickell Avenue with their bicycles. The protest was an offshoot of the “Wheels Up Guns Down” movement that has become a staple in South Florida every Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.
Police arrested a white male, Mark Bartlett, for displaying a gun; the man claimed he feared for his life and that of his white girlfriend. Police accused the man, and later his girlfriend, of using racial slurs.
According to ABC’s Miami affiliate, "All I see is 15 people running across the street toward my girlfriend -- over the median, toward my girlfriend," he said. "My first reaction is I have a gun on me. Whether I have a gun on me or not, I'm running to see and to protect my family. I had a gun though. It wasn't loaded. I ran out there. You can see I never pointed it. I never threatened anybody. I just needed it in case something were to happen."
Scalione said racial slurs were thrown around from both sides, but doesn't feel anyone in the situation should be labeled a racist.
No mention was made in the media that the blacks, blocking the public roadway, shouted racial slurs, apparently on the grounds that only whites use racial epithets .
    For the record, I grew up in south Florida and I worked in newspapers for several decades, “back in the day.”
A sidenote: Police charged Bartlett with failing to have a concealed weapon permit.
Florida generally allows a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed firearm within the interior of a private vehicle, without a license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. (http://tinyurl.com/ycluv5eg).
 
DATELINE WASHINGTON DC Bigotry runs rampant in the newly installed Democrat-controlled House of Re­pre­sent­atives.
Two new members, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan are starting off their congressional careers by, according to the Document web site (http://tinyurl.com/y7vhksyp ), (B)oth women deceived voters about their positions on Israel. Both women, at some point during their rise in electoral politics, led voters — especially Jewish voters — to believe that they held moderate views on Israel. After being elected, both women reversed their positions and now say they are committed to sanctioning the Jewish state.
America’s first two Muslim congresswomen are now both on record as appearing to oppose Israel’s right to exist. They both support the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement. Both are also explicitly or implicitly opposed to continuing military aid to Israel, as well as to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — an outcome that would establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Instead, they favor a one-state solution — an outcome that many analysts believe would, due to demographics over time, replace the Jewish state with a unitary Palestinian state.

 
DATELINE WASHINGTON DC Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi denies the President of the United States the privilege of giving the State of the Union message from the floor of her house.
The State of the Union message has been a tradition from Geo. Washington’s speech on January 8, 1790. He gave that speech on the Senate — not the House — floor. (https://preview.tinyurl.com/y73cmhzz)
The same site reports that The second President, John Adams, also gave his annual messages in person but the practice was ended by Adams' successor, Thomas Jefferson, who sent his messages to Congress in writing. Jefferson's written communication with Congress began a tradition which lasted more than a hundred years and was not broken until President Woodrow Wilson personally addressed a joint session of Congress in 1913. With few exceptions, all subsequent Presidents have chosen to appear annually before a joint session of Congress to deliver their message. The term "State of the Union" was first used to describe an annual message delivered by President Franklin D. Roosevelt but came into common usage during the presidency of Harry Truman.
According to the House’s web site (http://tinyurl.com/y9xlkvqm), while the president is Constitutionally required “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” Article II, Section 3, Clause 1. the same apparently does not specify WHERE the address shall be presented, nor does it require Pelosi et al to listen (or read) the President’s words. (Naturally, she will critically critique whatever the president offers. Tv networks demand no less.)
Bottom line: the President should meet his Constitutional responsibilities and give the State of the Union address at any venue that can accommodate all U.S. willing-to-listen senators and representatives.
The president has the obligation to convey his remarks to the congress; the congress has no obligation to receive it.

 

 
PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on What am I missing?

No comments: