This morning, in response to the bipartisan effort in Congress to supply the CSRs legislatively rather than through executive actions, President Trump tweeted:

I am supportive of [Senator] Lamar [Alexander]as a person & also of the process, but I can never support bailing out ins co’s who have made a fortune w/ O’Care.

Ah, so it was these immense profits that caused the insurance companies to abandon various markets. Got it. Clever devils.

He’s just brimful of desperate rationalizations, isn’t he?

A reader also wonders about recalibrations of LIGO:

I was about to say “no” because the distortions from gravity waves cause the 2.5 mile LIGO arms to compress and stretch around one-ten-thousandth the diameter of a proton — tiny fractions of femtometers. And after stretching and compressing, you’d be back to normal. But this article (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physics/gravitational-wave-memory/) mentions that spacetime might be distorted by gravity waves, so normal might not be the same normal again. Maybe that’s why I don’t fit into my old jeans anymore…

Fascinating stuff! I (being a lowly software engineer) had never thought of this:

Now that gravitational-wave detection is likely becoming a regular occurrence—we’ll probably find evidence of many more in the next few years—physicists are again pondering an obscure detail about gravitational waves that was once also thought virtually impossible to observe—gravitational-wave memory, which involves permanent changes in the distance between two objects.

And then that leads to this:

“In the last few years, we have discovered that ‘empty’ space, as described by Einstein’s theory of gravity, is not as empty as we once thought,” [Andrew] Strominger says. “It actually has a lot of hidden structure which can store information. The information is stored at the edges of space such as infinity or the horizon of a black hole. We [c]all this structure ‘soft hair.’ ”

“The gravitational-memory effect measures the soft hair,” Strominger says. “It would be most interesting to directly measure it.”

“This is indeed a very exciting prospect,” [Paul] Lasky says. “It is fantastic that people are thinking about the implications of such a detection, and it is especially wonderful to hear that it could have an influence on such fundamental questions as the black hole information paradox.”

Amazing thoughts. I wonder how all this theorizing impacts the mathematical universe hypothesis – that is, what the hell does the merging of two neutron stars mean in terms of the hypothetical mathematical entities of which we’re merely a reflection? (I think.)

Oh, and maybe this has something to do with virtual particles? Sure wish I hadn’t been such a slowpoke in college….

Ever have a hankering to know just what the legendary Marquis de Lafayette was actually doing in colonial America during the Revolutionary War? Not in the mood for dense academic prose, the passive voice, or French?

Then Lafayette In The Somewhat United States by Sarah Vowell may be for you. This is a book written in the current vernacular, full of witty observation, commentary from the 21st century on the denizens of the 18th century, and prose that is staccato – sometimes a bit too staccato.

But it treats the Marquis as the raw young man that he was, noting his virtual abandonment of his new, pregnant wife in his stubborn pursuit of joining the United States in war, as well as the various political winds which nearly blew now-legendary Founding Father George Washington aside. It explores the various challenges faced by the Colonial Army, and how Lafayette worked to ameliorate at least some of the real problems faced by the Colonials, and how the people most likely to benefit from independence from England had to virtually be dunned into paying their due, from the lowliest Colonial farmer to the Louis of France, whose help in the Revolution paid partial revenge for other English victories – but may have contributed to his own demise on the “French razor” several years later.

The interjection of modern viewpoints into the world of 1776 has its drawbacks and its advantages, the latter in some ways as comedic points as well as illuminating the fact that the Revolutionaries were just as capable of hypocrisy as we are today. But it certainly makes it easy to enjoy this book more than the weighty historical tome, full of footnotes and densely argued points; of course, if that’s what you need, then this will not do at all.

But if you just want a light go-over of the Marquis’ fabled role in the American Revolution, this is not a bad book to read.

Continuing this theme, the idea of Trump as a role model makes me absolutely ill, and so I feel very sorry for the citizens of Israel. Ben Caspit on AL Monitor has the comparison. Keeping in mind that Mandelblit is the Israeli Attorney General, and was put in that position by Netanyahu with the expectation that Mandelblit would be a lapdog. Instead, Mandelblit is investigating Netanyahu for corruption:

Netanyahu’s strategy was copied from that of US President Donald Trump, down to the very small details. Netanyahu creates chaos and initiates unremitting attacks on Israel’s gatekeepers and regulators, with the goal of delegitimizing these bodies that will soon determine his fate. The prime minister’s relations with Mandelblit are very tense. On the condition of anonymity, a source within Netanyahu’s inner circle talked about the “betrayal” of Mandelblit and Alsheikh. He also talked about State Comptroller Joseph Shapira’s “crossing of red lines” (referring to Shapira’s report on the government’s decision-making process before and during the 2014 Gaza war). Since Netanyahu believes that all of these people turned their backs on him and betrayed him, he is fighting them with all of his strength: He hopes to draw legitimacy from his popularity, which continues to rise in the Likud and in Israel’s right-wing electorate.

A significant number of Netanyahu’s capricious initiatives will not come to pass; most of them will not even advance to significant stages. Meanwhile, the prime minister achieves his goals: He creates chaos, the perception of disorder and lack of control while masterminding the unfolding events and delivering weekly blows to imaginary enemies, mainly those he labels as left wing. Netanyahu tries to create the impression that shadowy, demonic figures, funded and activated by the left, are trying to bring down a sitting prime minister. “A government can be replaced only at the voting booth,” insisted another associate of Netanyahu, talking on condition of anonymity. In this way they elegantly sidestep the fact that a previous prime minister, Olmert, was deposed due to criminal investigations against him and, ultimately, was even sent to prison.

Notice the reference to a personal betrayal, as if this was a great and horrid crime. Evidently, Netanyahu’s camp is run on a basis of personal loyalty, rather than loyalty to the best interests of Israel. And is this distressing the citizens? The next paragraph suggests that perhaps it doesn’t:

And by the way, Olmert was sentenced to prison for fraud and breach of trust that revolved around 60,000 shekels ($17,000). Netanyahu is under suspicion for fraud, breach of trust and bribery involving much higher sums of money, but he does not let the facts destroy his strategy. In an era of “alternative truth” and “fake news,” there is no need for real evidence or proven facts. Each camp believes what its leaders tell them. Whichever side that is more determined and aggressive will win. At least that’s what Netanyahu believes.

So tribalism is also enveloping Israel, perhaps. A depressing thought, for down that staircase lies fascism and ruin.

Remember the LIGO device, used to detect gravity waves? Now it’s caught two neutron stars in the act. Eric Betz on D-brief has a nice description:

An artist’s illustration of two colliding neutron stars. (Credit: NASA/Swift/Dana Berry)

They were neutron stars — the collapsed cores left behind after giant stars explode into supernovas. Closer and closer they spun, shedding gravitational energy, until the stars traveled at nearly the speed of light, completing an orbit 100 times every second.

By then, dinosaurs reigned on Earth, and the first flowers were just blooming. That’s when, 130 million years ago, the dance ended. 

The collision was fast and violent, likely spawning a black hole. A shudder — a gravitational wave — was sent out across the fabric of space-time. And as the stars’ outer layers launched into space, the force formed a vast cloud of subatomic particles that would cool into many Earths’ worth of gold, platinum and uranium.

Seconds later, a blast of high-energy gamma-rays – the most energetic kind of light – punched through the erupting cloud.

The space-time ripple and the light crossed the cosmos together, and finally arrived at 6:41 a.m. Eastern on Aug. 17. The gravitational wave first reached Italy’s freshly finished detector Advanced Virgo before stretching and squeezing the lasers at America’s two LIGO sites.

Two seconds later, NASA’s gamma-ray detecting Fermi spacecraft caught the blast.

Neat stuff. Including direct confirmation that heavy elements are created in these mergers.

A reader remarks on KRACK and Wi-Fi passwords:

My understanding is that KRACK allows MITM sniffing of traffic, but does NOT decrypt your password, nor does any particularly good or bad password make ANY difference to the attack technique. You might want to research this a bit further. I have a feeling that Mr. Weaver is wrong.

Perhaps. I believe the issues of KRACK and Wi-Fi passwords are unconnected. Concerning the KRACK (Key Reinstallation Attacks – and, no, I don’t know what that means) problem I mentioned earlier, here’s more information from the researchers who discovered the problem:

We discovered serious weaknesses in WPA2, a protocol that secures all modern protected Wi-Fi networks. An attacker within range of a victim can exploit these weaknesses using key reinstallation attacks (KRACKs). Concretely, attackers can use this novel attack technique to read information that was previously assumed to be safely encrypted. This can be abused to steal sensitive information such as credit card numbers, passwords, chat messages, emails, photos, and so on. The attack works against all modern protected Wi-Fi networks. Depending on the network configuration, it is also possible to inject and manipulate data. For example, an attacker might be able to inject ransomware or other malware into websites.

The weaknesses are in the Wi-Fi standard itself, and not in individual products or implementations. Therefore, any correct implementation of WPA2 is likely affected. To prevent the attack, users must update affected products as soon as security updates become available. Note that if your device supports Wi-Fi, it is most likely affected. During our initial research, we discovered ourselves that Android, Linux, Apple, Windows, OpenBSD, MediaTek, Linksys, and others, are all affected by some variant of the attacks. For more information about specific products, consult the database of CERT/CC, or contact your vendor. …

As a proof-of-concept we executed a key reinstallation attack against an Android smartphone. In this demonstration, the attacker is able to decrypt all data that the victim transmits. For an attacker this is easy to accomplish, because our key reinstallation attack is exceptionally devastating against Linux and Android 6.0 or higher. This is because Android and Linux can be tricked into (re)installing an all-zero encryption key (see below for more info). When attacking other devices, it is harder to decrypt all packets, although a large number of packets can nevertheless be decrypted.

[Bold in the original.] I’ll decline to offer any interpretation or commentary as there are far more competent folks out there than I. I will say that the problem being in the standard is a bit appalling. On the other hand, this sort of thing is notoriously tricky to get right.

Reading Saeid Jafari’s piece in AL Monitor on Iran’s hardline (Principlist) political camp is reminiscent of the United States’ pack of right wingers, where all are supposedly on the same page, yet have that lust to power pushing them along:

[Former President] Ahmadinejad’s attack against the parliament speaker [Larijani] comes as some view Larijani as the symbol of a classic Principlist who in recent years has distanced himself from the camp due to its hard-line activities and instead now enjoys close ties with the Rouhani administration. It should be noted that Larijani ran as a conservative in the 2005 presidential elections, which first brought Ahmadinejad to power. However, he was eliminated in the first round of voting, coming in sixth place after late Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, former parliament Speaker Mehdi Karroubi, Ghalibaf and former Minister of Science Mostafa Moin.

It should also be noted that some Principlist groups don’t even consider Larijani a conservative anymore and have strongly criticized him for his close ties with the current administration. In a recent development, a picture of Larijani next to former Reformist President Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005), the leader of the Reform movement, surfaced on Sept. 23, causing a great deal of controversy and harsh criticism from hard-liners. Some even described the photo as an attempt by Larijani to launch his campaign for the 2021 presidential elections.

As such, Iran’s conservative camp today is more divergent than ever. This is perhaps due to a lack of leadership in the camp and the existence of multiple forces who each see themselves as being superior to others. This is not to mention that not all Principlist groups accept Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi, the hard-line cleric who is seen by many as the spiritual father of the conservative front. Thus, it seems as if each part of the movement is branching out for itself, with none willing to accept other factions.

Note the Iranian analog to the RINO. I wonder how much that phenomenon has occurred in Iran, until the hardliners are best viewed as extremists? As a theocracy, it shouldn’t be surprising to see a certain over-confidence evident in the various factions, since all of them think they understand best what their Divine Being wants. That same reasoning justifies the ejection of members in good standing from the group – after all, they’re not conforming to the wishes of DB, now are they?

Because, of course, they know the mind of DB.

The importance of separating the roles of public and private sectors (see here for ruminations on this topic) is brightly illuminated in this story about Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA) withdrawing his name from consideration as the Administration’s Drug Czar on Maddowblog:

The Post reported that as the opioid crisis intensified, Congress “effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling prescription narcotics onto the nation’s streets.” The point of the measure was to “weaken aggressive DEA enforcement efforts against drug distribution companies that were supplying corrupt doctors and pharmacists who peddled narcotics to the black market.”Leading the way was Tom Marino, a Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, who was the beneficiary of generous contributions from the drug industry.

And while many members of Congress are responsible for voting Yes, as well as President Obama for signing it, I think it’s important to recognize that, at its point of entry into the Congressional body, this is essentially corruption. By this I don’t mean that Marino was bribed, but he was, to use an old metaphor, carrying water for these drug distribution companies, no doubt in order to ensure future contributions from them.

And that’s not his role.

Look, safeguarding the public, in this case from the consequences of its own ignorance, is the role of Congress; guaranteeing the profits of any particular industry is absolutely not.

But even more importantly, consider the underlying moral topography. Rep. Marino, an avid Trump supporter, or at least obedient to GOP party dictates with a Trump Score as of this writing of 95.3%, is presumably of a conservative religious bent (see here for some info on his civil rights stances, such as being anti-same sex marriage), and yet he chose to introduce a bill that would restrict the government from pursuing those who are indulging in illegal activities. On success, a baffling, tragic epidemic intensifies.

All for the sake of greater industry profits.

This confusion of societal & moral imperatives, or perhaps ignorance of, has real consequences, in this case measured in the lives lost to the drugs that should have been restricted to those with a legitimate need. All because Marino didn’t do his job – he didn’t undertake to study his role seriously.

Perhaps he’ll be restricted from Congress at the next elections.

The banana industry, which is heavily dependent on the Cavendish variety, has been approaching a cliff as the voracious TR4 fungus, immune to darn near everything, has been invading the various plantations world-wide and destroying all the commercial bananas in its path. However, as WaPo reports, a chance finding of a wild banana immune to TR4 was found. So did the banana industry leap in feet first, wild to save itself? Not so much:

It took years to isolate the gene responsible for the resistance. Then, in 2004, a breakthrough: [James] Dale’s lab identified candidate genes worth testing. Over three more years of painstaking work, Dale inserted genes from the M. acuminata subspecies into cells from a Cavendish, developing them first in tiny test tubes, then growing whole plants. It takes about a year to grow a plant with roots that can be placed in the soil.

But despite the clear and present danger of TR4, no one wanted to pay for a field trial; banana producers mistakenly believed they could manage the disease and keep it in check. So it was another three or four years before Dale could cobble together funding and find a facility where he could grow the plants to produce transgenic bananas. He was able to plant a small field trial in 2012, which lasted three years. …

Ironically, a major obstacle to replacing today’s Cavendish with a TR4-resistant strain is the banana industry, which for the most part has dropped out of doing research, says Ploetz. William Goldfield, director of corporate communications for Dole Food, one of the largest producers and importers of bananas, said in an email that the company is “looking at how to develop a disease resistant banana through crop improvement and plant breeding methods,” but he didn’t go into specifics. Requests for comment from the three other top banana producers went unanswered.

I’m sort of hoping the current banana producers get kicked out on their collective ears and are replaced with a new collection of companies that are actually willing to do more than just harvest bananas, sell them, and collect profits. Of course, maybe the WaPo story doesn’t properly portray the industry, in which case I’d retract my statement. But unwilling to fund some simple field trials? Come on, guys. That’s about as short-sighted as trying to put a price on civilization. Existential threats call for covering the hole safely, not trying to edge around the bottomless pit.

The same day we arrived in Seattle, we went dockside with our host. Only a couple of my pictures came out well, unfortunately.

Our host did much better, I thought. Here are a couple of my favorites of his work, by permission.

This one looks a little like an old LST from World War II.

Some nice reflections on some sort of underwater life. I wonder if Roger Corman ever tried to cast that underwater life…

Nicholas Weaver on Lawfare notes a weakness in Wi-Fi passwords in passing while addressing a newly discovered vulnerability in WPA2 called KRACK:

So unless your Wi-Fi password looks something like a cat’s hairball (e.g. “:SNEIufeli7rc”–which is not guessable with a few million tries by a computer), a local attacker had the capability to determine the password, decrypt all the traffic, and join the network before KRACK.

Our Wi-Fi password does actually have a passing resemblance to a cat’s hairball.

And that’s all. I just liked the simile.

Concerning the new threat to the ozone layer, a reader remarks:

Not too surprised to find that chlorinated carbons have similar effects as fluorinated carbons. Fluorine and chlorine have similar electro-negative properties, being the 2 lightest and most reactive halogens.

The article suggested that chlorinated carbons were not expected to survive long enough after manufacture & release to make it up to the ozone layer. The weather in the area, however, apparently funnels those chemicals right to the ozone layer much faster than suggested.

This probably wouldn’t fly in my neighborhood, but it’s a fascinating look, sort of like the Sydney Opera House, which is to some extent the single word Why? Still, one of the goals of artists is to attain an unique look in order to stimulate new thoughts. And this work by LOT-EK is certainly out of the ordinary:

© Danny Bright via DesignBoom

Yep, those are shipping containers. From LOT-EK:

21 steel containers are collected and stacked. The stack is then cut diagonally along both the top and bottom, creating a striking profile that invokes Williamsburg’s industrial past, while providing a sculptural nod to the rapidly changing neighborhood. The house is located in a typical corner lot in Brooklyn, measuring 25×100-feet. Transforming the containers’ assembly into a single-family residence, the diagonal cut generates a very enclosed and private monolith from the surrounding streets. The diagonal also modifies the conventional ground-floor rear yard type and use, allocating private outdoor space at each level of the house. Large glass doors allow access to each deck, offering light and cross ventilation at all levels. A steel stair along the north wall connects all outdoor spaces.

Lloyd Alter on Treehugger.com is torn:

We complain about shipping container architecture all the time on TreeHugger, usually prefaced with that tired phrase “jump the shark” and this 5000 square foot house they built in Brooklyn is just completely nuts. We say that shipping container architecture doesn’t make sense, and this doesn’t either. But there is something about this house and I like it. …

But wow, it’s got drama. Like all of LOT-EK’s container buildings, you can tell that there is an architect at work here. And it’s interesting that the clients for this house have a bit of drama themselves, running popular Brooklyn restaurants that our Brooklyn-dwelling editor and photographer describes as a “total little empire that is almost too rustic-hipster-cool, but the quality is undeniable and they were there early so it doesn’t feel painfully trendy.”

© Danny Bright via DesignBoom

For Lloyd, it fails the functional test, but its sheer novelty has captivated him. More from Lloyd on Treehugger.com.

Even that red tie may be a misdirect.
Nyah.

The Thomas Crown Affair (1999, not the 1968 original, and a hacked up TV version at that) is less a cautionary story than a lesson in leaping to conclusions. We follow the unexpected life seduction of elite insurance recovery specialist Catherine Banning as she begins the investigation of a painting stolen from the Metropolitan Museum of Art: 3 men attempting a sophisticated robbery are foiled, but a painting by Monet is missing anyways.

Suspicion falls on a local Monet lover and millionaire, Thomas Crown, even as he donates a painting from his own collection to fill in for the missing Monet. As Banning pursues Crown, she is, in turn, pursued by Crown, who finds her intelligence and assertiveness very attractive. But what about the other women in his life, not to mention his business, Crown Acquisitions, which does financial deals?

This story specializes in the head feint to the left while moving to the right, from the roles of minor characters to the climactic scene in which the stolen painting is revealed while yet another disappears – in the midst of quite the clever ploy to distract the watching police.

It would be accurate to say the theme is lightweight, and yet it has its useful applications in real life, enough so to make the story interesting, and if it seems to wander afield for a while, the wrap-up makes it worthwhile for the patient, attentive audience appreciative of dry humor. It’s worth a watch on an otherwise drowsy evening.

Our Seattle vacation host took us through Pike Place, where they sling fish and sell chocolate and many other things. I attempted a few pictures.

First, the only bug crawling across an expanse of concrete. Sure, it seems a bit irrelevant, but my Arts Editor felt the shadow was a lot of fun.

And our host caught me at it.

My Arts Editor also fell in love with this effigy on the left. Then there was this shot on the right, which I’m not actually sure I shot from Pike Place. Perhaps that should be in the Gasworks Park collection. Or perhaps from our host’s apartment.

Finally, my favorites from Pike Place.

I wish this was slightly more in focus.

And this was shot through a miror – you can see my paunch on the right, and there’s our host on the left. It was taken at Pigalle Place, a fancy French joint with excellent food.

I did take a number of other pictures, mostly of the bay’s port area, but using the zoom function of a smartphone camera leads to an unacceptable level of graininess, unfortunately. Here’s an example of a reject.

You may have read that President Trump declined to certify Iran as adhering to the JCPOA guidelines. But what about that statement he issued? Elena Chachko of Lawfare examines the two concrete action items:

First, the new designations (and any new non-nuclear sanctions, for that matter) are technically in line with the JCPOA. The JCPOA only covers nuclear obligations and sanctions. Yesterday’s designations, like previous non-nuclear Iran sanctions that the U.S. has imposed post-JCPOA (see, for example, below and here), are based on involvement in terrorism, meddling in Syria, and involvement in proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (including missile technology) – all activities that fall outside the scope of the nuclear deal. …

Second, yesterday’s IRGC designation does not set a precedent, contrary to the impression Trump’s statement and some news reports may have created. Trump said that “[t]he execution of our strategy begins with the long-overdue step of imposing tough sanctions on Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.” In fact, the IRGC has been on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list for quite a while under multiple sanctions programs. As OFAC’s press release notes, the IRGC was previously designated in 2007 pursuant to E.O. 13382 for supporting Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs; in 2011 pursuant to E.O. 13553 for its role in human rights violations; and in 2012 pursuant to E.O. 13606 for similar reasons. All three executive orders are not among the orders the Obama administration revoked as part of the implementation of the JCPOA (see pp. 3, 37-40 of the implementation day guidance).

Or, per Trump’s modus operandi, he’s full of bluster and thunder, but like any farting cow, it doesn’t mean as much as he’d like you to think. But what about Congress?

The main legislative effort currently under way seems to be the Corker-Cotton plan, titled “Fixing the Iran Deal.” (Of course, the JCPOA can’t actually be unilaterally “fixed.”) The plan includes automatic “snapback” of U.S. sanctions if Iran goes under a one-year “breakout” capability, that is, the ability to manufacture a nuclear weapon. It also contemplates restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program that would ignore the JCPOA’s “sunset” provisions as they apply to U.S. sanctions. The document does not say anything about amending INARA as Trump suggested, nor does it mention any specific elements that would combat “the full spectrum of Iran’s nefarious activities.” It does say that the proposed legislation “would not conflict with the JCPOA upon passage.”

In light of this, it is difficult to say at this point whether the product of this legislative effort, if successful, would necessarily contradict any of the commitments the U.S. undertook under the JCPOA. For example, if the restrictions contemplated by the Corker-Cotton plan would only address specific nuclear weaponization activities and missile development, they would arguably be in line with the JCPOA. As previously mentioned, the JCPOA does not cover ballistic missile development and related sanctions, and Tehran reaffirmed in the agreement “that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons”, in accordance with its obligations under the NPT (see paras. iii-iv of the Preamble and General Provisions section of the JCPOA). In any event, the scope of the Corker-Cotton initiative, at least based on the document Senator Corker’s office released, appears to be more modest than what Trump seemed to suggest in his statement.

I begin to wonder – just kidding, I’ve been thinking this for quite a while – this is all about blunting Obama’s achievements and not about fixing some critical mistake in the JCPOA that only the GOP can see. Much like the panic over the ACA in the area of healthcare, the GOP’s intransigence during the Obama years over working on the Iranian problem has come back to bite them on their ass. In a disturbing trend, they’re returning to their mad skills in marketing to cover up the fact that they don’t appear to have anything at all to offer, even as they dominate the political landscape.

Excuse me: they have bitter partisanship to offer, much to the detriment of the country. It’ll be interesting to see how their marketing holds up. As we saw in the intra-party battle, er, GOP primary, over AG Jeff Session’s old Senate seat, the marketing and tactics have become quite savage. Will they, at some point, be rejected by the voters?

On the conservative side, Washington Beacon Editor Matthew Continetti is confounded at the behavior of the Congressional GOP (from National Review):

What is striking is that, with the exception of Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, none of the Republicans and Democrats who opposed the nuclear deal two years ago with such vehemence have gone out of their way to prepare the ground and make the national security case for the president’s decision.

Now, the Democrats I can understand. They are just playing to type. To say a kind word for Trump’s attempt to improve the deal would violate the secular commandment to resist his very being. The Republican silence, by contrast, is far more maddening.

This is the party that invited Bibi Netanyahu to criticize the deal in an address to a joint session of Congress. This is the party whose 2016 platform reads, “A Republican president will not be bound by” the deal and “We must retain all options in dealing with a situation that gravely threatens our security, our interests, and the survival of our friends.” This is the party that nominated and elected a president who said his “number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.”

Yet the headlines preceding today’s remarks have been almost entirely shaped by the deal’s supporters, by the echo chamber that promoted and distorted the aims and conditions of the agreement to begin with. These were but some of the stories in Thursday’s edition of the Times of Israel: “Barak urges Trump not to decertify Iran nuke deal,” “Netanyahu at odds with security team over Iran deal,” “With Trump set to decertify Iran deal, experts tell Congress to stick to accord,” “Jewish Democrats who opposed Iran nuke deal now urge Trump to keep it.” You have to look hard for a piece detailing Iranian noncompliance, explaining the process of decertification and its relation to the overarching agreement, or quoting defenders of the president and his policy.

Perhaps the GOP in Congress knows what Continetti doesn’t wish to admit: the deal is working, and his objections are insubstantial in the final analysis.

The Editors of National Review also addressed the issue, and there very first paragraph caught my eye:

We have opposed the Iran deal from the beginning. Building on the North Korean model of negotiations, Tehran engaged in a years-long dialogue with the West over the question of whether it would have a nuclear program, all the while developing its nuclear program. The upshot of the agreement was that we accepted Iran’s becoming a threshold nuclear power and showered it with sanctions relief — including, literally, a plane-full of cash — for the privilege.

Since the deal left the rest of Iran’s objectionable and threatening behavior untouched, the regime was free to invest proceeds from its economic windfall into its ballistic-missile program and its agenda of military expansion across the region. The Obama administration hoped that the agreement would moderate Iran’s behavior, but, predictably, it has emboldened it. Giving more resources to a terror state has never reduced terror. Couple these failings with a weak inspection regime and key sunset clauses, and the deal is nearly as historically bad as President Trump says in his characteristically over-the-top style.

Why did it catch my eye? Because it shares with Continetti a certain intellectual dishonest style. Continetti attempts to use the rhetoric of the critics of the GOP in the ‘echo chamber’ remark, yet it’s remarkably clear that many third party observers with relevant expertise felt that the JCPOA is a good deal, including the professionals responsible for our national safety in the military.

The Editors go a little further in the deceit column with their comment about “… a plane-full of cash  …”, which has been thoroughly documented to be Iranian cash that had been given to the United States for weapons systems which we did not deliver; it had been frozen for decades, but finally released per a settlement, as WaPo has documented yet again.

But far more interesting is the sleight of hand they practice in the second paragraph. Once you understand that the monies are unconnected to the JCPOA, it becomes paper-thin. But disregarding that, one must realize that we simply cannot practice the failed Japanese strategy of Kantai Kessen, wherein the World War II Japanese naval strategists attempted to end the war with the United States in one decisive battle. Their fixation on arranging such a battle ultimately led to their failure in the war (among many other factors, such as their lack of resources). This is what the National Review editors are calling for in this paragraph – an agreement that would neuter Iran.

But Iran would never sign such an agreement.

I think that President Obama realized that and prioritized the most important goals of such an agreement and went after the nuclear capability, instead. The JCPOA doesn’t treat missile technology? It also doesn’t forbid sanctions on that account. In point of fact, the JCPOA covers nuclear weapons development, which was its purpose, and by the account of the experts, it’s doing well. That leaves us with the option of pursuing the activities in all those other objectionable areas, now doesn’t it?

But the Editors of National Review don’t want to admit that President Obama’s entire strategy appears to be quite strong, and in fact I suspect is related to the successful strategies which allowed us to survive, and ultimately win, the Cold War.

So the question becomes whether or not Trump is repudiating a strategy with a history of success. Is he fearful that Iran is more stable than the United States? Does he not believe in the ability of democracy to not only defeat the theocracy, but to do it peacefully?

Or is he being manipulated by home-grown theocrats, eager for war?

A resident of Seattle remarks on Gasworks Park:

Look south across Lake Union and you will see a skyline that has dramatically changed in the last five years. The South Lake Union neighborhood is home to Amazon, Google Facebook, and a number of other tech companies.

And so our host mentioned, if memory serves. He also pointed out Amazon’s former headquarters, this big ol’ joint called Pacific Tower.

I tried to find a better picture of it, preferably from the highway, to show how it’s apart from, yet looms over, Seattle, but I was unsuccessful.

Austin Frakt on The Incidental Economist daydreams about an interview with a journalist regarding President Trump’s decision to stop paying Cost Sharing Reductions (CSRs):

A[ustin]: Well, like I said, those who aren’t protected by premium tax credits could pay higher premiums. But there is actually a scenario under which they aren’t worse off, and could be better off. It’s tricky, so I won’t go into it here. Go talk to Charles Gaba. But also keep in mind, since premiums go up, so do the tax credits, which the government pays.

Q: But the government saves money in the end because of not paying cost sharing reductions, right?!

A: No, the premium tax credit increases are larger than the cost sharing reductions savings. The government pays more, so taxpayers are worse off.

And then comes the use of one of my favorite words … gobsmacked. Nicholas Bagley, also on The Incidental Economist, has some interesting background, part of which was also published on Vox:

The Affordable Care Act provides two kinds of subsidies to help low- and middle-income people pay for insurance on the exchanges. Premium subsidies defray the cost of premiums for people making less than four times the poverty level. For those who make less than that, cost-sharing reductions help cover the costs of deductibles and other out-of-pocket spending.

Although they serve similar goals, the two subsidies function in different ways. The premium subsidies are refundable tax credits that go to individuals: They are administered through the tax code. For cost-sharing reductions, the ACA requires insurers to cut their lowest-income customers a break on their out-of-pocket spending. In turn, the statute says the federal government will, reimburse insurers for doing so.

Here’s the catch. The Constitution says that “[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Under the persnickety rules governing appropriations law, it’s not enough for a statute to order the government to make a payment. Congress must adopt a law that specifically appropriates the money to make that payment. And while the Affordable Care Act does link the premium subsidies to an existing appropriation, it’s silent about the cost-sharing reductions.

His conclusion?

If Congress doesn’t act, it’s really the worst of all worlds. To compensate for the loss of cost-sharing payments, insurers will have to raise their premiums for silver plans. Because premium subsidies are keyed to the price of silver plans, the size of the subsidies will increase along with the rise in premiums. And because many more people are eligible for premium subsidies than for cost-sharing reductions, total federal outlays will actually increase.

So taxpayers will have to pay increased premium subsidies at the front end. Then they’ll also pay the cost-sharing money through litigation at the back end. It’s a financial bath, and for no good reason other than sheer political cussedness.

Far as I can tell, the folks at The Incidental Economist have some authoritative heft to them. Perhaps Trump should listen to them rather than his pack of second-rate advisors.

President Trump has periodically complained about the media engaging in chronic lies. For instance, from WaPo:

President Trump, who has demonized the news media as “the enemy of the American People,” alarmed free-speech advocates this week by writing on Twitter that NBC News should be punished by regulators after the organization published a report that he did not like.

So, if we’re really going to demand more truth-telling from everyone involved, let’s have President Trump be a real leader and show us the way.

President Trump, it’s time for you to change your name to better reflect the reality of all the verified lies you’ve told everyday, not to mention the rank incompetency and amateurism.

I look forward to the ceremony where you assume the new name of

Donald J. Trump-Nixon.

I realize former President Nixon might be somewhat insulted, as he at least showed some competency in office, but he’s not around to protest, so I am emboldened to entreat you to embrace honesty and take on this name.

President Trump-Nixon, stand forth and be proud.

We were fortunate that our visit to Seattle landed on a string of sunny days, and so Ron, our host, took us to a place called Gas Works Park, a former gasification plant. Now a rest and recreation area, the shell of the former supplier of gas for lighting remains. Too bad I my sense of balance was still askew after the train ride.

The surrounding hills are also included in this little park. I avoided taking pictures of people, but they were there.

I nearly caught this flock of geese a little earlier in their landing pattern. Obviously, this is a multi-client park.

Here, my Arts Editor approaches one of the dilapidated structures for artistic communion.

And here we look up the communion pipes. Open wide!

He’s the cosmeticist. The mad cosmeticist.

If I’m going to review Blade Runner 2049 (2017), then I’d better review its predecessor, Blade Runner (1982). The problem with reviewing Blade Runner is unusual – there’s a veritable cornucopia of material that can be discussed, from marvelous (especially for the time) dystopic vistas of the city of Los Angeles, through a set of characters who fit in well with the background of a world losing its best and brightest to the off-world colonies, to questions of whether specific characters represent mythic entities (I’ve been toying with the idea that Gaff represents Fate), to a well thought out plot that concentrates on a simple question, one which has occasionally bothered myself, as long time readers know.

And that is the question of the status of artificially created sentient creatures.

The Tyrell Corporation is responsible for the creation of replicants, “meat robots” who are created fully grown and appear to be humans. However, they are physically more powerful than their creators, and their training can range from agricultural skills to armed conflict. When the scientists realize that the emotional nature of their creations become unpredictable after several years of existence, resulting in malfunctions such as mutiny, they install a self-destruct mechanism which activates after four years. The “units” drop dead.

Is this the soft sell or the hard sell?

They have been banned from Earth, regardless of the self-destruct; Blade Runners are Earth cops specialized in hunting and killing retiring illegal replicants. Now four replicants have arrived from off-world, all military models, and former Blade Runner Rick Deckard is forcibly recruited back into the police force to find and retire them. He left the force because the job bothered him, but in his investigations he discovers a new innovation by Tyrell Corp – the ability to insert memories into replicants such that the replicants do not realize their very nature.

This brings up questions of integrity, doesn’t it?

Blade Runner posits the creation of replicants as human beings with no timeline, no period of growing up, burdened with a short life time – and the same human lust for life, family, and belonging that we all have. Then it plays out the consequences, including an ending where Deckard could have easily been killed, but is spared by the last of the replicants, who realizes that his love of life also means that it shouldn’t be taken witlessly. The question is implicit in the material: does the ability to create sentient entities imply the ability to force order on those sentient entities’ lives?

For all the imaginative special effects, wonderfully realized backgrounds, and characters that integrate seamlessly into this future Los Angeles, the thematic material is the driver of this story, the reason for Deckard’s quiet revolt against the social order, and perhaps even the background reason that this future is so dystopic. In my mind, it triumphs over the occasional rough edge and the one or two odd scenes (I watched my copy of the Director’s Cut).

Strongly Recommended.

Pyroclastic flow:

A pyroclastic flow (also known scientifically as a pyroclastic density current^[1]) is a fast-moving current of hot gas and volcanic matter (collectively known as tephra), which reaches speeds moving away from a volcano of up to 700 km/h (450 mph).^[2] The gases can reach temperatures of about 1,000 °C (1,830 °F). Pyroclastic flows normally touch the ground and hurtle downhill, or spread laterally under gravity. Their speed depends upon the density of the current, the volcanic output rate, and the gradient of the slope. They are a common and devastating result of certain explosive eruptions. [Wikipedia]

I’ve read this phrase so many times, and yet have never been entirely clear on its meaning. Noted in “Indonesia’s Agung Raised to Highest Alert for Eruption,” Erik Klemetti, Rocky Planet:

The 1963 eruption of Agung was big. It ranked as a VEI 5, which is on the same scale as the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens. The volcano has a history of eruptions of this scale, with another VEI 5 eruption that produced pyroclastic flows, lots of ash fall and some lava flows in 1843. The 1963 eruption also emitted lots of sulfur dioxide and chlorine into the atmosphere, which caused a brief global cooling over the next year.

Remember the ozone hole? Perhaps my reader is too young. Back in the 70s, the ozone which protects the Earth from dangerous solar UV radiation began developing a hole, caused, it was eventually discovered, by CFCs. Through both private and public efforts, the Montreal Protocol was promulgated to reduce the use of CFCs, and now  that hole is shrinking; I briefly discussed this with one of the climate scientists involved and reported it here.

Now Spaceweather.com is reporting a new threat to the ozone:

An international team of researchers led by David Oram of the University of East Anglia has found an unexpected, growing danger to the ozone layer from substances not regulated by the treaty.

The danger comes from a class of chemicals known as “chlorocarbons.” Dichloromethane is an example. It is used in paint stripping, agricultural fumigation, and the production of pharmaceuticals. Over the past decade dichloromethane became approximately 60% more abundant. “This was a major surprise to the scientific community and we were keen to discover the cause of this sudden increase,” says Oram.

Developing economies in East Asia appear to be the source. “Our estimates suggest that China may be responsible for around 50-60% of current global emissions [of dichloromethane], with other Asian countries, including India, likely to be significant emitters as well,” says Oram.

More information on Spaceweather.com, including nuggets on the strange weather patterns in the Far East which may be responsible for moving these chemicals, formerly considered too short-lived to be harmful, into the upper atmosphere.

In a way, it’s a lesson in how there is always something new to learn in science.

While my Arts Editor was reading, a reading light played games with us. That first one’s fairly mellow:

This second one features a creature taken by surprise.

And here’s a ghostly E.T.