Perils of the Posh

I am a believer in property rights, and do NOT condone theft. Yet I just read how "traumatized" the Ecclestone heiress [translate: did nothing to earn wealth] feels about the theft of jewelry valued at more than 50 million pounds [Over $66.6 M] from her 55 room Kensington mansion. I can understand that this is a "news" story, but find little that moves me emotionally.

First, anyone keeping jewelry of that value around the house [instead of a bank safe deposit vault] is not very bright and responsible, or has lost all perspective as to wealth and value. No doubt a sense of entitlement has blinded the heiress to the reality that "real" people do not have such valuables at hand, and if they did they would take steps to secure them. Second, this example of wealth inequality and flaunted consumption warrants little sympathy, particularly when one has done nothing to earn or create the wealth. How great a "loss" is it truly for someone who invested nothing, sacrificed nothing nor contributed anything to the generation of the value of the items stolen. Third, the heiress will doubtless recover insurance funds for unrecoverable jewels and likely go right out an spend the money on similarly useless and unproductive baubles. While a few of the trinkets may have sentimental value, it is difficult to believe any protestation of "loss" when one has demonstrated so little sense of "value." Inconvenience, perhaps, but a deep sense of loss is hard to envision.

I might be a bit proletarian in outlook here. I do not resent wealth, but believe that with such wealth comes responsibility. To borrow from the Christian Bible [Luke 12:48]  “For of those to whom much is given much is required.” The Muslim faith calls, in one of its five pillars for "zakat" or the duty of the wealthy to contribute to community and charity. I could feel more sympathy if the heiress had a miraculous "epiphany" and decided she did not need to place such wealth in idle pieces of jewelry. She might be moved to self-reflection and to instead invest at least a part of the insurance proceeds into productive channels creating jobs or charitable purposes providing support for those not born with a silver spoon. But we should not hold our breath awaiting such revelations. 🧐

Tamara Ecclestone: '£50m worth' of jewellery stolen from heiress

An Offer Zelensky Could Not Refuse - The Call to Ukraine President Zelensky

The White House release a memorandum "summarizing" a phone conversation between US president and Ukraine President in which a "favor" was requested of the foreign leader to investigate the US president's political rival. This call was on the heels of the US president's suspension of an aid package to the Ukraine. It is no surprise that the summary memo of the phone call with Ukraine President Zelensky points directly to PUTHOP pressuring Zelensky to “look into” and “get to the bottom of” old and debunked conspiracy complaints against Biden. Those conspiracy allegations have been thoroughly investigated, reported and found to be groundless and illogical. However, such abuse of office by PUTHOP is in keeping with his other arrogant behavior. Neither is it a surprise that PUTHOP would claim he did nothing for which he should be held to account. He has consistently maintained that his conduct is above the rule of law, so why should pressuring a foreign government to interfere with US electoral politics be challenged?

As for the Biden allegations, Biden was only one of a group of leaders of countries demanding ouster of Shokin. Moreover, Shokin was criticized for failing to conduct a rigorous investigation of the energy company with which Biden’s son was connected [as a Board member]. If Shokin was replaced by someone who would conduct a serious investigation, it would hurt, not help, Biden’s interests. The conspiracy allegations were unsubstantiated illogical nonsense involving no potential benefit to Biden.

Some argue that “conclusions” of corruption based upon PUTHOP pressuring Zelensky to investigate PUTHOP’s political enemy are “subjective,” and I disagree. They are logical outcomes of analysis of assembled facts. Ukraine is a country in need of military and financial aid to stabilize government and resist Russian aggression (annexation of its sovereign territory, sending troops into Eastern Ukraine, etc.). Congress approved an aid package of $400 million, which PUTHOP “temporarily” suspended because of alleged US concerns about investigations of “corruption.” Within days of the suspension, PUTHOP calls Zelensky and repeatedly asks him to investigate the Biden conspiracy allegations about Biden. NO OTHER corruption issue was mentioned in the call summary [which was provided by sources under control and biased toward PUTHOP]. During the call, PUTHOP tells Zelensky to talk to Attorney General Barr and PUTHOP’s personal attorney Giuliani who had been trying to gain access to Zelensky. A contact with the Attorney General could plausibly be explained if there were an ongoing formal investigation of Biden (there was none), but there is no plausible justification for involving Giuliani other than PUTHOP seeking personal political gain from the requested “favor” of investigating Biden.

Suppose you were sick and needed life sustaining medicine, and the major supplier of that medicine “temporarily” cuts off your access. The CEO of that supplier then calls you up and asks you repeatedly for a “favor” of taking action against one of his personal enemies. Could anyone logically or reasonably argue it is “speculation” you were being pressured to take such action in exchange for favorable treatment with respect to the suspension of badly needed medicine? Similarly, Zelensky was in dire need of US aid, conditionally suspended, when PUTHOP insistently requested the “favor” and told Zelensky to meet with Giuliani and Barr to “work something out.” No honest and reasoning person could conclude otherwise than a quid pro quo mob style exchange was proposed. The combination and timing of these factually established occurrences admit of no other conclusion. Logic, not speculation.

PUTHOP calls the inquiry a “witch hunt” and that is a typical response. He also called the Mueller Investigation that found at least eight separate events that could be deemed obstruction of justice a “with hunt.” Mueller declined to issue an indictment, based upon a DOJ memorandum prohibiting it, but said his findings did not exonerate PUTHOP. Yet the underlying facts and events were substantiated. So, a “witch hunt” inquiry is as likely as not to yield credible evidence of wrongdoing. And remember that this single act of pressuring a foreign leader to interfere with domestic electoral processes is just one more instance among the many examples of abuse of power, violation of the Constitution and malfeasance by PUTHOP.

Taking a Stand - In Defense of A Civil and Humane Society

I will borrow words from Keith Olberman to make a point. Commenting on the transformative advice he derived from words of his dying mother about character and integrity, he said:

"It’s been 27 years since she spoke those words. I had to start paying attention. I had to truly learn to walk away from toxic people that I loved dearly. It didn’t matter anymore who you were. If you hurt me, betray me, use me, disrespect me or cause me physical harm or others etc. I will walk away from you. You can no longer treat my life and well-being in a cavalier manner. Yes! I will forgive. And yes my heart remains soft. But I can’t help others if I stick around with those who may be harmful to my well-being! So I now wish them well. Move on! And continue my journey to help others....Walking away from you may have been painful ...But its more painful to pretend your behavior or actions weren’t harmful to me or my family! They were! ...You watch Trump everyday harm others and our country. And you don’t care. You just go about your business. Your lack of empathy is disheartening and disturbing!

To my friends and acquaintances who support or even condone the policies, actions and rhetoric on PUTHOP and this Administration, I say this. I will not attack you personally, though I reserve the right to challenge your actions and ideas. Neither, however, will I respect you or presume that your beliefs and actions come from empathy, compassion, good will or love. Those assessments must be EARNED by you, as you have rejected the foundational premises by your words and deeds. I may intellectually understand your position as based upon logic, sometimes perverse, bigoted and often mean-spirited. Or I may acknowledge that your arguments make no logical sense at all. We CAN have dialogue and discuss issues of the day, and I am open to credible arguments and ideas. But know that you begin on a position of "0," without privilege or credibility. To establish such credibility, you must advance your arguments upon facts, logic and evidence as well as alignment with commonly accepted values and notions of human rights and decency, social justice and respect. These are the essential criteria.

For example, separating children from parents and jailing and psychologically traumatizing them for weeks in cages without adequate food and sanitary necessities is a non-starter. It cannot be justified in logic, factual necessity or humanitarian grounds. If you condone such actions and policies, or the person who is responsible for imposing such conditions, then you OWN the actions and their implications. You may claim to love your own children, but if you condone such treatment of ANY child, you are a hypocrite undeserving of respect or credibility.

Some may find my stance harsh or even intolerant. However, I believe that humanity entails tolerance of difference, but does not entail tolerance of inhumanity. One who stands with the chanting crowd watching a lynching is no less inhumane that the one who places the noose around the victim's neck. One does not have to agree with my opinions or proposed solutions, but the criteria by which I assess your credibility and worth of your arguments are implacable.

You may have fiscal capital, but of moral and intellectual capital you have none! Having abandoned integrity, self respect and humanity, you are at "0" with nothing to lose. You may choose to remain in your self-serving and insular cabal and continue to support hate, division and bigotry. If, instead, you do not support or condone the inhumane, hateful, duplicitous, racist and destructive policies of the PUTHOP Administration, you can establish credibility and integrity by DOING something to remove the blight and cancer from the nation's body politic. In this case, silence does equal consent. Where you go from point "0" is up to you. 🤓