History Denied

At one point both the New Orleans Saints and Indianapolis Colts were at 13-0 this season.  Sports reporters breathlessly reported on the "historic" season each team was on the verge of.  They wrote about the possibility of two undefeated teams meeting in the Super Bowl with perfection on the line and assured whatever the result.

Alas, those sports writers will have to find weightier matters to write about (perhaps Tiger Woods's latest travails) as both teams lost a game.  In fact New Orleans has lost two.  As both teams get ready for the playoffs and focus on their real goal of winning a Super Bowl (nothing historic there it happens every year) they may in fact suffer more losses.

I recall that after Mickey Mantle had a liver transplant, the hospital held a press conference attended by many sports journalists.  After a question inquiring about the health status of the liver donor, a doctor replied "you're a sports journalist aren't you?"

CNN sent me a "Breaking News Alert" after each of these teams lost their first game.  Perspective has truly been lost in a historic way.

Happy Holidays to the Goldman Family of Tinton, NJ

This holiday season will be especially sweet for Sean Goldman and his father David Goldman.

In 2004, four year old Sean Goldman was taken to Rio by his Brazilian born mother and kept there against the wishes of his father David Goldman.  She informed him that she wanted a divorce and would be remaining in Brazil.

Thus began a 5 year ordeal for the Goldmans which only ended when the Brazilian Supreme Court ordered Sean returned to his father.  Sadly Sean's mother died during childbirth in 2008 but his stepfather and his Brazilian family insisted on fighting to keep him there.

This case shows a shocking lack of respect for the rule of law and international treaties.  Let's be clear about what happened here.  This was a case of parental abduction full stop.  His mother should have been charged with a felony.  Brazil, as a signatory to the Hague convention, should have immediately had the police at her door to have Sean sent back to the United States until his custody was resolved.,

The fact that it took so long (even after the death of his mother) is something that i find absolutely chilling.  What is the point of the Hague convention when it is so blatantly ignored for 5 years?  The fact that the Brazilian Supreme Court ruled correctly does not mitigate the outrage, it aggravates it because it confirms what was known in 2004.....Sean Goldman should not have been removed from his father in this manner.

There will undoubtedly be trauma yet to come for young Sean as he gets to know the father that he has not grown up with for most of his young life.  He will have to adjust to a new language, culture, school system and make new friends.

It is shocking that the Brazilian court system would allow this to happen in such a clear cut case.  It is also shocking that his family in Brazil insisted that the handover not happen in private and insisted on doing it before a media circus.  One can't help but wonder if the system would be even slower to act if his mother hadn't died so tragically.

Putting a child through this absurd process is abuse.  I'm sorry but i can't come up with a kinder word to describe what has happened here.  His family in Brazil, along with the cooperation of several levels of the Brazilian judiciary committed abuse.  They may not be guilty of a crime in a strict legal sense, however there is no question that they are guilty of a moral crime.

A final chilling thought:  how many other cases like this are out there without the sunlight of publicity moving things in the right direction??

Obama's Copenhagen and Health Care legacies

The Obama administration was widely creditted with saving the Copenhagen talks with a last minute pledge to raise USD 100 billion in funds for climate change aid for developing countries.

If indeed this action "saved" the accord, it is worth asking what exactly it was that got saved.  The accord is not legally binding.  This accord sets no targets and will be reviewed in 6 years.  In short, it was an agreement to agree at some future point in time.  The more alarmist views (which is also increasingly the consensus view) is that the world will have already reached the tipping point in 6 years if it has not done so already.

Perhaps it is most telling that in describing this agreement to agree, President Obama hailed the agreement as being "meaningful."  Truly meaningful agreements do not need to be described as such.

A similar story is being played out in the Health care debate now progressing through Congress.  In an effort to placate Conservative Democrats and ram a bill through by Christmas, the Democrats have allowed two Senators (Lieberman and Nelson) to impose their own terms and conditions on the bill. It is truly stunning to note that during the Democratic primaries of 2008, there was much discussion about a Canadian style single payer system.  The single payer system died early and in its place was a milder "public option."  The public option was jettisoned later on.  The dems have made it clear that only option that would not be considered is not passing a bill.  This of course strengthened the hands of Senators Lieberman and Nelson.

This kind of "agree at any cost" approach is unworthy of a great nation and will prove harmful in the long run.

One wonders where this approach might lead if applied to other areas of policy disagreements.  When will President Obama stand up and say "no deal."???

Tragedy

The front page of the New York Times is reporting on the death of Chris Henry.

Chris Henry is a wide receiver for the Cincinnatti Bengals of the National Football League.  News reports indicate that he had jumped into the back of a pickup truck being driven by his fiance after a domestic argument.  He was trying to get into the front of the truck when he fell off and suffered his fatal injuries.

Weighty issues are being discussed on the networks such as "how will his teammates be able to carry on and prepare for this weekend's match with the San Diego Chargers."

So one might ask why exactly his death is being described as tragic by so many people and merits space on the front page of the New York Times?  Well he is famous of course.   Actually i'd never heard of him and i actually follow the NFL.

Apparently he had a troubled life including several brushes with the law.  Maybe he was a good person who had a troubled history.  Maybe not....who knows?

The only thing i know for sure is that his death is not rendered more tragic because of his fame.......despite the news coverage indicating otherwise.

Legal Mumbo Jumbo

In a recent case in england, a man was jailed for 30 months after he and his brother chased down some knife wielding criminals who had invaded their home and assaulted his family members.  One of his sons escaped to sound the alarm and an uncle arrived to help chase down the thugs.  One of the home invaders was beaten with a cricket bat and left brain damaged. 

This case (and the case of Toronto grocer David Chen) raise the issue of how far one can go in protecting one's private property and family.

In both cases, legal scholars make arguments as the Judge in the england case made in his ruling:

"“It may be that some members of the public, or media commentators, will assert that the man Salem deserved what happened to him at the hands of you and the two others involved, and that you should not have been prosecuted and need not be punished," said the judge.


“However, if persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6956044.ece

Indeed this judge would have us believe that the actions of this man would cause anarchy if left unpunished.  Why innocent people might resort to assaulting home invading criminals with shocking regularity.

This type of reasoning shows that too many legal scholars live in ivory towers separated from the real world.  In the real world, the police are far too slow in their reactions to do anything but collect evidence after the fact.  In the real world, there are significant deterrents to an outbreak of vigilantism.....such as fear and the fact that it is usually the criminals who are armed.

This is the kind of paper based reasoning that sees the wolves and the deer as equal under the law and subject to the same rights and limitations.  If a mother deer were to trample a wolf to defend her offspring, these judges would be calling for the shooting of that deer lest it lead to an outbreak of wolficide at the hands of these awful deer who did not know where "reasonable force" ends and "assault" begins.

If you know anyone who has walked down a street worried about being assaulted by a rogue shopkeeper or homeowner, then you should probably question the company that you keep.  If however you have ever worried about walking down a street worried about being assaulted by a criminal on the street, then you live in the real world.

One wonders where these judges live.

Why Politicians Lose the Respect of the People

Following is the text of comments made by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid about Republican opposition to the Obama Health Care bill:

"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans have come up with is this: Slow down, stop everything, let's start over. You think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. In this country, there were those who dug in their heels and said, Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait, things aren't bad enough about slavery. When women want to vote, slow down, there will be a better day to do that. The day isn't quite right. This body was on the verge of guaranteeing civil rights to everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today. History is repeating itself before our eyes. There are now those who don't think it is the right time to reform health care. If not now, when?"


Senator Reid's outrageous comments sound like the desperate flailings of a man on the losing side of a debate.  Comparing the Health Care Reform bill to the struggles for Abolition, Women's Suffrage and Civil Rights trivializes those important historical achievements and diminishes the credibility of his own effort.

It might be worth pointing out that the first Republican President was also known as the Great Emancipator.  It might be worth noting that the civil rights struggle saw a Democratic party that fractured with southern segregationists splitting with the party while Republicans registered African American voters.  It might be worth pointing these things out if Senator Reid's comments were worthy of rebuttal, but they are really not.

It is small wonder that he is trailing in his campaign for re-election this year.

Populist Foolishness

Companies that have received government bailouts have become the favourite whipping posts of politicians.  The auto companies and major banks have been subject to restrictions on executive compensation to widespread cheers from the proletariet masses.

These moves appeal to the common folk who are angry that taxpayer funds were needed to prevent these private companies from going under and creating havoc.  However such measures were always wrong on the merits.

In recent days it has come to light that companies such as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) have suffered the loss of over 1,000 top producers due to restrictions on compensation.  They have opted to leave for companies that did not take government bailouts and hence were not subject to restrictions on pay.  General Motors fired Rick Wagoner and now have fired Fritz Henderson.  What quality CEO will they find when they are subject to pay restrictions?  Lee Iacocca was headhunted into Chrysler in the late 70's and turned that company around (also with government loan guarantees which were repaid early and in full).  Would such a top executive take the helm of GM or Citibank when he knows that his pay could be multiples higher if he/she chose to work at another company? 

Citibank is in negotiations to pay back TARP money so that they will not be subject to restrictions on compensation. Citibank has been the subject of poaching raids by other financial institutions who target their top talent with bonuses that a TARP restricted firm cannot pay.

Lost in all of the class warfare inspired outrage is an important point:  the individuals that lost so much money and endangered their firms were all fired.  The comp restrictions are targetting people who made money without taking such silly risks. 

Lost also is the fact that the government bailouts were largely in the form of a purchase of a part of the company by the government.  RBS is 80% owned by the British government and Citi is 30% owned by the US Treasury.  They will recoup their taxpayer funded investments most effectively by keeping top producers on the payroll...not by driving them away!

Perhaps the most singularly stupid move comes from Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling who is preparing to introduce a bonus tax on bankers.  Perhaps Mr Darling is not aware but Britain is not a particularly big place.  The money that is earned by British banks and used to pay bonuses aren't necessarily British sourced money.  The introduction of such a tax will prompt banks to flee Canary Wharf and set up shop in other countries where they can do the same business.  In short, it will result in less money for British coffers and fewer jobs in Britain.

Some have even raised the possibility of a human rights complaint to the ECHR as it is unprecedented for a tax to be levied on a particular profession only.  However there is an election coming up in Britain so i don't expect such stupidity to fall by the wayside.  British citizens will comfort themselves in the knowledge that a banker earning 2 million pounds a year will pay more taxes than a soccer player earning 10 million pounds.

Apologies for the rambling nature of this post but I feel that i am still more coherent than the poorly thought out policies being made by elected officials.

President Nero has Stopped Fiddling.....or has he?

President Obama finally announced his decision on Afghanistan after 3 months (1 year?) of dithering.

His plan calls for an Iraq style surge of 30,000 troops who will begin withdrawing in July of 2011.  This apparent setting of a deadline drew a furious response from people like John McCain that announcing a disengagement in advance would embolden the Taliban and give them a tactical advantage.  Of course it should be noted that John McCain is an acknowledged and widely respected expert on military matters.....quite unlike President Obama.

Chastened aides have gone out to the airwaves to say that July of 2011 is only a target and a withdrawal would depend upon "progress" and "stability" in Afghanistan.  Still missing from their vocabulary are words like "victory" and "win."  No doubt a decision on a withdrawal would be drawn out anyways.

The Taliban (and the world) should be told that the surge will last until the Taliban are defeated.  This is the quickest route to an early withdrawal and anyone who has learned the lessons of history would know that.

Ivan the Terrible Redux

John Demjanjuk's legal saga has been in the news for nearly 30 years.

It was in 1981 that Israel first sought extradition of the man who was later accused of being "Ivan the Terrible."

US authorities stripped him of his citizenship on the basis that he had lied on his citizenship application in the 50's and deported him to Israel.  He was found guilty and sentenced to death in 1988.

In 1993, the Israeli Supreme Court overturned his conviction based upon evidence in the form of written statements of former camp guards who identified another man as being Ivan the terrible.  The authors of these written statements were executed by the Soviets in a post war purge.  The Israeli Supreme Court decision drew a clear line of distinction for Israel as the sole multi party democracy in the Middle East that also has the maturity as a nation to acquit an accused Holocaust participant.

It would not have been an easy day for the Simon Weisenthal Center and Holocaust survivors but it was the right decision.  The conviction of Nazi War criminals is too important a matter to be supported by flimsy evidence.

So what has happened to Demjanjuk since?

He was returned to the United States where his citizenship was restored but then extradited to Germany where is now being tried for being a guard at the Sobibor concentration camp.

The evidence that is available would seem to indicate that he was indeed, at least, a junior member of the SS. (He was only 20 years old when his native Ukraine was invaded by Germany and 24 by the end of the war and so a junior role is plausible.)   That being said the trial should not be continued.

There is no Statute of Limitations for a number of crimes and crimes against humanity are certainly amongst them.  That being said it is worth remembering why such statutes exist in the first place.  Memories fade, witnesses die and physical evidence degrades.  This applies to both incriminating and exculpatory evidence.

The Nazis reign of terror ended 64 years ago.  Even a new conscript at the end of the war would be in his 80's.  Trials of Nazi War criminals were important, and cathartic, events for a world reeling from the horrors of the Holocaust.  They have now outlived their usefulness in that regard.  War Crimes trials are trivialized once they move on from prosecuting the brain trust to the pawns.

The Simon Weisenthals of the world should know that they did important and valuable work.  However they should now realize that a combination of their success and the passing of time has completed their work.

To continue on at this point risks undoing some of the good work that has been done by recording some unjust convictions and that should not part of their legacy.