Final Proposal + Short Quiz - For Sep 3

[johnkarls]

.
**************************************************************************
To: ReadingLiberallyEmailList@johnkarls.com
From: ReadingLiberallyEmailList@johnkarls.com
Bcc: The Approx. 150 Recipients Of Our Regular E-mails
Subject: Wed Sep 3 Meeting on Hillary Distancing Herself From Pres. Obama Re The Islamic State
Date: To Be E-mailed 8/16/2014
Attachments:
NicklausRoad-DrivingDirections.pdf
RL-a810-GoldbergInterviewOfHillary
RL-a816-PopeFrancisAug9LetterToUNSecyGenReIraq
RL-a816-VaticanAmbassadorToUN-Iraq+JustWarDoctrine
RL-a816-BidenOpEd-WSJ-6-4-2007
**************************************************************************


Dear Friends,

The pleasure of your company and the intellectual stimulation of your views are respectfully requested for Wed evening, Sep 3rd, from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm at the home of Yours Truly at 11911 Nicklaus Road, Sandy UT 84092 which features a gorgeous 180-degree panoramic view of Hidden Valley and Hidden Valley Country Club from a ridge 200 feet above them (map & driving directions are attached).

If you have not already RSVP’d, please do so if you plan to come (there is plenty of room so all are welcome but we do need to know for how many to set up -- including Pinot Grigio from Yours Truly this time since Utah Owl has not RSVP’d).


**********
DISCUSSION TOPIC

Our focus will be the 8/10/2014 article in Atlantic in which Hillary Clinton distanced herself from Pres. Obama re The Islamic State in Syria & Iraq.

[A copy of the Atlantic article is attached for your convenience.]


**********
SHORT QUIZ (which, per tradition for August, is primarily yes-no)

1. Following the media fire storm created by the Atlantic article, does Hillary’s furious back pedaling on Aug 12-13 simply mean that the pressure to do so from the White House comprised a threat to cancel President Obama’s agreement to support her Presidential candidacy in 2016 which would mean that Hillary would be guaranteed a primary opponent from the left = Sen. Elizabeth Warren?

2. In Hillary’s interview by Jeffrey Goldberg as reported in the Atlantic article, did Hillary claim that she had argued within the Administration three years ago for intervention in Syria before Al Qaeda in Iraq (which morphed into ISIS or ISIL and then morphed into The Islamic State) became the threat to the American Homeland that it is today because of its thousands of Americans/Europeans who are fighting with AQI/ISIS/ISIL/TIS and who can easily enter both Europe and the U.S. on their European/American passports (since the U.S. and Europe do not require visas for each other's passport holders) to attack the American/European Homelands because American/European intelligence does NOT even know who they are (all according to the Talking Heads on the various 8/10/2014 Sunday-morning talk shows)?

3. Has The Islamic State (aka Al Qaeda in Iraq) been disowned by Core Al Qaeda for being too rabid with its zillions of beheadings and crucifixions, and the choice it gives everyone it conquers which is EITHER support them and also convert if you aren’t already a Sunni Muslim OR ELSE be killed?

4. Has Pope Francis during the last week declared that fighting The Islamic State comports with the Just War Doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church?

5. Did Osama bin Laden issue a fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans?

6. Was Osama bin Laden’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans the subject of a famous book by the Founding Dean of Harvard U’s Kennedy School of Government, Graham Allison, regarding how to deal with the fatwa?

7. Was Osama bin Laden’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans the reason why Vice President Biden wrote, at the beginning of his campaign for the Presidency during the 2008-election cycle while he was still Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, an OpEd in the 6/4/2007 Wall Street Journal entitled “CSI: Nukes” in which he proposed that since fissile material has “DNA” that proves the country of origin, the U.S. should announce a policy of “nuclear annihilation” against any country whose fissile materials are used by terrorists in a nuclear attack on the U.S.?

8. By way of footnote, did anyone in the media note (as we did at the time) that Joe Biden’s proposed policy would have compelled the U.S. to commit national suicide if its own fissile materials were stolen and used against it?

9. Now that Osama bin Laden is dead, can his fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans be revoked?

10. Did the most famous demonstration that fatwas can NOT be revoked after the death of the issuer of the fatwa involve (A) the Brits severing diplomatic relations with Iran on 3/7/1989 because of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s fatwa to kill Salmon Rushdie following the publication of his Satanic Verses and (B) the Brits, when they restored diplomatic relations on 9/24/1998 following the death of Ayatollah Khomeini, having to give up their demand that the fatwa be revoked when New Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pointed out that only the issuer of a fatwa can revoke it so revocation is NOT possible following the death of the issuer?

11. Is Al Qaeda in Iraq (aka ISIS aka ISIL aka The Islamic State) likely to feel an obligation to follow Osama bin Laden’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans?

12. Are President Obama’s policies of ending the War in Iraq and the War in Afghanistan, and his apparent policy of refusing to become involved in any other imbroglios (with only two lapses*) -- apparently motivated by the desire to conserve our resources for domestic needs?

* The two lapses = (1) overthrowing Libya’s Col. Qaddafi in 2011 and (2) Pres. Obama’s TWO surges in what he termed “The Good War” in Afghanistan.

[Incredibly, the American media lately has “drunk the Kool Aid” that Candidate Obama campaigned in 2008 on the promise of ending both the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War, when in fact his campaign was based on his constant attack that President Bush had “taken his eye off the ball” of fighting “The Good War” in Afghanistan (as Candidate Obama called it) by starting a second war in Iraq AND DURING HIS FIRST MONTH IN OFFICE (January 2009) now-President Obama ordered HIS FIRST SURGE IN AFGHANISTAN from our “light footprint” of only 17,000 troops in Afghanistan to 70,000 troops -- CAUSING NEWSWEEK TO FEATURE AS THE COVER STORY FOR ITS 2/16/2009 ISSUE AN ARTICLE ENTITLED “OBAMA’S VIETNAM”!!!]

13. Is Hillary right that an exception to this policy is required to avoid 10 million Americans being nuked IAW Osama bin Laden’s fatwa?

14. Or can America co-exist with The Islamic State and meet the nuclear threat that it poses to 10 million Americans in some other way?

15. If America opts for “some other way,” would America be happy if the success of the “other way” depends on such things as water boarding? Or an even more extensive eavesdropping on both Americans and foreigners?

16. If America does not want to fight Iraq War III, is there really any other way to defeat Al Qaeda in Iraq (aka ISIS aka ISIL aka The Islamic State)?

17. In other words, isn’t the idea of Iraq which was a creation of the League of Nations in 1920 following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I -- an idea that has passed into history because the former territory of Iraq has been permanently partitioned on a de facto basis into The Islamic State (which extends into Syria), a Shiite area (which may soon be absorbed by Iran) and, if someone will supply arms to the Kurds, a Kurdish area? In other words, that Iraqi-Prime-Minister-Designate Haider al-Abadi doesn’t really stand a Ghost Of A Chance of persuading the Sunnis to re-join Iraq (and the Kurds, if given arms by somebody, may achieve their dream of an Independent Kurdistan simply by virtue of their geographic separation from Haider al-Abadi’s Shiite area)?

18. Or in yet other words, is there any possibility of winning a War of Ideas with a people who are obligated to execute Osama bin Laden’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans?

19. Does anyone (except Hillary) envy President Obama the decisions he has to make???

20. Is there anyone who doesn’t wonder why Hillary seems to be so eager to make them???


**********
We hope to see each of you on Sep 3rd!!!

Your friend,

John K.

PS -- To un-subscribe, please press "reply" and type "deletion requested."

[johnkarls]

.
The Atlantic/Goldberg Interview of Hillary was also attached to the Original Ad Hoc Meeting Proposal of 8/10/2014.

Accordingly, please see the Original Ad Hoc Meeting Proposal which is posted in this section of this bulletin board and the "Reply" thereto which comprises the Atlantic/Goldberg interview.

[johnkarls]

.
FrancisLetters2014


POPE FRANCIS
LETTER OF THE HOLY FATHER
TO THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
CONCERNING THE SITUATION IN NORTHERN IRAQ

His Excellency
Mr Ban Ki-moon
Secretary General
United Nations Organization

It is with a heavy and anguished heart that I have been following the dramatic events of these past few days in Northern Iraq where Christians and other religious minorities have been forced to flee from their homes and witness the destruction of their places of worship and religious patrimony. Moved by their plight, I have asked His Eminence Cardinal Fernando Filoni, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, who served as the Representative of my predecessors, Pope St John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, to the people in Iraq, to manifest my spiritual closeness and to express my concern, and that of the entire Catholic Church, for the intolerable suffering of those who only wish to live in peace, harmony and freedom in the land of their forefathers.

In the same spirit, I write to you, Mr Secretary-General, and place before you the tears, the suffering and the heartfelt cries of despair of Christians and other religious minorities of the beloved land of Iraq. In renewing my urgent appeal to the international community to take action to end the humanitarian tragedy now underway, I encourage all the competent organs of the United Nations, in particular those responsible for security, peace, humanitarian law and assistance to refugees, to continue their efforts in accordance with the Preamble and relevant Articles of the United Nations Charter.

The violent attacks that are sweeping across Northern Iraq cannot but awaken the consciences of all men and women of goodwill to concrete acts of solidarity by protecting those affected or threatened by violence and assuring the necessary and urgent assistance for the many displaced people as well as their safe return to their cities and their homes. The tragic experiences of the Twentieth Century, and the most basic understanding of human dignity, compels the international community, particularly through the norms and mechanisms of international law, to do all that it can to stop and to prevent further systematic violence against ethnic and religious minorities.

Confident that my appeal, which I unite with those of the Oriental Patriarchs and other religious leaders, will meet with a positive reply, I take this opportunity to renew to your Excellency the assurances of my highest consideration.

From the Vatican, 9 August 2014

FRANCIS

© Copyright - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

[johnkarls]

.
The Washington Times – 8/13/2014

Vatican approves of U.S. airstrikes in Iraq
By Jessica Chasmar

The Vatican has given a rare exception granting approval to U.S. military airstrikes against Islamic State fighters in Iraq.

“Military action might be necessary,” said Silvano Tomasi, the Holy See’s ambassador to the United Nations, Agence France-Presse reported. “Intervention now, before it is too late.”

Fearing a genocide of Christians, the Vatican is making a exception to its peace policy in condoning military intervention in Iraq, despite vocally disapproving the U.S. intervention in 2003.

“Those supplying arms and funds to the fundamentalists, [and] the countries tacitly supporting them, must be revealed,” Mr. Tomasi added.

Rabban al-Qas, the Chaldean bishop of Amadiyah, agreed, arguing that intervention is needed “to stop the wolf getting to the flock to kill, eat, destroy,” AFP reported.

The Iraq-based leader of the Chaldean Catholic Church, Louis Sako, however, argued that limited strikes aren’t enough.

“The position of the American President Obama only to give military assistance to protect Arbil is disappointing,” he said, AFP reported.

[johnkarls]

.
Sen Biden Proposes Nuclear-Annihilation Threat
Posted by johnkarls » Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:33 am
The Wall Street Journal

CSI: Nukes
BY JOE BIDEN
JUNE 4, 2007 – OP. ED. ARTICLE IN WSJ PRINT VERSION

The most dangerous threat America faces is the possibility that one of the world's most extreme groups -- like al Qaeda -- gets its hands on a nuclear bomb. Luckily, a would-be nuclear terrorist cannot make the ingredients for a modern-day Hiroshima by himself. Either a state will have to give or sell him a bomb or the nuclear material to make one, or the terrorist will have to steal the material.

To bring deterrence into the 21st century and prevent an attack from ever occurring, the United States and other potential targets of nuclear terrorism must take advantage of nuclear terrorists’ reliance on states.

The U.S. has long deterred a nuclear attack by states, by clearly and credibly threatening devastating retaliation. Now is the time for a new type of deterrence: We must make clear in advance that we will hold accountable any country that contributes to a terrorist nuclear attack, whether by directly aiding would-be nuclear terrorists or willfully neglecting its responsibility to secure the nuclear weapons or weapons-usable nuclear material within its borders. Deterrence cannot rest on words alone. It must be backed up by capabilities.

Before, we relied on being able to track incoming bombers or missiles to know who had attacked us. Today, because a nuclear bomb might be delivered in a rental van or a boat, the credibility of the new deterrence will rest on our scientific ability to examine the air and ground debris created by an attack to determine the source of the nuclear material.

Building on work from the Cold War, the U.S. is the leader in this new science of nuclear forensics. Any country today that aids a would-be nuclear terrorist, through action or neglect, has to be concerned about getting caught. But we can and must do more to improve our ability in this area, and to make our ability to trace the source of a nuclear explosion widely known. We need more nuclear forensics research, more scientists to analyze nuclear samples, and an assured ability – using our own aircraft or those of cooperating states – to quickly collect nuclear debris from the site of any attack, in this country or around the world.

While there is a lot the U.S. can do on its own to deter countries from helping nuclear terrorists, there is much more we can do through cooperation with other governments. In the aftermath of an attack – or much better, if terrorists are caught smuggling nuclear material before an attack – scientists would want to compare the samples they collect against what is known about other countries’ nuclear material, to figure out the samples’ country of origin. To enable such work, the U.S. should take the lead in creating an international nuclear forensics library.

The library could house actual samples of nuclear material contributed by participating countries, validated data about their material, or binding agreements to provide predetermined data in the immediate aftermath of an attack or smuggling incident. A library cannot guarantee that in the wake of an attack the world could assign blame to a country, but it could be a critical tool in narrowing an investigation and debunking wild rumor or allegations. Countries might hesitate to share their nuclear material, but the library could safeguard samples and identify their origin only if they matched smuggled material or nuclear debris. Any country that refused to contribute to a nuclear forensics library would risk condemnation or suspicion in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack.

Working out arrangements – to ensure that samples and data stay in trusted hands and that countries cannot fake the samples or data they submit – won’t be easy. That is all the more reason to build on existing data collections in Russia and Germany and work with other countries to craft such a world-wide nuclear forensics library.

Four years ago, I proposed improving our nuclear forensics capabilities, but today funding for critical nuclear analysis by our National Laboratories remains dangerously low. Congress must give the labs the resources that they need – and that America’s security demands.

This new form of deterrence must add to, not replace, other efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism. We must devote far more dollars and people to working with Russia and other countries to secure and reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons and materials and to remove nuclear weapons-usable materials from as many sites as possible. The president must make this effort his or her personal priority.

Deterrence based on strong nuclear forensics is a critical tool to help prevent nuclear terrorism. To prevent a nuclear 9/11, we must use every tool we have.