Meeting Report

Post Reply
johnkarls
Posts: 2033
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Meeting Report

Post by johnkarls »

.
Ordinarily, we do not produce meeting reports.

Though for the sake of good order, we do under the current circumstances of being bombarded with zillions of inquiries about what happened, both from regulars who were unable to participate and from curious non-regulars.

As usual under such circumstances, Yours Truly describes his recollection of what happened and then as usual, since everyone’s impressions might differ, he invites any participant to post her/his comments (which he does herewith).

*****
By way of background, the following e-mail was sent to the 9 RSVP’s for our Wed evening meeting pre-dawn last Monday. One of its attachments was the Suggested Discussion Outline which is also posted in this section of our website.

The e-mail had said in its final section entitled “A Lot Of Ground To Cover So Please Read The Suggested Discussion Outline Carefully” --

“Our meetings are greatly facilitated if any factual disagreements can be resolved beforehand, so that the discussion can concentrate on policy issues. That is the primary reason for http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org. So if you want to dispute a factual statement in the Suggested Discussion Outline, please post your claim together with your authority.”

No factual disagreements were posted.

*****
So we spent a considerable amount of time focusing on the first set of questions in the Suggested Discussion Outline, for which the overwhelming consensus was: Yes – Yes – Yes – No.

A. Isn’t Hirsi Ali’s proposed “Reformation” of Islam really jettisoning one of its basic principles, rather than getting back to basics???

B. In contrast, wasn’t Martin Luther’s “Reformation” getting “back to the basics” of what Christ claimed Christianity to be – viz., “loving your neighbor as yourself” following which was the Story of the Good Samaritan to drive home Christ’s point that everyone in the world is your neighbor???

C. Doesn’t Hirsi Ali herself describe her proposed “Reformation” with an analogy to a historic building for which, instead of destroying it and building something else in its place, its façade is preserved while all of its interior is gutted and replaced with the most-modern features???

D. So although Hirsi Ali says that Westerners should support the efforts of Islam Reformers and NOT the Islam Apologists, is doing so a realistic way of preventing 10 million Americans from being nuked IAW ObL’s fatwā???

*****
We then turned to the second set of questions in the Suggested Discussion Outline --

A. Would the reforms of The USA Liberty Act be sufficient to prevent Authoritarian Rule by our Intelligence Services à la Orwell’s “1984”???

B. AND EVEN IF the reforms would be sufficient IF ENFORCED, why should America believe in Washington DC’s “Kabuki Theater” in which NOBODY is ever HELD ACCOUNTABLE for violating the law???

C. FOR EXAMPLE, do there appear to be ANY INVESTIGATIONS of such obvious criminal behavior imperiling our national security as (A) the Clinton Foundation in general and Uranium One in particular, (B) Hillary putting top-secret documents on a personal computer server that was less secure than g-mail and that was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments, (C) Hillary and the DNC buying false “opposition research” from the Kremlin and distributing it to the mainstream media while masking their deeds by using the Perkins Coie law firm as their agent to accomplish these illegal activities, and (D) rigging the Democratic Primaries against Bernie Sanders who was the only candidate in 2016, other than Donald Trump, standing up for American workers (which should comprise a “slam dunk” case of criminally defrauding all of Bernie Sanders’ zillions of small campaign contributors)???


D. Should we launch one of our Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail Campaigns --

D-i. Opposing the extension of FISA Sec. 702 beyond 12/31/2017 entirely???

D-ii. Opposing the extension of FISA Sec. 702 unless Jeff Sessions’ so-called “Justice” Department institutes prosecutions for such obvious criminal behavior imperiling our national security as those described in Paragraph (C)???

D-iii. Opposing the extension of FISA Sec. 702 unless FISA Sections 702(a) and 702(c)(2), which permit the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct so-called “WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING” for ONE YEAR PERIODS, are amended to provide that (1) the AG and DNI are NOT permitted to string together a series of one-year periods, (2) the AG and DNI are NOT permitted to use the “fruits of the poisonous tree” to obtain de facto “warrantless wiretapping” of a target beyond one year by simply engaging subsequently in “warrantless wiretapping” for yet another year of individuals with whom the original target communicated during the first year, and (3) even during the original one-year period, the AG and DNI must proceed as soon as possible on a “good faith” basis to obtain a FISA warrant???

D-iv. Other???

*****
A REVIEW OF OUR 5/20/2017 MEETING

Yours Truly began our 12/13/2017 discussion of this second set of questions with a review of our 5/10/2017 meeting on “Authoritarian Rule By Our Intelligence Services” for which we read (probably for the first time since High School for most of us) George Orwell’s “1984.”

Not surprisingly, a Meeting Report was prepared due to the zillions of queries about what happened. The Meeting Report said, inter alia, that we had 11 attendees and --

“My recollection is that there was nobody who had any trust in our Intelligence Services to tell the truth, even under oath (since nobody ever seems to get prosecuted for perjury!!!)!!!

“And my recollection is that there was nobody who had any confidence in our Intelligence Services (despite the presumable integrity of the overwhelming majority of their “rank and file”) to “do the right thing”!!!

“Especially in light of the zillions of reports that Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said in an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that it is “really dumb” to oppose our Intelligence Services because -- “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

“[See, for example, the report at thehill.com/homenews/administration/312605-schumer-trump-being-really-dumb-by-going-after-intelligence-community.]

“About half of our attendees spoke up in opposition to the potential invasion of their own privacy by our Intelligence Agencies.

“This mirrors the discussion at our 8/10/2016 meeting when Yours Truly led the faction who believed that National Security was/is so important, that anyone “with nothing to hide” should have no objection to our Intelligence Services doing whatever is necessary to protect us.

“[In this regard, please see the “Original Proposal” for our 5/10/2017 meeting posted on http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org.]

“HOWEVER, there seemed to be UNIVERSAL OPPOSITION to the possibility/probability that our Intelligence Services will use their power to zap any of our democratically-elected officials with whom they disagree.

“NONETHELESS, there did seem to be a diversity of opinion on (1) whether we are just “around the corner” from Authoritarian Rule by Our Intelligence Services à la George Orwell’s 1984, or (2) whether we are merely (!!!) in a permanent modus vivendi pursuant to which Our Intelligence Services dictate U.S. policy by zapping whichever democratically-elected officials displease them WITHOUT the oppression of Orwell’s 1984.

“THERE WAS UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT that (as posited in both the Suggested Discussion Outline and the Suggested Answers to the Fourth Short Quiz posted on http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org) there is NO SOLUTION to the problem.”

*****
OUR CONCLUSIONS LAST EVENING ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF FISA SEC. 702

After reviewing the results of our 5/10/2017 meeting, especially the comments of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on the Rachel Maddow Show that it is “really dumb” to oppose our Intelligence Services because -- “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you” -- the results last evening were strikingly similar to the results of our 5/10/2017 meeting.

All but 3 participants last evening favored launching one of our Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail Campaigns opposing the extension of FISA Sec. 702 --

(1) Unless Jeff Sessions’ so-called “Justice” Department institutes prosecutions for such obvious criminal behavior imperiling our national security as (A) the Clinton Foundation in general and Uranium One in particular, (B) Hillary putting top-secret documents on a personal computer server that was less secure than g-mail and that was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments, (C) Hillary and the DNC buying false “opposition research” from the Kremlin and distributing it to the mainstream media while masking their deeds by using the Perkins Coie law firm as their agent to accomplish these illegal activities, and (D) rigging the Democratic Primaries against Bernie Sanders who was the only candidate in 2016, other than Donald Trump, standing up for American workers (which should comprise a “slam dunk” case of criminally defrauding all of Bernie Sanders’ zillions of small campaign contributors); AND

(2) Unless FISA Sections 702(a) and 702(c)(2), which permit the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct so-called “WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING” for ONE YEAR PERIODS, are amended to provide that (A) the AG and DNI are NOT permitted to string together a series of one-year periods, (B) the AG and DNI are NOT permitted to use the “fruits of the poisonous tree” to obtain de facto “warrantless wiretapping” of a target beyond one year by simply engaging subsequently in “warrantless wiretapping” for yet another year of individuals with whom the original target communicated during the first year, and (C) even during the original one-year period, the AG and DNI must proceed as soon as possible on a “good faith” basis to obtain a FISA warrant.

*****
THE THREE DISSENTERS

One of our participants made a short speech about the existence of polls that allegedly show that public opinion favors doing whatever is necessary to keep us safe regardless of the consequences for our democracy.

Ordinarily, I would have ruled such comments “out of order” because we have always been a “public-policy study group” that focuses on the best interests of our nation, rather than being an “amateur public-polling organization.”

However, I refrained because it was obvious that just like at our 5/10/2017 meeting, some of our participants do NOT believe in “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death”!!!

And that the short speech was giving cover to participants last evening who did NOT believe in “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death”!!!

Following the short speech, there were three participants (including the person who delivered the short speech) who opposed the Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail Campaign described above.

We take great pride in our Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail campaigns to America's decision makers which, with only a few computer keyboard key strokes, can be sent by each of our members (1) to the decision maker, and (2) to all of the member's friends and acquaintances requesting them to do the same in an unending chain.

Accordingly, we also take great pride that each of our official recommendations has been approved unanimously at one of our meetings or, at most, received only one dissent (in which case we say there was a "consensus" rather than "unanimity").

Since we had three dissenters last evening, the Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail Campaign was NOT approved despite support from the overwhelming majority.

So be it.

Respectfully submitted,

John Karls


---------------------------- Original Message -----------------------------
Subject: 3 Important Items + Heads Up Re Deadline For January 10th Topic Proposals
From: ReadingLiberally-SaltLake@johnkarls.com
Date: Mon, December 11, 2017 1:39 am MST
To: ReadingLiberallyEmailList@johnkarls.com
Bcc: The 9 RSVP’s Listed Below
Attachments:
RL-dc13-PossibleTopicsForJan10.docx
RL-dc08-SuggestedDiscussionOutline.docx
NicklausRoad-Driving Directions.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To the 9 RSVP’s for Our December 13th Meeting --

Denise Chancellor
Thomas Chancellor
Jay Hansen
Marcia Hansen
Kathryn Kair
George Kunath
Attila Relenyi
Janice Shawl
Yours Truly


Dear Friends,

We are the 9 RSVP’s for our meeting this Wednesday evening.

This is your regular monthly Heads Up that the deadline for posting Possible Topics for our January 10th meeting on http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org is 7:00 pm tomorrow (Tuesday December 12th).

If you are not already registered to post, please e-mail your proposal to me by 6:00 pm tomorrow and I will post it for you.

Attached is the current version of the list of proposed topics that will be handed out at Wednesday evening’s meeting.

As usual, please be ready to vote for your choice at 7:00 pm sharp on Wed.

And please look over the other suggestions (more detail for each is available in the second section of http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org) since we always have a French run-off if no suggestion has received a majority of votes on the first round.

**********
DRIVING DIRECTIONS

Driving directions to my home in Sandy UT are attached. If you run into any trouble enroute, my cell = 917-270-xxxx.

**********
CELEBRATING OUR 12TH ANNIVERSARY AT 6:30 PM WITH A GLASS OF MOËT ET CHANDON

Please arrive 30 minutes early Wed evening if you would like to help celebrate our 12th Anniversary with a glass of Moët et Chandon and a piece of cake.

As usual, our formal discussion will begin at 7:00 pm.

**********
A LOT OF GROUND TO COVER SO PLEASE READ THE SUGGESTED DISCUSSION OUTLINE CAREFULLY

The Suggested Discussion Outline, which was distributed with last Saturday’s weekly e-mail, is also attached to this e-mail for your convenience.

We have quite a bit of ground to cover so please re-read the Suggested Discussion Outline carefully.

NB: The two sets of Discussion Questions are highlighted in Bold Red –- the first set appearing in the middle of p. 2 and the second set beginning at the bottom of p. 3.

An important reminder --

Our meetings are greatly facilitated if any factual disagreements can be resolved beforehand, so that the discussion can concentrate on policy issues.

That is the primary reason for http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org. So if you want to dispute a factual statement in the Suggested Discussion Outline, please post your claim together with your authority.

In this regard, we have always had a rule against distributing handouts at our meetings because they are so disruptive as participants read them serially, and because they are so discourteous to speakers while the handout is circulating.

Which, of course, is another reason for posting on http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org.

***********

Looking forward to seeing you all on Wednesday evening (December 13th),

Your friend,

John K.

PS for Janice Shawl – Please let me know if you need to Skype.

Post Reply

Return to “Suggested Discussion Outline - Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now by Ayaan Hirsi Ali - Dec 13”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest