The Incredible Shrinking President: He Doesn't "Own or Control Those Numbers"

It's a little past midnight in New York, and I'd like you to humor me with a one-minute exercise. Go to the home page of The New York Times and do a search for "Obama." I just came up with "no matches found."

Now go to CNN (I'm looking at the International Edition) and do the same search. Again, I came up with "no matches found."

Now have a look at the President's Schedule for June 22 as provided by the White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule): "No public schedule."

Enmeshed in scandal at home, buffeted with crises overseas, America's president has disappeared.

Disappeared? Well, not entirely. Somebody has to run the show and tell us what he's up to. Obama is making a week long trip to Africa, from June 26 to July 3, with his wife and daughters, and the cost of this excursion does not seem to want to go away. Asked about the cost of this upcoming journey, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications Ben Rhodes told reporters on a conference call Friday (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-administration-defers-security-africa-trip-costs-skips-211646601.html):

"We don't have the exact figure on costs—frankly we don't own or control those numbers."

Hmm . . . Let's try that one out on the domestic front:

"Jeffrey . . ."

"Yes, dear."

"How much did that MRAP that you just brought back from Afghanistan cost us?"

"Sorry, dear, but we don't own or control those numbers."

Well, you can't see it online, but that was my pillow, blanket, trashy novel and medicinal vodka bottle (filled with water) being thrown out the bedroom door.

David Brooks, "The Humanist Vocation": In Search of a Lost Soul

I just arrived back from Afghanistan with my MRAP (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/06/meet-our-next-car-mrap.html), and yes, I'm tired. The flights were delayed, there were so many MRAPs to choose from, but it was well worth the effort. I've already noticed that I'm not getting much in the way of miles per gallon, and its 0-60 acceleration is slow, but you should see how people stare as I drive by them! Who cares if I cause traffic jams by occupying two lanes? How did Borat describe such a vehicle?:

Borat: A man yesterday, tell me if I buy a car I must buy one with a pussy magnet.
Car Dealership owner: He means a car that women like.
Borat: Yes, but where do you keep this magnet?
Car Dealership owner: No. There's no magnet he just means the vehicle. Women love the Hummers.
Borat: Do this have a pussy magnet?
Car Dealership owner: No. The vehicle itself would be a magnet.
Borat: If I give you good price, will you please put in pussy magnet?

Which brings me to David Brooks's latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Humanist Vocation" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/opinion/brooks-the-humanist-vocation.html?_r=0) (I know, that wasn't much of a segue). You will recall that in response to Brooks's prior op-ed, "Beyond the Brain" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/06/david-brooks-beyond-brain-brain-is-not.html), I wrote:

"Yes, as terror, cruelty, greed and poverty swirl around us, we should continue to marvel at the sublime human mind.

And if we have a mind, do we have a soul? Truly, a soul-searching issue . . ."

Well, whether or not he reads my blog, he certainly picked up my gauntlet, and today, decrying the demise of the teaching of humanities, Brooks writes:

"A half-century ago, 14 percent of college degrees were awarded to people who majored in the humanities. Today, only 7 percent of graduates in the country are humanities majors. Even over the last decade alone, the number of incoming students at Harvard who express interest in becoming humanities majors has dropped by a third.

Most people give an economic explanation for this decline. Accounting majors get jobs. Lit majors don’t. And there’s obviously some truth to this. But the humanities are not only being bulldozed by an unforgiving job market. They are committing suicide because many humanists have lost faith in their own enterprise."

Humanists have lost faith in their own enterprise? Philosophers don't get jobs? How can this possibly be, given the election of Barack Obama and the advent of "Hope" and "Change," which have morphed into "Forward," which is, by the way, why I just bought an MRAP. "Forward" in an MRAP is fine, but reverse can be a nightmare.

But I stray from the matter at hand. Brooks continues his opinion piece by declaring:

"Back when the humanities were thriving, the leading figures had a clear definition of their mission and a fervent passion for it. The job of the humanities was to cultivate the human core, the part of a person we might call the spirit, the soul, or, in D.H. Lawrence’s phrase, 'the dark vast forest.'"

Ah yes . . . the "soul"! I told you, I knew it was coming. "On the Soul" by Aristotle? I wouldn't do that to you. Rather, I will confine myself to the elucidating declaration by Andre the Giant in the 1987 gem "The Princess Bride":

Fezzik: The Dread Pirate Roberts is here for your souls!

In fact, I had much time to contemplate my soul earlier this morning while driving down the highway in my new MRAP with the roof down. You see, I studied philosophy at the University of Chicago, and later learned law, and was forced to reeducate myself twice.

Reeducate myself? Okay, no one is willing to pay you today for introducing Immanuel Kant into negotiations (either you can, or you can't), but law? There's no market for law? To make matters short, I would refer you to the 1992 comedy "My Cousin Vinny":

Mona Lisa Vito: Don't you wanna know why Trotter gave you his files?
Vinny Gambini: I told you why already.
Mona Lisa Vito: He has to, by law, you're entitled. It's called disclosure, you dickhead! He has to show you everything, otherwise it could be a mistrial. He has to give you a list of all his witnesses, you can talk to all his witnesses, he's not allowed any surprises.
[Vinny has a blank look on his face]
Mona Lisa Vito: They didn't teach you that in law school either?

In fact, I vaguely recall them teaching me "legal ethics" at law school. It's the equivalent of "giant shrimp."

Yet again I stray from the human soul and its ineluctable corollaries, honesty and morality. Allow me to quote from a masterful opinion piece by George Will entitled "Obama hits a wall in Berlin" in today's Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-f-will-obama-hits-a-wall-in-berlin/2013/06/20/bfff0426-d9df-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html?hpid=z2), concerning Obama's speech on Wednesday at the Brandenburg Gate:

"Shifting his strange focus from Russia’s nuclear weapons, Obama said “we can . . . reject the nuclear weaponization that North Korea and Iran may be seeking.” Were Obama given to saying such stuff off the cuff, this would be a good reason for handcuffing him to a teleprompter. But, amazingly, such stuff is put on his teleprompter and, even more amazing, he reads it aloud.

Neither the people who wrote those words nor he who spoke them can be taken seriously. North Korea and Iran may be seeking nuclear weapons? North Korea may have such weapons. Evidently Obama still entertains doubts that Iran is seeking them.

In Northern Ireland before going to Berlin, Obama sat next to Putin, whose demeanor and body language when he is in Obama’s presence radiate disdain. There Obama said: 'With respect to Syria, we do have differing perspectives on the problem, but we share an interest in reducing the violence.' Differing perspectives?

Obama wants to reduce the violence by coaxing Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, who is winning the war, to attend a conference at which he negotiates the surrender of his power. Putin wants to reduce the violence by helping — with lavish materiel assistance and by preventing diplomacy that interferes — Assad complete the destruction of his enemies."

Hiding from scandals at home, Obama is also evading international truth.

A human soul? I don't know, however, I sure as heck believe in human evil, which needs to be confronted. Obama is doing his best to avoid the issue.

Meet Our Next Car: An MRAP!

Our Honda is more than ten years old, and almost every evening my wife tells me:

"While I was driving on the highway this afternoon, I saw this very sporty looking hybrid . . ."

"Sorry, dear, we're short on cash."

"Do you know how much it costs to fill the Honda with gas?"

"Yes, dear."

Well, tonight I have a little surprise for my wife. Actually, it's kind of a big surprise, which is going to fill up the entire driveway: Our next car is an MRAP!

"An MRAP?" you ask. "What's that?" Answer: Simple. As reported by The Washington Post  in an article entitled "Scrapping equipment key to Afghan drawdown" ((http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/scrapping-equipment-key-to-afghan-drawdown/2013/06/19/9d435258-d83f-11e2-b418-9dfa095e125d_story.html?hpid=z1)) by Ernesto Londoño:

"Facing a tight withdrawal deadline and tough terrain, the U.S. military has destroyed more than 170 million pounds worth of vehicles and other military equipment as it rushes to wind down its role in the Afghanistan war by the end of 2014.

The massive disposal effort, which U.S. military officials call unprecedented, has unfolded largely out of sight amid an ongoing debate inside the Pentagon about what to do with the heaps of equipment that won’t be returning home. Military planners have determined that they will not ship back more than $7 billion worth of equipment — about 20 percent of what the U.S. military has in Afghanistan — because it is no longer needed or would be too costly to ship back home.

. . . .

The most contentious and closely watched part of the effort involves the disposal of Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, the hulking beige personnel carriers that the Pentagon raced to build starting in 2007 to counter the threat of roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan. The massive trucks, known as MRAPs, came to symbolize the bloody evolution of wars that were meant to be short conflicts but turned into quagmires.

The Pentagon has determined that it will no longer have use for about 12,300 of its 25,500 MRAPs scattered at bases worldwide, officials said. In Afghanistan, the military has labeled about 2,000 of its roughly 11,000 MRAPs 'excess.' About 9,000 will be shipped to the United States and U.S. military bases in Kuwait and elsewhere, but the majority of the unwanted vehicles — which cost about $1 million each — will probably be shredded, officials said, because they are unlikely to find clients willing to come pick them up."

"Unlikely to find clients willing to come pick them up"? No way! Later today, I'm flying to Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, to select my own MRAP, which I can't wait to drive with the top down beside the beach.

Imagine the smile on my wife's face when I drive up to the house in our brand new rugged terrain vehicle! She always wanted a Jeep, and now I'm sure to make her proud!

Maureen Dowd, "Of Rats and Hit Men": Honor Killing

Some who read this blog are aware that part of my professional life was devoted to law enforcement. Fewer of my readers know that I recently took time to translate the memoirs of a former gang leader, who, after many years in prison, decided to make a clean break from his prior vocation. Accordingly, it should come as no surprise that I have been following the trial in Boston of James "Whitey" Bulger (see: http://abcnews.go.com/US/whitey-bulger-hitman-broke-heart-hear-bulger-fbi/story?id=19418872#.UcElYnZBTct) with avid interest.

In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Of Rats and Hit Men" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/opinion/dowd-of-rats-and-hit-men.html), Maureen Dowd turns her attention to this trial and the testimony of Johnny Martorano, who is now a federal witness against Bulger. Dowd writes:

"Johnny 'The Executioner' Martorano, who turned government witness and copped to killing 20 men and women as part of Whitey Bulger’s Winter Hill Gang, explained to Whitey’s lawyer Tuesday in federal court here that he was motivated by love of family and friends.

'I didn’t enjoy killing anybody,' he said. 'I enjoyed helping a friend if I could.'

If anybody insulted, implicated or roughed up his brother or a friend’s brother, if anybody looked at him funny while he was with a date, if anybody ratted on his fellow gang members, if anybody could eyewitness a crime committed by an 'associate,' he grabbed a .38 or a knife, a fake beard, a walkie-talkie or a towel to keep the blood off his car, and sprang into action. And somebody usually ended up in a trunk somewhere, sometimes still groaning."

While reading Dowd's op-ed, I searched for the word "honor," and it inevitably appeared:

"In a sneering cross-examination Tuesday, Henry Brennan, a lawyer on Whitey’s defense team, referred to Martorano’s deal for a 'so-called sentence' of 14 years (12 served) for 20 murders and asked the Executioner if he felt he was killing out of honor and integrity.

'I thought both,' Martorano replied."

"Killing out of honor"?

Throughout the Muslim Middle East, women are murdered every day by their fathers, brothers and husbands for allegedly bringing shame upon their families. The men call these murders "honor killings," which often go unpunished.

Throughout the world of crime, murder routinely involves perceived slights to the "honor" of gang leaders. This was plainly evident in the testimony of Martorano.

Families - crime families, tribes, clans and extended and nuclear families - continue to demand the death of those who have shamed their eminence, dignity, status or standing. It's all a matter of "pride" and "honor."

When does any of this insanity end?

Apparently not in my lifetime.

Thomas Friedman, "Postcard From Turkey": Dead Wrong!

Does Thomas Friedman speak Turkish? No, but that does not stop him from breezing into Istanbul and mistakenly describing the nature of protests throughout Turkey. In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Postcard From Turkey" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/opinion/friedman-postcard-from-turkey.html?_r=0), Thomas Friedman writes:

"Having witnessed the Egyptian uprising in Tahrir Square in Cairo in 2011, I was eager to compare it with the protests by Turkish youths here in Taksim Square in 2013. They are very different. The Egyptians wanted to oust President Hosni Mubarak. Theirs was an act of 'revolution.' The Turks are engaged in an act of 'revulsion.' They aren’t (yet) trying to throw out their democratically elected Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. What they’re doing is calling him out. Their message is simple: 'Get out of our faces, stop choking our democracy and stop acting like such a pompous, overbearing, modern-day Sultan.'"

Turks "aren't (yet) trying to throw out their democratically elected Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan"? An act of "revulsion"? Is that all it is? According to the BBC on June 7 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22809430):

"Mr Erdogan responded to calls for his resignation by referring to his election victory in 2011 when he took 50% of the vote.

'They say I am the prime minister of only 50%. It's not true. We have served the whole of the 76 million from the east to the west,' he told the crowd.'

It was the first major show of support for Mr Erdogan following a week of protests in which his opponents have called for him to resign."

As reported by Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/10/us-turkey-protests-idUSBRE94U0J920130610):

"Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan warned protesters who have taken to the streets across Turkey demanding his resignation that his patience has its limits and compared the unrest with an army attempt six years ago to curb his power."

According to The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/10122409/Mother-of-Turkish-protester-killed-in-Ankara-Erdogan-must-resign.html):

"The mother of Ethem Sarisuluk, one of five people killed in a fortnight of protests in Turkey, tells Justin Vela that the protests must continue until Prime Minister Erdogan resigns."

As reported by Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/with-one-voice-they-yelled-erdogan-resign.premium-1.527192):

"For the last two days, Istanbul’s main center, Taksim, and its surrounding areas, have been under siege due to a massive peaceful protest. Thousands of canisters of tear gas have been fired at hundreds of thousands of peaceful protesters throughout the city, together with water-cannons spraying tainted water that burns the skin, all while the protesters screamed in unison, 'Erdogan Resign!'"

And as reported by Friedman's own newspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/world/middleeast/turkish-leader-agrees-to-meet-protest-organizers.html):

"The protesters later widened their grievances into a broad rebuke of what they consider the authoritarian style of Mr. Erdogan and his political party, which is supported by religious conservatives in Turkey. The protesters have demanded the resignation of governors and security chiefs in Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir, the punishment of abusive police officers and the release of people detained in the protests. Some have called for Mr. Erdogan to resign."

Is the message of the Turkish protesters simply, "Get out of our faces, stop choking our democracy and stop acting like such a pompous, overbearing, modern-day Sultan," as Tom would have us believe? Or could it also have to do with the fact that Turkey leads the world in arresting journalists (see: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/02/2013217124044793870.html)?

And as long as we are on the topic of Erdogan, you will recall that when interviewed by Fareed Zakaria in 2012, Obama listed Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan as one of his best international friends (http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/19/inside-obamas-world-the-president-talks-to-time-about-the-changing-nature-of-american-power/). Care to comment now, Mr. President?

David Brooks, "Beyond the Brain": The Brain Is Not the Mind

Egbert: "Was I in here last night, and did I spend a 20 dollar bill?"
Joe the Bartender: "Yeah!"
Egbert: "Oh, boy, is that a load off my mind. I thought I'd lost it!"

- W.C. Fields as Egbert Sousé, "Sousé – accent grave over the 'e'!", in "The Bank Dick," 1940

His mind troubled by a host of scandals, including revelations concerning mind mapping efforts by the NSA (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/07/nsa-prism-records-surveillance-questions), President Obama set off on a globetrotting trip intended to set his mind at ease. Unfortunately, Obama was soon reminded by Putin that the two world leaders are not of the same mind regarding Syria (see: http://news.yahoo.com/russias-putin-says-disagrees-obama-syria-200057452.html). I wonder if Obama remembered his "open microphone" gaffe, during which the US president mindlessly asked Putin to bear in mind that he would have more "flexibility" after the election (see: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/26/us-nuclear-summit-obama-medvedev-idUSBRE82P0JI20120326). Obviously, the two remain minds apart.

Meanwhile, as Obama heads off for Tanzania, which has been involved in a lengthy dispute with the US over human trafficking (see: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-06-09/opinions/39856653_1_human-trafficking-tanzania-president-obama), those of us with enquiring minds, or even half a mind, wonder who is now minding the store in Washington.

Me? Mindful of this mess, I opened a bottle of Kahlua and again watched "Blade Runner." Rachael was an intelligent "replicant," with presence of mind, but did she actually possess a mind?

My mindset after last night's mind bender? I don't dwell on matters involving the subconscious mind.

Am I engaging in mind games this morning? Hardly. In his latest mind-expanding New York Times op-ed entitled "Beyond the Brain" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/opinion/brooks-beyond-the-brain.html?_r=0), David Brooks does not take the time to explain to us the meaning of "mind," but adamantly informs us - twice - that "the brain is not the mind." Brooks writes:

"At the lowbrow level, there are the conference circuit neuro-mappers. These are people who take pretty brain-scan images and claim they can use them to predict what product somebody will buy, what party they will vote for, whether they are lying or not or whether a criminal should be held responsible for his crime.

At the highbrow end, there are scholars and theorists that some have called the 'nothing buttists.' Human beings are nothing but neurons, they assert. Once we understand the brain well enough, we will be able to understand behavior.

. . . .

These two forms of extremism are refuted by the same reality. The brain is not the mind.

. . . .

Right now we are compelled to rely on different disciplines to try to understand behavior on multiple levels, with inherent tensions between them. Some people want to reduce that ambiguity by making one discipline all-explaining. They want to eliminate the confusing ambiguity of human freedom by reducing everything to material determinism.

But that is the form of intellectual utopianism that always leads to error. An important task these days is to harvest the exciting gains made by science and data while understanding the limits of science and data. The next time somebody tells you what a brain scan says, be a little skeptical. The brain is not the mind."

Yes, as terror, cruelty, greed and poverty swirl around us, we should continue to marvel at the sublime human mind.

And if we have a mind, do we have a soul? Truly, a soul-searching issue . . .

Obviously, I woke up on the wrong side of bed (no, this time not on the floor).

Never mind. 

Bill Keller, "Living With the Surveillance State": Ignoring the Real Threat

In an editorial entitled "Taking the mystery out of cyberwar" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/cyberwar-the-white-house-is-thinking-ahead/2013/06/16/b4a0ab00-d4fa-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html?hpid=z3), The Washington Post today describes defensive and offensive cyber operations, should the United States find itself in such a war:

"'Defensive cyber effects operations,' or DCEO, involve reaching outside of U.S. government networks to stop an assault or imminent threat. 'Offensive cyber effects operations,' or OCEO, are intended to 'offer unique and unconventional capabilities to advance U.S. national objectives around the world with little or no warning to the adversary or target and with potential effects ranging from subtle to severely damaging.' Both of these describe attacks, and, according to the directive, the president has ordered targeting plans. Stuxnet, the computer worm developed by the United States and Israel and used to sabotage Iran’s nuclear equipment a few years ago, was in the vanguard of such operations. Just recently, an online magazine that spreads al-Qaeda ideology was taken down, presumably another example."

Stuxnet, the product of a US and Israeli collaboration initiated when Bush was still president, can now be described as a fossilized worm. Should there be a future cyber war, look for a combined attack on transportation systems, power grids, telecommunications and financial markets. Although not as deadly as the tragic events on 9/11, such an assault could shut a country down and cause overwhelming destruction.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Living With the Surveillance State" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/17/opinion/keller-living-with-the-surveillance-state.html?pagewanted=all), Bill Keller begins by showering compliments on Thomas Friedman for his June 12, 2013 op-ed entitled "Blowing a Whistle" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/06/thomas-friedman-blowing-whistle-nsa-is.html). Keller writes:

"Tom’s important point was that the gravest threat to our civil liberties is not the N.S.A. but another 9/11-scale catastrophe that could leave a panicky public willing to ratchet up the security state, even beyond the war-on-terror excesses that followed the last big attack. Reluctantly, he concludes that a well-regulated program to use technology in defense of liberty — even if it gives us the creeps — is a price we pay to avoid a much higher price, the shutdown of the world’s most open society. Hold onto that qualifier: 'well regulated.'"

Well, I have news for both Bill and Tom: The bigger current danger to the US is not another 9/11 type attack, but rather a massive cyber assault. Moreover, even with warnings from Moscow concerning the Tsarnaev brothers, the data accumulated by PRISM couldn't prevent the Boston Marathon bombing.

Keller continues:

"But in most cases the advantages of intrusive technology are tangible and the abuses are largely potential. Edward Snowden’s leaks about N.S.A. data-mining have, so far, not included evidence of any specific abuse.

The danger, it seems to me, is not surveillance per se. We have already decided, most of us, that life on the grid entails a certain amount of intrusion. Nor is the danger secrecy, which, as Posner notes, 'is ubiquitous in a range of uncontroversial settings,' a promise the government makes to protect 'taxpayers, inventors, whistle-blowers, informers, hospital patients, foreign diplomats, entrepreneurs, contractors, data suppliers and many others.'

The danger is the absence of rigorous, independent regulation and vigilant oversight to keep potential abuses of power from becoming a real menace to our freedom. The founders created a system of checks and balances, but the safeguards have not kept up with technology. Instead, we have an executive branch in a leak-hunting frenzy, a Congress that treats oversight as a form of partisan combat, a political climate that has made 'regulation' an expletive and a public that feels a generalized, impotent uneasiness. I don’t think we’re on a slippery slope to a police state, but I think if we are too complacent about our civil liberties we could wake up one day and find them gone — not in a flash of nuclear terror but in a gradual, incremental surrender."

No "evidence of any specific abuse"? The fact that Snowden was privy to PRISM is in and of itself a significant failure. Add to this, Snowden's declaration: "I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal e-mail." In short, I would bet that a serious investigation would reveal massive abuse by NSA staff and subcontractors. Randomly select 100 NSA and subcontractor employees and ask them to take a polygraph to determine whether they ever abused the system. My guess is that there would be much "unhappiness" within the ranks.

Congress might also want to ask James Clapper about the hacking of Sharyl Attkisson's computer.

Indeed, the employment of Snowden and his freedom of action are evidence of the absence "of rigorous, independent regulation and vigilant oversight to keep potential abuses of power from becoming a real menace to our freedom."

I agree with Keller that "if we are too complacent about our civil liberties we could wake up one day and find them gone." In any given instance, a balance must be struck between the intrusiveness of technology and its ability to prevent disaster. The Boston Marathon bombing demonstrated PRISM's limited value.

More important, PRISM is powerless to prevent the real threat currently facing the US, i.e. a massive cyber assault on America's infrastructure, whose cost could prove immeasurable.