Monday, March 7, 2022

GOP policy versus Dem policy

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, March 3, 2022

A reverse airborne Dunkirk

While armada is a naval term, why should there not be armadas of privately owned airplanes that take off from Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and the Black Sea, fly over the border into Ukraine, and air drop humanitarian supplies of food, etc., to Ukranians on the ground for picking up and getting to places in Ukraine where needed?

Where Putin is committing war crimes against Ukranian civilians to kill, injure and starve them and destroy their homes, can humanitarian supplies include weapons for the civilians to defend themselves against being killed, injured and starved and against their homes being destroyed?

If Russian forces attack the private airplanes owned and operated by NATO country citizens, is that an attack on NATO countries and their citizens, which legitimizes the NATO countries militarily attacking the Russian forces that are attacking the private airplanes?


3/5/22 Russia's attacks on Ukraine's civilians an attack on Poland?

The NATO countries should consider whether Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians that Russia knows cause a refugee invasion of Poland and other NATO countries constitute an attack by Russia against Poland and those other NATO countries  

Article 5 of the NATO treaty refers to an "armed attack" against a NATO country. 

Whether a cyberattack can be an Article 5 attack is subject of debate. Would a cyberattack on a NATO country trigger Article 5? | Cybersecurity Dive  The foregoing article says, "For decades it seemed simpler, as an armed attack would be obvious and NATO nations would respond with tanks, artillery, and warplanes. Now, in our new world, nations can be undermined through information warfare and infrastructure crippled by cyberattacks, often difficult to trace."

In the case of Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians, clearly those are armed attacks and the question becomes whether those armed attacks can be considered against Poland where there is a clear and direct cause of a refugee invasion of Poland and of of all the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.

At a minimum, NATO can consider the matter and reach a collective decision about the same.

If NATO decides that there is an Article 5 armed attack against Poland, NATO can announce that to the world and to Russia and say to Russia that, if Russia does not cease its armed attacks on Ukranian civilians, NATO will take steps to defend Poland against the armed attacks by attacking the forces of Russia that are carrying out the armed attacks against Ukranian civilians that are causing a refugee invasion of Poland and all the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.


3/6/22 - Other ideas and considerations.



Email interchange with Mark Elovitz, Ph.D., J.D., Director Centre For Strategic Geopolitics Miramar Beach, Florida
From: Rob Shattuck 
To: Mark Elovitz
Sent: Sat, Mar 5, 2022 5:19 pm
Subject: Re: Unabashedly Addressing The Ukraine Crisis
Dear Mark,
Do you think Russia's attacks on Ukraine civilians that Russia knows cause a refugee invasion of Poland and other countries constitutes an attack by Russia on Poland and those other countries?
I think NATO should consider the question and make a collective decision.
If NATO decides that there is an Article 5 armed attack against Poland, NATO can announce that to the world and to Russia and say to Russia that, if Russia does not cease its armed attacks on Ukranian civilians, NATO will take steps to defend against the armed attacks by attacking the forces of Russia that are carrying out the armed attacks against Ukranian civilians that are having a clear cause and effect of a refugee invasion of Poland and of the economic, societal and security harms and damages to Poland that result from the refugee invasion.
I have written this up in more extended form at https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2022/03/a-reverse-airborne-dunkirk.html.
Thanks for your consideration of this idea, Mark.
Sincerely,
Rob

From: Mark Elovitz 
To: Rob Shattuck
Cc:
Sent: Sat, Mar 5, 2022 10:20 pm
Subject: What constitutes an Article Five attack on NATO?
Greetings Rob,
In response to your below-appended question:
Whether refugees from Ukraine into Poland (and elsewhere into NATO nations) would, could or does constitute an attack on NATO is an interesting issue about which NATO’s founding document and, more specifically Article Five thereof, is silent.
Indeed, how might, does or would a fleeing Ukraine refugee's abrupt appearance in a NATO nation constitute an attack by Russia even though proximately caused by Russia's wholly unprovoked invasion/attack upon Ukraine? Would the cost of caring for that refugee be deemed an attack?
Somewhat similarly, should refugees into NATO nations from Libya's chaos be deemed by NATO as an attack by Libya? Or is that a difference with a distinction? Is not Libya at war--- even though it is at war with itself? Should refugees into Europe from Syria's long-standing internal warfare be deemed an attack by Syria on NATO? Should Russia's significant involvement in the creation of some of those Syrian refugees be deemed a Russian attack on NATO? Should those millions of Syrian refugees still being housed in Turkey (a NATO nation) be deemed an attack on NATO by both Syria and Russia? Even more distant, exotic and perplexing scenarios present themselves to my mind. Indeed and ad absurdum, should Afghani refugees into NATO nations resulting from the USA's (and NATO's) botched war in Afghanistan be deemed an attack on NATO itself by fellow members? The issue becomes increasingly complex, convoluted and contradictory.
However, there is, for a truly concrete and immediate example, a more directly related question of whether the spill-over/bleed-over into a NATO nation from any Russian cyber-attack on Ukraine could/would "reasonably" constitute an attack on NATO.
I would tend to argue against that proposition with the weighty caveat that the answer might well depend on the nature/character/quality/extent of that cyber damage actually inflicted on a NATO nation.
So, if that cyber-attack on Ukraine resulted in loss of electricity/power to a hospital located in Poland and thereby proximately caused the deaths of "Polish patients" in that Polish hospital, that COULD (somewhat reasonably) be construed as an Article Five attack. IF NATO then predicated a responsive attack on Russia based upon those arguably related deaths, the potentiality for a further counter-responsive attack by Russia would quite foreseeably initiate WWIII.
That resulting horror and associated trauma would be exponentially enhanced by the likely use of nukes (as already not-so-indirectly indicated by Putin) thereby subjecting Western civilization to an all too conceivable conflagration between Russia and NATO (which expressly includes the USA & Canada) and resulting in massive, widespread destruction, innumerable deaths and the conceivable evisceration of much -if not all- of life as we know it.
As you may have noted: The next-preceding paragraph is an unduly lengthy sentence both in terms of verbiage and, most particularly, existential consequence!
I hope the foregoing is sufficiently responsive to your email.
Kindest regards,
Mark

From: Rob Shattuck 
To: Mark Elovitz
Cc: 
Sent: Sun, Mar 6, 2022 4:20 am
Subject: Re: What constitutes an Article Five attack on NATO?
Thank you very much for your response, Mark
I agree that, in various situations in which Russia's actions are causing harmful and destructive effects on NATO countries, NATO needs to consider the nature and severity of those effects in deciding whether such Russian actions should be considered as an Article Five attack on NATO.
Also, consideration must be given to the precedential potential of such a decision, i.e., if the actions by Russia are considered an attack on the NATO countries, similar actions by the U.S. and NATO countries can be considered an attack on Russia (or on some other country).
I would like to post your email in my blog. Do you have a problem with that? I think on a previous occasion involving an email of yours you said you didn't have a problem with my posting the email in my blog.
Sincerely,
Rob
Posted by at No comments:

Response to ALGOP reactions to SOTU

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, February 28, 2022

Walk with your neighbors today for Ukraine

Do you want to do something more for Ukraine than throwing out your Russian vodka?

Here's something more, and better.

Cut down on your gas consumption by doing less driving in your car. 

Every gallon of gas you don't consume in your less driving will deprive Putin of oil revenues and help squeeze Putin.

To get out of your house, organize daily walking in your neighborhood with neighbors.

Wear Ukraine's colors during your walking.

Think of the exercise benefits you get from your walking.

Think about the community and unity of purpose you will build in walking with your neighbors and talking to them.

Get going today on all the above.

Do your bit to support Ukraine that way today.

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, February 7, 2022

Am I bugging AL TV stations too much

For starters, see Editorializing by AL TV stations.

Next, go back to the January 2020 editorial of Susana Schuler, President & General Manager, WVTM13. See Open reply to Susana Schuler.

And then look at my email to CBS 42 News Director Rob Martin, which email is set out at  https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2021/11/email-to-cbs-42.html.

Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, January 23, 2022

Editorializing by AL TV stations


EMAIL TO ALABAMA BROADCASTERS ASSOCIATION
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: mnelson
Sent: Fri, Mar 18, 2022 5:01 pm
Subject: For Alabama Broadcasters Association - editorializing by Alabama TV stations
Dear Dr. Nelson,
I could not find on the Alabama Broadcasters Association website an email address for the Association, and I have chosen to send this email in care of you as the Educational Advisor to the Association.
Additionally, I consider your being Dean and Professor of the College of Communication and Information Sciences at the University of Alabama to be advantageous for pursuing the purpose of this email.
I have spent several months pressing Alabama TV stations about their public service editorializing practices, including whether their policy is that their television station does not undertake a public service editorializing function
The negative impression I have received is that Alabama TV stations choose not undertake public service editorializing. The basis for my negative impression is set out at Editorializing by AL TV stations.
The purpose of this email is to inquire of the Association what the sense of the Association is about the extent to which Alabama TV stations undertake a public service editorializing function. If the Association's sense is that some TV stations do undertake that function, and some do not, I would be interested in learning which TV stations do and which do not.
If my impression that Alabama TV stations generally do not undertake a public service editorializing function is correct, also I would like to learn why.
Is it because of financial and business considerations that the TV stations do not editorialize?
Is it because the TV stations do not have qualified staff who are capable of carrying out a public service editorializing function?
Are there other reasons?
Thank you for whatever consideration the Association gives to this email and such response that the Association is able to give me.
Sincerely,


Posted by at No comments:

Friday, January 7, 2022

AL Secretary of State election



Email sent to Ed Packard, Wes Allen and Chris Horn
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: ed@edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>; chrishorn@gmail.com <chrishorn@gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 7, 2022 4:06 am
Subject: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Dear Mr. Packard, Mr. Allen and Mr. Horn,
You are candidates (or a possible candidate) running for the position of Alabama Secretary of State in the 2022 election.
On Twitter, The Republican Accountability Project has a tweet with a video showing the NV Secretary of State candidate Jim Marchant saying that there is a “coalition of America First Secretary of State candidates around the country” that is working “behind the scenes to try to fix 2020 like President Trump said.”
You can view The Republican Accountability Project's tweet and the video at https://twitter.com/i/status/1478406073476395014 and also on my blog at https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2022/01/al-secretary-of-state-election.html.
What do you know about this reported “coalition of America First Secretary of State candidates around the country” that is working “behind the scenes to try to fix 2020 like President Trump said”?
Are you such an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Do you wish to be identified as such an America First Secretary of State candidate?
After I send this email, I will copy and paste this email on my blog at the aforesaid link https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2022/01/al-secretary-of-state-election.html.
If you provide any answers to my questions or make other response, I will post the same on my blog along with this email.
Thank you for your attention to this email.
[This email is being sent to Mr. Allen using his email contact form at Contact – Elect Wes Allen as Alabama’s Secretary of State.]

Reply from Ed Packard
From: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 7, 2022 9:31 pm
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Mr. Shattuck …
No, I am not. Prior to reading your email, I wasn’t even aware of such a thing as an “America First Secretary of State candidate”.
On another note, I understand you are planning to seek ballot access as an independent candidate for US House district 6.
In my approximately 25 years with the Secretary of State’s office, I assisted many independent candidates understand the rules affecting them. If you ever find yourself in need of such an effort, please feel free to contact me.
Best regards,
Ed Packard

Reply from me to Ed Packard 
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: ed@edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
Sent: Sat, Jan 8, 2022 1:05 pm
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Dear Mr. Packard,
Thank you very much for replying.
As to my being an independent candidate for US House district 6, what you saw was from 2020. I generated near zero interest in that in 2020. I don't think it would be any different in 2022. Unless something quickly changes, I am not planning on trying again for 2022.
In my view, the most critical matter confronting America is the growing political war over the 2020 election, January 6th, voting access, and holding elections the outcomes of which the candidates and the voters are willing to accept.
Secretaries of State and other election officials are critically important as regards what will happen to democracy in the United States during the next 3 years.
Secretaries of State, whether Republican or Democratic, can either be partisan combatants in the aforesaid political war for the purpose of helping their political side's agenda, or they can work together to defend and advance the cause of having elections and election outcomes in the United States that candidates and voters are willing to accept, as has been largely the case in the United States up and until 2016 and 2020, and that has now been put dangerously in doubt.
Regarding 2020, I thought John Merrill could have been very constructive, such as working with the National Association of Secretaries of State and its other members to produce jointly a NASS statement that the 2020 election was not rigged or stolen, as Trump alleged and continues to allege. I have no idea what John Merrill thought about trying to be constructive in the foregoing way or whether he did anything constructive.
The below are four blog entries I wrote from August 2020 to April 2021 related to elections and Secretaries of State (and which show what I tried to urge on John Merrill regarding 2020):
I would be very interested in your publicizing your view about Secretaries of State, Republican and Democratic, working together to defend and advance the cause of having elections and election outcomes in the United States that candidates and voters will be willing to accept, and any specific suggestions you have for that being accomplished (which suggestions you would endeavor to implement if you are elected as Alabama's Secretary of State).
Again, thank you for replying to me, and I look forward hearing the things you say in your campaign.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck

Further emails with Ed Packard
From: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 9, 2022 3:06 am
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
My position on election integrity is that the Legislature should mandate post-election procedural audits so that the public knows that election administrators have conducted any election according to state and federal laws and regulations.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Alabama is one of six states that do not require any kind of post-election audit. Our legislature should remedy that situation.
In 2021, to its credit, the Alabama Legislature did pass legislation to require a pilot program for a post-election audit in the 2022 general election. That pilot will involve three counties.
Regarding your call for election officials, regardless of political party, to defend the electoral process, I have long described actors in the electoral process as being in one of two groups: advocates or gatekeepers.
Advocates, in my formulation, are those individuals who support free and fair elections for all citizens. They believe in constructing an electoral system that empowers voters while at the same time demanding that election administrators perform their duties as specified in law and regulations. They know that our choice of election laws and regulations have political consequences, and they want to bend those choices toward fulfilling the promise of self-governance in a representative democracy. They want election administration bent toward effective, efficient and transparent implementation of election laws and regulations in service to the voters, not political agendas (although political agendas obviously are promoted though the way people themselves vote).
Gatekeepers, in my formulation, are those individuals who see their role as being responsible for ensuring only the “right” people get to vote. In truth, they tend to believe in constructing an electoral system geared toward benefiting their own faction or political party. They know that our choice of election laws and regulations have political consequences, and they want to bend those choices toward their political will. They want election administration bent to their will as well.
I am an advocate, not a gatekeeper, and was so during my near 25-year career with the Alabama Secretary of State’s office (and 30 years of involvement in election administration in total). And will continue to be so if elected to Secretary of State.


From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: ed@edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 9, 2022 8:16 am
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Thank you for articulating your position for defending the electoral process, which I will interpret as signifying a deep professional dedication to the cause of having elections and election outcomes in Alabama (and in the rest of the United States) that candidates and voters, whether on the winning or losing side, are willing to accept as legitimate and valid.
I will urge TV stations and others to interview you so that Alabama voters can learn of you and your position for defending the electoral process, which America critically needs at this time.


From: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 9, 2022 9:11 am
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
Thank you. I went ahead and wrote a new post for my campaign about election integrity. Let me know what you think.
https://edpackard.com/2022/01/09/election-integrity/


From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 6:21:02 PM
To: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
Subject: Re: Are you an America First Secretary of State candidate?
I can only be supportive of post-election procedural audits that help the public to know that election administrators have conducted their election according to state and federal laws and regulations. Your post admirably expresses yourself on the same for Alabama.
With all but six states having audits, it sure would be nice if all the audits have been done for 2020, all the audits support the integrity of the 2020 election, and that information was widely publicized throughout the U.S.


From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: ed@edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
Sent: Sat, Jan 22, 2022 12:46 pm
Subject: Cameron Smith: " Claiming Alabama won the football playoff isn’t the worst lie we want to believe"
Dear Mr. Packard:
Cameron Smith, in his article "Claiming Alabama won the football playoff isn’t the worst lie we want to believe", says the following:
Election results in 2016, 2018, and 2020 reflected the will of American voters. In myriad federal, state, and local elections, the vote tallies again and again upheld what we the people wanted. Administrative failures, voter errors, and fraud existed to a small degree in each of those election cycles. We do our best to catch election criminals and correct our mistakes. Tomes of research by both Democrats and Republicans indicates that we should indeed trust the results.
Do you agree with the foregoing that Cameron Smith says?
If you generally agree with what Cameron Smith says, would you modify what he says in order for it to be how you would express yourself on the subject? If so, how would you modify it?
Do you greatly disagree with what Cameron Smith says, and, if so, what exactly would you say on the subject?
As before, I will post this email in my blog, along with any reply you make to me.
Thanks for your attention to this email.
Sincerely,


From: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 23, 2022 1:11 pm
Subject: Re: Cameron Smith: " Claiming Alabama won the football playoff isn’t the worst lie we want to believe"
Mr. Shattuck ...
Based on all the information I have, especially as a former election administrator in the Alabama Secretary of State's office, I believe the elections held in Alabama in 2016, 2018, and 2020, do accurately reflect the choices of the voters in each election held in those years, whether we talk about the primary election, primary runoff election, or general election, not mention municipal elections and special elections held in those years. Alabama's election system is indeed very strong and has integrity and reliability. I am very proud of the work that election administrators perform in Alabama, be they probate judges, absentee election managers, members of the boards of registrars, sheriffs, or town and city clerks.
Yes, as Mr. Smith references, every election, whether in Alabama or elsewhere, will be afflicted with errors by election administrators and voters. And yes, we have found in various elections in Alabama, cases of voter fraud, usually related to absentee ballots. But, generally speaking, none of the instances of errors or fraud rise to the level of undermining any the results of any particular election. (There was a case in the City of Evergreen in the recent past, though, where errors in compiling the voter list did lead a federal court order that their municipal election be held again.)
Regarding other states, I have not seen any evidence that their elections are without integrity and reliability. I have heard many allegations and suspicions of election problems in some states, but at this point, from what I have seen and heard, these are just that - allegations and suspicions.
As I have often done during the course of my career at the Secretary of State's office, I encourage anyone and everyone who has witnessed errors or fraud to contact and report that information to the Secretary of State, their probate judge (in the case of county elections), or their city or town clerk (in the case of city or town elections). I also recommend reporting that information to their county district attorney and the Attorney General.
I also encourage them to not only be willing to speak to the officials I just mentioned, but also be willing and prepared to testify at any trial that their allegations may lead to. All too frequently, during my career, I heard from voters who saw activities that may well have been voter fraud, but the voters did not want to testify in court if an investigation lead to prosecution. The most common explanation for their reluctance was their concern about retaliation from individuals , or allies of those individuals, who allegedly perpetuated the fraud.
Our representative democracy is a team effort that includes all of us. Certainly, election officials have a responsibility to perform their job well and in accordance with laws and regulations. Voters obviously have a role in terms of their participation by showing up to vote. But voters also need to let election officials, district attorneys, and the attorney general, know when they witness something that raises their eyebrows and be willing to participate in any investigation and prosecution that may result from their information.
If you have further questions, please let me know. Thank you.


From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To: ed@edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2022 7:33 am
Subject: Re: Cameron Smith: " Claiming Alabama won the football playoff isn’t the worst lie we want to believe"
Thank you very much for your fulsome response, Mr. Packard.
I consider the most pressing national political matter to be the progression of the questioning by Americans of their elections, with the 2022 elections in the crosshairs.
I think America will be in big trouble domestically if the questioning trend grows during the next 10 months, and the 2022 election results are doubted in November and afterwards the way the 2020 election result is doubted.
Many vociferous and extreme Americans are strenuously working to spread and increase doubt about our elections.
The cause of defending our elections needs all the helpers it can get.
I hope your campaign to become Alabama Secretary of State includes many activities, communications and public statements during the next four months that are dedicated to the cause of Americans not having reason to doubt the 2022 elections or doubt the 2024 elections thereafter.
Sincerely,


From: ed edpackard.com <ed@edpackard.com>
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2022 7:57 am
Subject: Re: Cameron Smith: " Claiming Alabama won the football playoff isn’t the worst lie we want to believe"
I have been talking about the strength of our election processes when I’m speaking to various groups.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)