James, we are indeed speaking the same language, from the same (former) organization.
The full title of the book to which I referred is "Unlikely Warriors: The Army Security Agency's Secret War in Vietnam 1961-1973". It is not a novel, it is a history of ASA in Vietnam, told by people like me, in my own words. I was not paid for my writin…
James, we are indeed speaking the same language, from the same (former) organization.
The full title of the book to which I referred is "Unlikely Warriors: The Army Security Agency's Secret War in Vietnam 1961-1973". It is not a novel, it is a history of ASA in Vietnam, told by people like me, in my own words. I was not paid for my writing or my photographs, so I feel free to cite the work in this space, as there is no pecuniary interest in sales on my part.
Back to the topic at hand, my growing complaint is that our system of jurisprudence is so highly politicized that it is more interested in the flavor of the day, as it were, instead of reaching for the noble aspirations of our founding authors, toward liberty and justice for all, or some apt description of what all of us wish for. We have oceans of dark money sloshing around, trying to buy influence. We have unethical behavior on the part of Members of the Court going unchecked. Our judicial system should be above reproach, not just seen to be ethical and learned, but actually striving to improve our lives by making our system more fair, more just. And as I'm writing this I'm thinking that maybe I'm suffering from the same things they are suffering from, because I have a sense of what a more just and more fair system would look like, but it's difficult to describe it. Like, did the founding authors consider including their wives in the new democratic system. I think Abigail Adams, among others, made that argument. Can the judicial establishment rise above the political fray and lead the way toward a more perfect union?
The words of Judge Roy Bean comes to mind: "You'll get a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging". But I jest.
chào tạm biệt, roughly, iirc, farewell -- been more than half a century now, eh?
Forgive me if I seemed to imply that the book you mentioned was a work of fiction - I only meant to note the two I mentioned were. Indeed, I now have your book on my Kindle.
As to secrecy, I have an anecdote from a school mate of mine, also an Agency linguie who served in Germany. One Christmas the Russians sent him and his 'chicken plucker' colleagues personalized Christmas cards.
As one who taught American history for just over 40 years, a subject I took up in part because of the kinds of experiences we clearly shared, I do have my own take on the Founders and their legacy.
First, of course, Abigail Adams's letter to John is as you believe, in which she noted that all men would be tyrants if they could. To which John apparently replied with a bit of a chauvinistic chuckle, but no concession to her argument.
Unfortunately, though they clearly realized the danger of polarization inherent in political parties (which they called factions), they went ahead and started the process anyway. Not that it matters; basic human nature would have done so even without their help. They were, after all men of their time, but they also understood that the blueprint they were creating might well have to be amended in the face of future alterations in circumstance. For me, that understanding, and the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment are among the most important pieces of the Constitution. Unfortunately too many Americans, including some prominent members of the judiciary seem to be unaware of or ignoring both.
For all that they could not have foreseen all the forces that their document would face in the future, and that they failed to create the nation without slavery, to me the Founders did do something quite extraordinary. They created the first nation on earth to define itself at it's inception as one in which 'we the people' could together find enough of the courage, the honesty, the understanding, the tolerance, the compassion, the wisdom, the humor, the hope, and the sheer common sense to rule ourselves from the bottom up after four thousand years of the reverse. For myself now, as I peruse our political debates, the notable lack of most of those characteristics is the most dispiriting.
Forgive me for going on! As you clearly do, I have some pretty strong feelings on the subject.
James, we are indeed speaking the same language, from the same (former) organization.
The full title of the book to which I referred is "Unlikely Warriors: The Army Security Agency's Secret War in Vietnam 1961-1973". It is not a novel, it is a history of ASA in Vietnam, told by people like me, in my own words. I was not paid for my writing or my photographs, so I feel free to cite the work in this space, as there is no pecuniary interest in sales on my part.
Back to the topic at hand, my growing complaint is that our system of jurisprudence is so highly politicized that it is more interested in the flavor of the day, as it were, instead of reaching for the noble aspirations of our founding authors, toward liberty and justice for all, or some apt description of what all of us wish for. We have oceans of dark money sloshing around, trying to buy influence. We have unethical behavior on the part of Members of the Court going unchecked. Our judicial system should be above reproach, not just seen to be ethical and learned, but actually striving to improve our lives by making our system more fair, more just. And as I'm writing this I'm thinking that maybe I'm suffering from the same things they are suffering from, because I have a sense of what a more just and more fair system would look like, but it's difficult to describe it. Like, did the founding authors consider including their wives in the new democratic system. I think Abigail Adams, among others, made that argument. Can the judicial establishment rise above the political fray and lead the way toward a more perfect union?
The words of Judge Roy Bean comes to mind: "You'll get a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging". But I jest.
chào tạm biệt, roughly, iirc, farewell -- been more than half a century now, eh?
Forgive me if I seemed to imply that the book you mentioned was a work of fiction - I only meant to note the two I mentioned were. Indeed, I now have your book on my Kindle.
As to secrecy, I have an anecdote from a school mate of mine, also an Agency linguie who served in Germany. One Christmas the Russians sent him and his 'chicken plucker' colleagues personalized Christmas cards.
As one who taught American history for just over 40 years, a subject I took up in part because of the kinds of experiences we clearly shared, I do have my own take on the Founders and their legacy.
First, of course, Abigail Adams's letter to John is as you believe, in which she noted that all men would be tyrants if they could. To which John apparently replied with a bit of a chauvinistic chuckle, but no concession to her argument.
Unfortunately, though they clearly realized the danger of polarization inherent in political parties (which they called factions), they went ahead and started the process anyway. Not that it matters; basic human nature would have done so even without their help. They were, after all men of their time, but they also understood that the blueprint they were creating might well have to be amended in the face of future alterations in circumstance. For me, that understanding, and the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment are among the most important pieces of the Constitution. Unfortunately too many Americans, including some prominent members of the judiciary seem to be unaware of or ignoring both.
For all that they could not have foreseen all the forces that their document would face in the future, and that they failed to create the nation without slavery, to me the Founders did do something quite extraordinary. They created the first nation on earth to define itself at it's inception as one in which 'we the people' could together find enough of the courage, the honesty, the understanding, the tolerance, the compassion, the wisdom, the humor, the hope, and the sheer common sense to rule ourselves from the bottom up after four thousand years of the reverse. For myself now, as I peruse our political debates, the notable lack of most of those characteristics is the most dispiriting.
Forgive me for going on! As you clearly do, I have some pretty strong feelings on the subject.