Cuba

by Dave

Many Cuban-Americans feel betrayed.    They wanted the  lifting of sanctions tied to some grand change from the Cuban government.   It didn’t happen.  But nothing the Cuban government could have done would have satisfied many ardent anti-Castro, anti-communism  supporters.

Cubans in Miami will tell you how Fidel destroyed their country and imprisoned their   people trying to reform the government.  Good, hardworking  and honest people went to jail or escaped Cuba.  Those that left Cuba had to  leave all their possessions behind.

According to Wikipedia:

The Republic of Cuba is one of the world’s last remaining socialist countries following the Marxist-Leninist ideology. The Constitution of 1976, which defined Cuba as a socialist republic, was replaced by the Constitution of 1992, which is “guided by the ideas of José Martí and the political and social ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin.”[4] The constitution describes the Communist Party of Cuba as the “leading force of society and of the state”.[4]

It might be in the Constitution, but by all reports, capitalism is far from dead in Cuba.  Increased tourism is creating a new economy.

Those supporters of  sanctions have a point- you can not have democratic reform with a one party system.   The economy was destroyed through government ownership of everything.  Those opposed to the embargo also have a point- this is a 50 year attempt to change Cuba and it  failed.  The other countries in South America and the EU do not support the sanctions.

There is no one more adamant on maintaining sanctions than Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,  representing Miami and Coral Gables, FL.   I have include a link to her speech to Congress below:

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Speech to Congress, March 21, 2016

Actually, this is fairly tame attack on President Obama and his efforts to restore relationships with the Cuban regime.  Some 13 years ago, Cuba included as one  of a handful of countries in the infamous “axis of evil”  which included Iraq (under Saddam Hussein), Iran,  North Korea and Libya.  This inclusion was done on in May 2002, by the Undersecretary of State John Bolton, in the Bush Administration warning these rouge states including Cuba,    “state sponsors of terrorism that are pursuing or who have the potential to pursue weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or have the capability to do so in violation of their treaty obligations.”[5]

I think Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen statement  that ‘The image of President Obama in Cuba says ‘no human rights are being violated.’”  is not valid.  Didn’t the Congresswoman see the image of Pope Francis in Cuba in September 2015?  Did that also mean “no human rights are being violated.”  This bit of fiction came  from the mouth of Raul Castro- and not President Obama or Pope Francis.   Was Congresswoman upset when Nixon visited Chairman Mao  in China in 1972, or Gerald Ford in 1975?

I like the Ladies in White (Damas de Blanco) – they are very courageous women.   I want them to succeed. (see description below)  Raul Castro still has many political prisoners.   I don’t think Obama trip hurt their cause and likely helped them. The Castro government was harassing members of this group.  The police were seen tearing down their banner as Obama came to Havana.  They didn’t want the media to film what was on the banner, “Cuba’s dream is Cuba without the two Castros.”  It got reported anyway- and so did Cuba’s harassment of the Ladies in White.

Ladies in White (Spanish: Damas de Blanco) is an opposition movement in Cuba founded in 2003 by wives and other female relatives of jailed dissidents. The women protest the imprisonments by attending Mass each Sunday wearing white dresses and then silently walking through the streets dressed in white clothing.

In the future, it will hurt Raul Castro if he attempts to blame the failure of his government on the embargo and the supposed threat from  the US.  President Obama said in Cuba at the joint press conference with Raul Castro:

I’ve made it clear that the United States has neither the capacity nor the intention to impose change on Cuba. What changes come will depend upon the Cuban people.

We will not impose our political or economic system on you. We recognize that every country, every people must chart its own course and shape its own model. But having removed the shadow of history from our relationship, I must speak honestly about the things that I believe, the things that we as Americans believe.

What has been surprising is how muted the response has been from Republicans.   One would expect former Ambassador John Bolton to be all over Fox News.    Of course,  all Republicans are right now focused on the election, and candidate Trump is not out there blasting Obama for embracing communist Cuba, but just saying he could have cut an even better deal.   About pare for the Donald.  Rubio and Cruz announced they would reverse course.

Rubio and Cruz Skeptical on U.S.-Cuba Relations, Trump Wants to Improve Them

MIAMI – The Republican candidates for the White House, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, both of Cuban origin, would reverse the US openness towards Cuba, undertaken by President Barack Obama, while Donald Trump said that he “would improve it.”

During the twelfth Republican debate in the primaries, held in Miami on Thursday, Rubio, a Florida senator, who needs to win in his state in order to stay alive in the race, claimed that the new US policy toward Cuba is “an unrewarded exchange,” adding that Cuba “has not taken a single change in human rights.”

“I would love the relationship between Cuba and the United States to change. But today, Cuba has not changed,” Rubio said.

Texas Senator Ted Cruz said he would reverse the diplomatic relationship steps taken by Obama with Havana, just as he would reverse other steps taken by Obama’s government, like the Iran nuclear deal.

Trump when asked the same question said he believes that “50 years is enough” referring to the embargo imposed on the island, but noted that he would like to “improve the agreement”, however without delving into details.

Latin American Herald Tribune detailing comments made during the last debate.

Rand Paul with his Libertarian leanings thought the lifting of the embargo might be a good for Cuba.   Libertarians believe in less federal government interference abroad.

So,  Trump is being really clever. It is his answer to almost anything. Elect me, and I’ll have this wonderful deal I’ve negotiated with the Cuban government.   American will be great again.  (Applause sign).   Note that international support for the embargo has pretty much gone.

So  the real problem with what Representative Ros-Lehtinen is saying, is not her characterization of Cuba today, but whether to use the whip or carrot to move the cart forward.  After 50 years,  the carrot seems far more productive

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

The Media

by Dave

 

laugh fest

Image from Africanews.com on South Sudan Laugh Festival last week.

The  four axioms of media reporting are:

  1. If it bleeds, it leads.*
  2. Incidences closer to the viewing audience are far more important than further away.
  3. The more similar the victims are to the viewing audience, the more likely people will watch
  4. Commentary should  conform to long held beliefs of viewing audience.  Fox has conservative  commentators and MSNBC has liberal commentators.

A terrorist attack in a shopping mall in Iowa.  Hasn’t happened, but if it does,  you will have every reporter in the country swarming down to cover the story.  And every political candidate will have something to say with tweets and text messages flying around within milliseconds.

A 178 people have die from an epidemic of  yellow fever in Angola. Reported last week. It was on BBC, one of my favorite news channels. Relatively unimportant as it is in Africa.

A blend of happy and sad news is nice.  Obama dancing the tango is fine. Of course, if you’re Fox News,  everything can be Obama’s fault.  Instead of dancing the tango, our Chief-in-Commander should be flying to Brussels in Air Force 1 , dressed on combat gear,  on the phone to the Brussels’ police demanding two Muslim terrorists are caught right now.

There is a lot of  election year theatrics.  Interpol exists if  you don’t know.  Fox plays to its audience- like usual. If Obama did try to be involved,   Fox would have come down, full force, that he was grandstanding,  totally superficial and an attempt to score points from a tragic event.  But both Kerry and Biden went to Belgium. and I’m certain discussions are of a longer term strategy for defeating ISIL fanatics.

Reporting from China or Moscow, what six people on the street think about Donald Trump is not international news.

A lot of things happen in the past week.  How many reporters flew to South Sudan to participate in the first Laugh Festival?

South Sudan’s Laugh Festival

From the looks of it, some people were close to dying from laughter.   How in the world do you have a laugh festival in a country beset with so many problems?  South Sudan is one of the world’s newest country,  for 2 years has been in a terrible civil war.

Yes, dear – there are serious events occurring outside of the US – Europe, and the other three “newsworthy” countries Cuba, Canada and Mexico.  The Brazilian Congress has started impeachment proceedings against their president, Dilma Rouseff  this week and over 3 million people protested against the government in Sao Paulo.

And just last week,  South African police launch a graft probe against the President Duduzane Zuma’s son.

Volkswagen and the EPA were supposed to be in court this week to tell the judge if the problems with emissions were fixable.  They got a one month extension.  I think it’s their second extension.

Last week, we learned scientists believe the Zika virus has been around in Brazil for 2 years. To me that’s frightening.

From the country down under, the Great Barrier Reef is disappearing due to climate change:

Great Barrier Reef 

But like the news of South Sudan’s festival, there was plenty of positive news, of which 99% goes unreported.  The new funding for World Health Organization to combat yellow fever in Africa last week has to be one of them.  The agreement signed in Egypt  between defense ministers from 27 African and Arab countries, pledging  information sharing in combating terrorism is another.  Or how women farmers are making a big difference and the great work of the Rainforest Alliance.  Terrific news.

I like to watch BBC  and Al-Jazeera news.   I like One American News, but only for their reporting, not commentary.  They keep them separate.  I like Bloomberg News.   I watch Fareed Zakaria  on CNN which is good,  except he should let others give “their take” as the lead in to the program.

Perhaps, the media could have reported on South Sudan’s laugh fest as kind of a happy news filler.

Stay tuned.

Dave

  • quote from Marshall McCluhen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John McAfee and Cell Phone Security

by Dave

John McAfee can break into the Apple’s iPhone 6 if they just give him a chance, but his claim  is certainly total bluster. The claim gets John McAfee his 15 minutes of fame, although today it has been cut to about 90 seconds on national television.   I explained the government’s problem with hacking through  the iPhone 6 in a separate blog- but it’s worth reviewing.

Apparently, law enforcement departments across the country have a large number of iPhone 6 they would like to open.  FBI Director Comey explained the problem best as they want Apple to remove the watchdog in front of the security system.  Apple’s iPhone 6 has built in  defenses when it suspects there is an intruder.  Entering the password too many times, initiates a delay in password attempts.  The user can activate another security measure which would wipe clean iPhone contents if too many attempts are made on the phone.  The phone is still functional in every respect, except the user’s content such as telephone numbers, pictures, etc is gone. These measures thwart an attempt to open the iPhone by simply trial and error iterations on the password.

So, what the government has been unable to do, is to find a means of calling off the watchdog, presumably by some code change in the operating system.  Once that is done, it could be days, months or years (or never) to hack through the phone by guessing at the password. The government is likely has experts working with other iPhone 6 so they don’t trigger the defense mechanisms on the San Bernadino phone.

Along with pictures, there is likely stored GPS information, useful in tracking the movements of the San Bernadino terrorists.  The contents of  cell phone these days is a phenomenal tool in solving crimes.  But search warrants are required.

Now what you need to know about John McAfee.    John McAfee founded McAfee and Associates,  but he sold out way too soon.  He credits the success of his company, to finding the best individuals to write the anti-virus software.   He has a long history of being an incredible promoter of his latest endeavors.   For decades, he separated himself from the computer technology world. As a great marketer that he is, he was involved in marketing various enterprises including yoga, ultalight flight, and anti-viral medicines based on plants grown in Belize.  With the wealth gained from the sale of McAfee, he built a number of beautiful homes and according to McAfee, had to unload them at a loss.  Now, he has founded Future Tense Central and announced he is running for president.   I don’t see much for sale at his website but a baby monitoring system.

Ok.  So why John McAfee is blowing hot air?  Because if what he is saying is true, he can at any moment,  demonstrate his company’s ability to open  iPhone 6. If he could do that,  I’m sure he will be in strong demand from law enforcement across the country, with much less publicized cases, such as theft and drug cases.  Of course, these would be cases where the police has valid search warrants to hack the phones based on probable cause.

He’s teasing the FBI- I know how to open the phone and you don’t. Ha ha ha.  And I can’t tell you unless you give me the San Bernadino iPhone, which the FBI can’t do, in case John McAfee sets off the watch dogs.

But, McAfee always sounds very good.  He gets invited as keynote speaker at computer security conferences.  And obviously, he knows how to get on MSNBC or Fox News in their attempts to  find commentators on any hot topic of the day.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Garland- Just going with the best

by Dave

Ok- I got it wrong.  I looked over the 3 nominations on Obama’s Supreme Court short list- and thought it would be Sri Srinvassen, because he was young and outstanding in every respect.  Obama liked the oldest on the list- Merrick Garland, who edged out the competition based on years of experience.    Obama just went with the best.  And this is exactly what myriad of court watchers are saying.

The judicial system has a kind of ladder, and it’s tough to get to the top rung of the Chief Justice of the Appellate Court for the DC circuit.   To get there, you have to get the approval of both Republicans and Democrats.  Our system of congressional approval really supports more practical centralist type of judges.

But,  the Republicans have made this their holy war,  against a “liberal” judge, so Obama selected someone,  who in the past was acceptable to many of the Republicans’ top leadership, including John McCain, when he was appointed to the DC Appellate Court.

Garland is regarded by court watchers as a centralist.     Judge Andrew Napolitano who appears regularly on Fox News, stated this is the most conservative nominee the Democrats have put forward in the modern era.   It is also been stated that some Democrats in the Senate, may feel disappointed by Obama’s nomination because he did not nominate someone with more  liberal credentials.

Garland could  side with Chief Justice Roberts or Kennedy on court decisions, both of whom were nominated by Republicans.   He is likely to be a strong defender of 1st (freedom of speech and religion) and 5th amendment (prohibiting unreasonable searches) rights, as was Justice Scalia.

What is totally absurd is the notion, that by refusing to go ahead with a hearing on the nomination, that this allows “the people of the US” to decide on the nomination.  Somehow,  to obstruct the normal process of filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court, through refusing to hold hearings,  has been lauded by conservative republicans, as in consistent with our democratic ideals of our country.

Pragmatism is not a quality you hear often- but it is vital to the functioning of the Supreme Court.  The principle of stare decisis, means justices respect prior decisions as final.   This is why decisions are not overturned when new justices are appointed.

The people of the US can vote on many issues- but not Supreme Court judges.  And thank God for this.  We elect our representatives and leaders to make decisions for us.   The makes us a republic.  On choosing a Supreme Court justice, it should never come down to a popular judge- or we are all in serious trouble.

In fact, it was the late Justice Scalia, who said the public does not have a sufficient understanding of the law, to be able to follow the logic behind their decisions, which must follow the interpretation of laws and prior decisions.  So, the public can not make an inform decision on who would be best for the Supreme Court.  This is why we have a Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

The Congress can reduce the power of the Presidency, by obstructing the normal process of government, but in the end,  it makes government less able to function.  The #1 obstructionist, is Mitch McConnell, the Senator from Kentucky, and Majority Leader of the Senate.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

 

Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee

by Dave

Suppose they held a Miss America contest, and the plan was, just after crowning the winner, they were either going to push her off the stage or mug her as she was leaving the pageant.   That’s exactly what’s going to happen to Obama’s nomination.

Well,  I stated on Feb 18  that I thought Judge Jacqueline Nguyen was likely going to be Obama’s choice, but I thought it could go to Sri Srinivasan.  Based on recent leaks,   I now think Obama will nominate  Sri  Srinivasan.   I rule out Merrick Garland because he is 63 years old, and Paul Watford, because of prior Republican opposition in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  He was confirmed 61 to 34.

I also believe no hearing will take place.  If a hearing does take place, Republicans  will attempt to show the nominee is unqualified.  Ted Cruz would like the chance to tell the country that Obama has nominated the worst possible Supreme Court candidate ever.

The Republicans  will  not allow the nomination to go forward.   So, pushed off the stage, or mugged on the way out-  the Supreme Court will have 8 justices for at least a year, maybe longer.

It’s a terrible precedent.  It is not politics as usual- as it has never been done before.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

 

 

 

Religious Freedom

by Dave

I have been working on a series of posts on this topic.  First, I recognize this as a hot button issue in the current election.  Secondly, there are a lot of cases.

There are several freedoms which we enjoy.   The first is the freedom to practice the religion of our choice.  This sounds simple enough, but it is not.  Suppose the practice of our religion calls for killing goats or taking drugs- is that protected?

Suppose the practice of our religion means we can’t work on weekends- do companies have to make allowances in their policies?  Suppose our religion believes all wars are  evil  (actually they do!),  is forcing us to pay taxes a violation of our religion?

If a person is refused work because they wear a scarf in accordance with the Muslim religion,  is this a violation of their religious rights?  How far does a company have to go to accommodate the religious rights of individuals?  Their policies are supposed to be religion neutral- but if they need to know the religion of a person, in order to make exceptions- is that going too far?

There have been cases involving both the rights of individuals and churches.  A synagogue or mosque which is denied a building permit because of anti Jewish or Muslim seems immediately contrary to our values and laws.  But one case involved a church which wanted to expand it’s building into an area which was zoned as an historical area- does that sufficiently burden the right to practice one’s religion?

Obamacare has been contested in the past and will in the future because it requires companies and people to pay for services which may violate their beliefs- such as contraception and abortion.   But,  must the government or insurance companies carve our exceptions for every individual who claims that the medical insurance burdens their religion in some way?  If we  as a society bend over too far on religious liberties, we end up with individuals deciding which laws they have to follow,  or a legal system unto themselves.

All of the above, relates to freedom of religion.  There is also the freedom from religion generally known at the separation of church and state.   A lot of these cases were headline news-  but many have been decided.  The famous school prayer case (1962) was about the following prayer:

“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.”

It was unconstitutional.    A moment of silent meditation has replace school prayer for at least 54 years.  There have been a host of other cases, such as a prayer recited before a football game.

Can a monument be place in front of a state courthouse,  proclaiming all non-Christians to unworthy?  Of course not,  as this would be an obvious attempt to indoctrinate a religious practice.  But religious message were done in a more subtle manner- mixed in with non-secular quotes, is that a violation of the separation of church and state?  In 2005, there were 2 cases decided on religious monuments, one in favor of keeping the monument and the other one against.   And at least one judge concurred in both decisions.   So, it really gets down to what is on the monument.

The very interesting point of all religious freedom questions,  it that both liberals and conservatives on the court support religious rights- a strange outcome to most.

The Muslim woman that was refused her sales job won her case in 2015.  It was really more about the Equal  Opportunity act provisions than First Amendment.  Justice Scalia wrote the opinion, and all liberal justices concurred in an 8-1 decision.  Only Judge Thomas dissented- but maybe he was right, because companies now have the added burden of considering religious beliefs when they ask their sale personnel to dress properly for the job. This is exactly why these cases become messy, because the enforcement of a perceived individual right (in this case to wear a scarf) adds an immediate burden to someone else’s right (deciding appropriate dress codes).

It also becomes messy  because the Supreme Court can only decide based on the facts of the case, the laws passed by Congress and prior rulings of the court.   So- no points given to creative and innovative  solutions.      Nor are all decisions likely to be popular or easily understood by the public.  Nor should this be the case!   The decisions are the result of deep legal scrutiny involving hundreds of pages of briefs  and logic,  certainly not given to the whim of the public.  The justices on the court are highly intelligent legal scholars.

This is exactly the point made by Justice Scalia in an interview in 2009, and boy he right!

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

 

Ya got trouble!

by Dave

My God,  is there anybody that remembers “The Music Man”- that Musical which at its core, was about a con artist, who starts a school band in a sleepy little town of River City?  Of course, it’s all about swindling money from the residents of the town, and never buying any musical instruments.

It is of course, how our society runs.   We are twice as likely to do something or buy something, if we are both escaping from  what we perceive to be a major problem, and at the same time,  believe a simple solution is just around the corner.  If we accept the problem is threatening our well being- then we are likely to accept any solution.

If you concentrate on the problem, make it as ominous as possible, this starts the fear process.  The “Music Man” main character, is Harold Hill, who sings “Ya got trouble” in a pool hall in River City.   See lyrics at the end.

This is so relevant to today’s political debate.  We’ve got trouble, with a capital T that rhymes with P, and that’s called politicians!   Trump,  Rubio,  Cruz are all jumping on what is wrong with the country, yet the extent of the problems and their solutions are typically likely to fail.   Issues like abortion,  immigration and gun control are hot button issues.

Oh- we’ve got trouble in River City.  Eroding family values!  Drugs everywhere!  Police can’t do their job!   The country has trillions of dollars in debt and we are sinking fast.  North Korea is threatening us with their missiles!  And on top of that, Obama wants to take away your guns and doesn’t respect anything in the Constitution!  I’m mad as hell and I can’t take it anymore! (Peter Finch as Howard Beal , Network (the film), what a performance)

With the Democrats, it’s about the inequality of the wealthy and middle class. Colleges cost too much and people can’t get ahead.   There is suffering everywhere and begging for help.  The rich have all the benefits, pay lower taxes and can make huge donations to candidates. Unfair and unjust.  We’ve got problems with the police, and unnecessary violence.  Oh- it’s River City deja vu!

The Music Man debut in 1957.   There were big crises at the time ,  communism was spreading like some disease, devouring China and extending itself through other poor countries.  It was common to see a picture of the globe, drenched in red paint.  Russia had the bomb, and there was a lot of talk of how Russia was coming “to bury us”  and we better all have fallout shelters.

The secret of how to solve problems, is to reduce them, and work on them piece by piece. But,  of course it is not the way to sell products, or win elections.  Sometimes it is hard to tell the difference.

Music Man  took a simple pool table, as the source of River City’s problem.

Mothers of River City
Heed that warning before it's too late
Watch for the tell-tale signs of corruption
The minute your son leaves the house
Does he rebuckle his knickerbockers below the knee?
Is there a nicotine stain on his index finger?
A dime novel hidden in the corncrib?
Is he starting to memorize jokes
From Cap'n Billy's Whizbang?
Are certain words creeping into his conversation?
Words like... swell?
And... 'so's your old man'? 

Well if so, my friends, ya got trouble
    Oh, we got trouble
Right here in River City
    Right here in River City
With a capital 'T' and that rhymes with 'P' and that stands for 'pool'
    That stands for pool

We've surely got trouble
    We surely got trouble
Right here in River City
    Right here
Remember the Maine, Plymouth Rock and the Golden Rule?
    Our children's children gonna have trouble

Oho, we got trouble
We're in terrible, terrible trouble
That game with the fifteen numbered balls is the devil's tool
    Devil's tool

Yes, we've got trouble, trouble, trouble
Oh, yes, we got trouble here, we got big, big trouble
With a 'T'
    With a capital 'T'
And that rhymes with 'P'
    That rhymes with 'P'
And that stands for pool
    That stands for pool

My feeling of course, is none of our problems, are as serious as any politician would make it out to be.   Nor are any of the solutions likely to be easy. We have to make progress where we can- which comes usually from compromise.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Apple v. FBI

by Dave

Skeleton Keys.

This is today’s hot story.  Let me summarize the problem.  A married couple in San Bernadino killed 14 people, seriously injured 22, and were subsequently killed by police in a shoot out, and their cell phone was captured. The FBI wants Apple to modify the operating system (iOS 8) on the phone to bypass security features, and  Apple refused.  The FBI is currently attempting to force Apple to comply through a court order.  Apple filed a motion to suppress the order.  Just about everyone thinks this case will end up in the Supreme Court maybe in 2017.  Nobody knows how important the contents of the phone might be, but the central issue is whether the government has the power, with a search warrant, to force Apple to create the bypass.

If an  older version Apple cellphone is stolen,  hackers can break in  using computer equipment  which will try millions of passwords. Brute force hacking has been around for decades.  The only thing that has really changed is how fast these programs can make  trial and error iterations because this information is electronically fed into the device.

In developing security protection, what Apple did not want, is to have a security system which would completely lockout the user who accidentally  enters a wrong password, multiple times.   So, the smart detection system must not inconvenience users in thwarting hackers.  So, here is how Apple implemented the security system based on their court filing:

“Cyber-attackers intent on gaining unauthorized access to a device could break a
user-created passcode, if given enough chances to guess and the ability to test
passwords rapidly by automated means. To prevent such “brute-force” attempts to
determine the passcode, iPhones running iOS 8 and higher include a variety of
safeguards. Id. ¶ 10. For one, Apple uses a “large iteration count” to slow attempts to
access an iPhone, ensuring that it would take years to try all combinations of a six character
alphanumeric passcode. Id. ¶ 11. In addition, Apple imposes escalating time
delays after the entry of each invalid passcode. Id. ¶ 12. Finally, Apple also includes a
setting that—if activated—automatically deletes encrypted data after ten consecutive
incorrect attempts to enter the passcode. Id. This combination of security features
protects users from attackers or if, for example, the user loses the device. ”

So, the FBI wants Apple to create up to 3 bypasses into the iOS 8 system. The optional automatic deletion of encrypted data is the most interesting,  as there must be some safeguards so users don’t accidentally  trigger this feature.  But, this feature allows the user to access a “sanitized” phone after forgetting a password.

Apple claims that these bypasses are significant code modifications.  From their description, I have my doubts. The “if activated” option of automatic sanitizing  the phone, is triggered after 10 failed attempts.  Suppose this is altered to a billion or 100 billion attempts, then the code remains but a parameter is changed.  Similarly,  embedded in the slowdown feature is a delay factor,  which could be set to zero to negate its effect. Or the large iteration count, could be reset to some huge number like a trillion, before it would be triggered.   Thus, it isn’t code changes per se, but values or parameters  within the code which would be changed.

All this is interesting, even to people like me, who are decades behind technology.  The appropriate analogy is the Apple phone includes a smart lock, which recognizes someone trying to pick the lock  and takes defensive measures.

The government’s case rests on the premise that Apple is the owner of all cell phones it sells,  as it is sold under a lease contract to its customer.   So, just as an apartment owner must open up a door when police come with a search warrant,  Apple has the same responsibilities.

If it takes additional tools to open up the door of an apartment, such as a crowbar, the owner still has responsibility to pry the door open.  Apple’s reply is  that any bypass code that it  created,  would not only allow access to the captured phone, but to any other Apple phone.  However,  it is likely that this part of the cellphone operating system which the FBI wants modified, is very well protected, so others outside of Apple can not access it.

Before iOS 8 deterrents, law enforcement agents were benefiting from the ability to open cellphones through brute force methods. This can occurs today only under when a search warrant has been.

The FBI could lose the case in the Supreme Court, because the “crow bar” analogy, doesn’t hold true.  The FBI  is telling Apple what it wants, but doesn’t really know what Apple by-pass procedures they have to write.   So, they aren’t saying “break in with a crow bar” but invent a crow bar so you can break in.” And amazingly, this is where First Amendment rights come in, as the government is demanding that Apple writes software.

The security features in the iPhone are like the Volkswagen software which detected when their cars were undergoing emissions testing and took (illegal) defensive measures.  Volkswagen got caught when university students were measuring emissions while driving.

If the FBI loses the case, it seems possible that  laws could be passed that would force  any company selling phones under a lease contract,  to make the contents of the phone accessible to law enforcement if a search warrant is issued.  I know this is likely to raise the ire of civil libertarians, but I think there are ways to ensure privacy and let law enforcement agencies do their job at capturing criminals.

But, this could end up a “cat and mouse” game, where only the amateurs get caught with incriminating cellphone  information.  The San Bernadino case will put other criminals  on high alert that their cellphone can and will be used against them or their cohorts in a court of law.  Drug dealers are probably very keen on improving their cellphone security.   Ways to quickly sanitize phones in case of arrest and  to avoid iCloud backups, are likely to be the next “security” precautions.

I don’t know how all this will eventually play out in the Supreme Court. I am kind of hoping that something can be worked out so the FBI can complete its investigation.

Apple’s Court Filing 

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

 

 

 

Love thy Enemy

by Dave

This isn’t about Trump and Univision.  It is about Ted Cruz and the nagging Canadian birth question.

Before anybody starts to pick up stones,  let me say (I’m already ducking) that Ted Cruz was an American fom  the moment  he was conceived.   Let’s  at least get that out of the way.

Some very prominent lawyers and professors of law aren’t so convinced that someone born outside of the US meets the conditions to run for the president.  A case has never come before the Supreme Court, for their interpretation of “natural born” citizens.

As Laurence Tribe, a professor at law at Harvard, has written,  if this question ever comes before the Supreme Court,   the judges which are most likely to side with Cruz, are the liberals, which of course Ted Cruz hates.

The court isn’t divided politically- it is divided philosophically.   Those in the conservative camp,  tends to interpret the constitution   based on the text of the constitution (textualism) and what the founding fathers intent was (originalism). when the constitution was written.  They would apply these standard to interpreting the law.

The conservatives with their narrow focus, would ironically be Cruz’s worst nightmare, because there is  historical support for the contention, that what “natural born” means,  the person must be born within the territory of the US

If the case makes it to the Supreme Court,  it’s the liberals that will support Cruz because they tend to include more into the interpretation of what is written. They see the constitution as a “living document”  providing guidance but also factoring other considerations.  I also think Cruz should win, as a practical matter, because he been a citizen from the day he was born, just as all other citizens.  His situation is not uncommon,  as many American  families work abroad, and have children.   I think he would be a terrible president, but that’s up to voters, not the courts.

Laurence Tribe’s Comments

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Attack on ISIL in Libya

by Dave

The town of Sabratha, just outside of Tripoli to the west,  would easily rank as one of the top 10 places I would want to visit in by lifetime.  It isn’t on many people’s list, and certainly not today, after the occupation of the town by ISIL.

Sabratha

It has beautiful beaches and well preserved Roman theatre.   But as reported on Feb 19, 2016, US warplanes have put a serious dent in ISIL’s plans by hitting a training camp.

US Daily News

Good.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Who would want to be a SC nominee?

by Dave

I think everybody has got this issue wrong.  They are either focused on who Obama will nominate or how Congress will make sure, the nominee isn’t confirmed. Nobody is thinking about the poor individual who will certainly either (a) Take a beating during the confirmation hearing, before the committee declares the nominee obviously unacceptable or (b) Prepare for a confirmation hearing that wouldn’t take place.

This is a nomination that is dead on arrival.  So,  I can’t imagine anyone wanting this job.  I mean  if you’re going through hell, there should be some reward at the end.  I don’t see it.

But, it’s not like you can draft someone to be a SC nominee.  “Hey you,  get dressed, you’re going to the confirmation hearings,  and we  have bandages ready and an ambulance on stand-by.”  Response, “You can’t make me go!”

I guess it is nice to be get called by President Obama, and hear, “You’re my man!” for one of the country’s top position.   At least, it used to be an honor.

Of course, we need a highly intelligent and  respected judge, who has served on the  Federal Appeals Court and is a  constitutional expert.   The nominee is likely to have argued cases in front of the Supreme Court.

The candidate will immediately be pillared by all Republican candidates.  “This nominee will continue to destroy the Constitution, just as the liberals have done in the past”, will be the charge leveled against the justice.   The scrutiny of the candidate will go far beyond legal opinions, and  include his family, his acquaintances,  his financial records and anything else that can be dredged up.

On top of that,  any nominee will, if hearings are conducted,  be asked questions about cases pending in the courts, which they can’t answer.   Any nominee will be accused of stonewalling the committee.

I really love the candor of Robert Gates confirmation hearing.  He writes, in his book Duty,

I remember sitting at the witness table listening to this litany of woe and thinking, What the hell am I doing here? I have walked right into the middle of a category-five shitstorm.  I was the first of many, many times I would sit at the witness table thinking something very different from what I was saying.

Robert Gates paid $40,000 to a legal form to fill out financial disclose form.   Even the slightest error could be blown out of proportion by someone who did not want to vote for him.  But, Gates got confirmed.  Obama’s nominee won’t.  It’s going to be pure  theater.

 

So, who does Obama want to feed to the wolves?  Jacqueline Nguyen will be the nominee.  She’s just too perfect!  She was confirmed to be on the ninth  appeals court judge, 91-3.

Jacqueline Nguyen

My second guess, is Sri Srinivasan. Another incredibly smart judge on the DC Court of Appeals.

Sri Srinivasan

Sri has really got a bit stronger credentials- as if this mattered.   If either accept the nomination,  I will still be wondering- why????

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Justice Scalia’s Passing

by Dave

There was an immediate outpouring of sadness and tributes to his character and accomplishments at Anthony Scalia’s passing.  The New York Times collected many of these along with their analysis of the immediate future of the Supreme Court:

New York Times Article 

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes”

Thanks to the internet, lies travel the world at the speed of light.  Justice Scalia’s passing occurred on the same date as the Republican debate.  Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio announced during an Republican debate, that President Obama would break an  80 year precedent, if he appointed  a Supreme Court justice during an election year.

No precedent exists.    Obama can not appoint justices,  he only nominate them and  the Senate approves them.  The New York Times shows Justice Kennedy was the last justice to be nominated during an election year.  Amy Howe, Editor of Scotusblog agrees- no precedent.

Scotusblog.org

Politifact also confirms this:

Politifact

No president has ever considered leaving it to the next president to select a Supreme Court justice.  Senate confirmation of any justice will be next to impossible, with the politicizing of the approval process.

On top of that, honoring a precedent,  Rubio insisted it would make the selection  more democratic.  Let the people decide.  If there is a justice that would absolutely cringe at this idea, it would be Justice Scalia.  He said numerous times, that because of the intricacies of the court cases,  99% of the population does not understand or appreciate the process.  They only see outcomes.  Decisions are based on laws, the Constitution and prior decisions made by the courts.

But, confirmations in the Senate have become increasingly politicized and both Republicans and Democrats should take blame for this.  Obama could nominate the brightest justice on the planet, and  his selection would never make it to confirmation hearings.   The Senate’s Majority Leader  Mitch McConnell  is establishing a new and dangerous precedent,  making it difficult for a president to carry out his legal obligations under the Constitution.

 

As the big pending  cases (limitations on abortion,  affirmative action case in Texas, Obamacare conflicts with religious freedom burdens, and immigration reform by executive action) are to be decided this term,   Justice Anthony Kennedy will continue to be the swing  vote,  but it will be different.  If he sides with the liberals, it will be a 5-3 victory.  If he sides with conservatives, it will be a 4-4 decision, and the appeals court decision will hold.  The Justices can decide to hold off a decision until their next term, hoping that a new justice will be confirmed by then.

More to come.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Trump’s wall

by Dave

Trump plans to build a wall along the Mexican border to keep Mexico from sending us, all their rapists, drug dealers and assorted criminals.   He says he will get Mexico to pay for it.

Ok, so if they pay for it, I guess it’s their wall.  Really strange.  It is like a burglar breaking into your house, to install a burglar alarm.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Intervention in Libya

by Dave

The latest news is that the British will send 1,000 troops to defend Benghazi in Libya against ISIL  This is excellent news.  I predict the Libyans will defeat the eastward advance of ISIL.

According to the “The Times” (a UK newspaper):

“Downing Street and the Pentagon are in talks to persuade Libya to take at least 1,000 British troops to bolster its forces in the battle with Isis, whose coastal stronghold is just 200 miles from Europe.”

So, the rationale for deployment is not to save Libya, but to keep ISIL terrorists from coming to Europe as refuges, to create more chaos in European cities.  I would rather intervention  be based on humanitarian reasons, but c’est la vie.

The role of these troops is to support the Libyan army, as advisers or trainers.  It is an attempt to put boots on the ground, but keep them away  from the front lines.   It may appear  the Europeans and the US are helping to support the Tobruk government over the Tripoli government- a very tricky situation.  I am certain that as Britain and others ally with the Libyans against jihadists, they don’t want to become enmeshed into the civil conflict.

Stay tuned,

Dave

 

Zika virus

by Dave

I am not a medical professional.  There are a lot of excellent websites, written by experts in this area.  I am only repeating what the CDC (Center for Disease Control in the US) has stated.

If you are pregnant and in a area with the Zika virus, you must do four things everyday: (1) Wear long sleeve shirt and pants,  (2) Apply mosquito repellent- “Off” with DEET is a good one, (3)  Eliminate any standing water, in your house or around it and (4)   Stay as much as possible in dry,  air conditioned areas, which can translate into, “Let’s go shopping!”  – on doctor’s order.  If one has done everything possible, then relax.

Stay tuned,

Dave