Author: Richard L. Marrash

Chaos, Cringe, and Stay Tuned

/ Richard L. Marrash / 2 Comments

Remove an illegitimate ruler, a ruthless dictator, from power in a neighboring sovereign country. No easy task, but it was carried out with extraordinary skill and professionalism by United States military personnel–a surgical extraction–without the loss of a single American life, and with minimal damage to citizens of the target country, Venezuela. The action has been praised by several regional governments, and by citizens and supporters of the Opposition party that had won election in 2024, but had been denied the right to govern by the ruling regime. Ousted by a loss in the election, but maintained in power by force, Nicholas Maduro, was ruling Venezuela illegitimately. That criminal status was underscored by a multimillion-dollar reward for his capture by the first Trump Administration, followed by the Biden Administration, and continued under Trump 2.0.

The winner of the 2024 election and subsequent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Maria Corina Machado, pursued by the usurper regime, had to flee the country, as did many of her compatriots. Previous contacts with the Trump Administration had indicated that the latter would welcome her return to assume her rightful position as the elected head of state. But following the successful operation that resulted in the capture and removal of Maduro, it appears that the Trump Administration has lost interest in Machado and the Venezuelan opposition movement. Rather, it has declared that it would collaborate with the government of Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, “if she does the right thing.” According to President Trump, the popular, democratic, election-winning Ms. Machado will no longer do. “She doesn’t have the support within, or the respect within, the country. She’s a very nice woman, but she doesn’t have the respect.”

Clearly, reestablishing democracy and legitimate governance is not a priority of this administration. That should come as no surprise. The President has always been a transactional player. The deal is what matters to him, and the deal in Venezuela is oil. The former dictator, Hugo Chavez, had nationalized the country’s oil industry and expropriated the property of U. S. oil companies. The latter, in fact, had created Venezuela’s oil sector. And now, according to Trump, “we will run Venezuela.” That means working with the same illegitimate regime that has been ruling the country under Nicholas Maduro.

So much for Trump’s “America First” policy and his repeated campaign promises to stay out of foreign entanglements, especially military actions to effect regime change. We are now going to “run Venezuela”, and while we’re at it, we might consider going after Columbia, Ecuador, Paraguay, and how about this: taking possession of Greenland. Taking Greenland! Property of the Kingdom of Denmark, our NATO ally. Good Lord! Destroy NATO in one fell swoop, and with it the longest stretch of global stability–eighty years of keeping the peace since the end of World War Two. Trump’s policy advisor, deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, the likely influence behind these ideas, announces the intention to use our power to rule the Western Hemisphere, including control of the Arctic approaches by grabbing Greenland. Such naked imperialism would simply mean that we are handing China and Russia the playbook so they can emulate us in their own zones of influence. That’s not a wise strategy, nor is it intelligent foreign policy trade-craft. “O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts, And men have lost their reason.”

Goodness, gracious, I thought Trump told us that we would look after our own country’s needs and avoid dangerous adventurism abroad. I guess the promises during the election campaign were meant only as suggestions to gain the approval of the America First crowd. The MAGA spin doctors have been working overtime to normalize this issue. Other issues like the turmoil in our domestic sphere have gotten their own special pro-Administration interpretation.

To be fair, there is a good case to be made for removing Maduro and obtaining compensation for the looting of American oil resources. The goal is legitimate; the means by which it was achieved might not be. The U. S. launching of a military operation against a South American neighbor will be challenged. International law has to be respected even though Venezuela’s criminal regime has pursued several provocative policies including the courting of our powerful global adversaries, providing them oil as well as a strategic outpost right on America’s doorstep. There are compelling reasons for acting against the Venezuelan dictatorship, especially being so close to our shores. Precedent goes back to the Monroe Doctrine (with a cute play on words giving us the Donroe Doctrine). But all the same, the Administration has engaged in saying one thing, then doing the opposite. They are not the first to spin their actions, but they have taken that conduct to a whole new level.

The first full year of the Second Trump Administration has played out in ways that bedevil any rational attempt to explain policy. Policy? Policies? What policies? Certainly nothing coherent or enhanced by objectivity and vision for the long-term health of the nation. The only throughline is Donald Trump’s whim at any given moment. The deal maker wants this or that when he wants it. And the Constitution, the law, the Judiciary, the Congress, and anyone who disagrees with him be damned.

The Trump Administration’s balance sheet is mixed. Some achievements have been successful: closing the porous southern border, for example. But ICE operations to arrest and deport illegal immigrants have been excessively aggressive, and in too many instances have targeted peaceful working residents, who pose no threat to the community, or even American citizens. This is still supposed to be America, the land that most of our ancestors came to as immigrants. Yes, over the past few decades, too many have come illegally. But they are illegal, not inhuman. There is no reason to harass them unmercifully or to deny them due process of law. The law and the Constitution seem to have little effect on Trump and company. No one objects to removal of criminal offenders and “the worst of the worst,” but what we have seen does no credit to the government or to those who turn a blind eye to injustice. Moreover, the economy will not benefit from the loss of so many of those who have been working in the unpleasant jobs that very few other Americans will accept.

Economists warned the government about levying tariffs across the board. Some tariffs had to be walked back right away because of the economic blowback, and others have caused problems already, such as in the agriculture and construction sectors. More are going to feel the squeeze in the future. Most expert opinion declared the tariff policy a bad idea, even if some surgically targeted tariffs could be useful when applied to support specific foreign policy objectives. Well-thought-out policy, however, is not a regular characteristic of this Administration.

Not simply abroad, but also at home, the President has deployed the military to make America great again. He has sent National Guard troops into American cities. He claims that crime is out of control in cities led by Democratic politicians, a claim in defiance of crime statistics for most of those areas–most report that crime rates are down from previous years. But Trump asserts that the Guard is there to support local law enforcement. In most cases, the latter have declared that they have no need of National Guard assistance. No matter. Trump says that urban crime where Democrats are in power requires a military response.

During the 2024 election campaign, Trump and his supporters insisted that they would release all of the Jeffrey Epstein files. That case, they claimed, had failed to disclose all of the malefactors and their wicked deeds. Yet that presumably urgent legal matter has since gone silent, as the Department of Justice and the Administration apparently have decided against fulfilling their campaign slogans. You can draw your own conclusions.

Support Trump, if you choose, that is your right. Disagree with him, if you choose, that is your right, too. Although, if you disagree, you should not, as an American citizen, have to face slander and punishment. But in these unbelievably perverse times, a United States Senator–retired Navy veteran who flew numerous combat missions in the Persian Gulf wars, and later a renowned astronaut–has been threatened with recall to active duty for the purpose of being tried by court martial. For what? For reminding the military that they have a duty to refuse to obey an illegal order. Everyone currently serving and who has served in the military understands that duty. The current Secretary of Defense (or of War, if you so choose) emphatically stated the very same thing on television only a few short years ago. But Secretary Pete Hegseth, a Republican, chooses to attack Senator Mark Kelly, a Democrat, for making the same point. He threatens him with court martial to reduce him in rank and to reduce his retirement compensation. As an American, a politically Independent voter, and a veteran myself, I consider this an outrage–a cowardly play by a petty man so lacking in fitness for the position he holds that he has made the once-venerable Pentagon into a laughing stock. Virtually no one on the Republican side in Congress has had the courage to stand up even for the sake of their institution, the First Branch of Government, to denounce such despicable overreach. Mark Kelly is a man of honor and integrity, whose long years of service to this nation have exemplified the courage and character that we all respect. The same cannot be said of his detractors.

But vindictive legal action against political opponents is a hallmark of the Trump Administration. And it is carried out by sycophants who lack integrity, honor, and character. Such unsavory people can be found in both parties, certainly, but this Administration revels in retribution, carries it out with relish, and proudly brags about it.

A few days ago we passed the fifth anniversary of the insurrection of January 6, 2021, a violent attempt to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 election. When he took office in 2025, Donald Trump pardoned nearly all of the participants, including the most violent ones. A textbook case of criminal behavior and illegality, yet Pete Hegseth wants to charge Senator Mark Kelly with sedition for reiterating what Hegseth himself said–that the military must refuse illegal orders. Remember that at the Nuremberg Trials, Nazi military leaders and subordinates sought to excuse their murderous actions by claiming that they were “only following orders.” In the U. S. military, such a claim is no defense for carrying out illegal or criminal orders. I have no doubt Hegseth will attempt to spin the context to somehow arrive at something resembling a charge. Unless the JAG officers at the Pentagon are complete idiots, such a charge and any other attempt to discredit and demote Mark Kelly should be dismissed. But given the degree of hypocrisy at the highest levels of our government today, I wouldn’t put it past them to get creative in finding some way to dishonor a true American hero. In the long run, it doesn’t matter. The truth is there for anyone to observe. I salute retired Navy Captain Mark Kelly, currently United States Senator from Arizona, and offer him my profound respect.

The United States of America will survive even an immoral, self-serving, narcissistic despot and his pitiful brood of ass-kissing tools as well as his diehard worshipers. The real world is changing rapidly, and our country requires rational, well-educated and creative innovators to meet the challenges ahead. I believe that brilliant young Americans of all backgrounds will rally to the cause of their nation in the fierce global competition that has arisen. America’s future progress demands flexibility, adroit problem-solving, and scientific thinkers. Narrow minds and rigid ideologues need not apply.

Tighten your seat belts, America, and let’s get started. Welcome to 2026!

Remember Pearl Harbor

/ Richard L. Marrash / Leave a comment

They are nearly gone, the brave men and women of our armed forces who endured that terrible attack on our naval installation at Pearl Harbor in the Hawaiian Islands on Sunday the 7th of December 1941. A few survivors still attend the annual memorial ceremony on the exposed bridge of the sunken battleship Arizona, but it won’t be very long before they are all gone–as will be the case with all of those who served in the Second World War. My family members who served during that war are gone now, except for my uncle, Sam Sadie, United States Marine Corps 1943 -1946. My uncle Sam will celebrate his100th birthday two weeks from today, on 22 December. He’s a little frail now, needs help most of the day, but his mind is sound. He loves his favorite baseball team, the New York Yankees, watches as many games as he can, and still makes wisecracks when something clever strikes him. And uncle Sam remembers December 7, 1941. He remembers Pearl Harbor.

Veterans Day 2025

/ Richard L. Marrash / 2 Comments

A smart, snappy salute to all who served in our Armed Forces. Today belongs to you.

You have earned the respect and gratitude of all of your countrymen. And you have my personal and unreserved respect. I am glad to have been counted among you although I can honestly say that my own service during the Cold War and into the Vietnam Era was largely unremarkable. I am grateful for all those great GIs who served before my time (WWI, WWII, Korea) and for those superb warriors who came after me (Afghanistan, Iraq, and across the Middle East). I include all of you who have served in many other locations from Europe to the Far East, taking on thankless and often hazardous duties. We honor you.

You have kept us safe, and made the world a better place despite global political controversies, domestic disputes and flawed foreign policies, and at times even in the face of fickle and sometimes grudging support from some of your own countrymen. You stood fast, and stayed true to your oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” We are better for it as a nation, and we owe that to you.

God bless all of you, Veterans, and God bless the United States of America.

With the highest esteem,

SP5 Richard L. Marrash, United States Army, 1961 – 1965

George Washington’s Warnings

/ Richard L. Marrash / Leave a comment

President George Washington warned in his 1796 Farewell Address about dangers that lay ahead for the US – warnings that seem startlingly contemporary and relevant 229 years later. I have republished below the article by Robert A. Strong, which first appeared in THE CONVERSATION, September 8, 2025 8:00am EDT.

(Please note: There are live links to many of the documents and issues mentioned in the article. Unfortunately, I could not get the hyperlinks to show in color, but if you hover your cursor over the point that interests you, it will show that the link is live.)

George Washington’s worries are coming true

President George Washington warned in his farewell address about partisanship, sectionalism, excessive public debt, ambitious leaders and a poorly informed public. Mike Rosiana/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Robert A. Strong, University of Virginia

The United States will celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the country’s founding document, in 2026. Twenty years later, America will celebrate the 250th anniversary of President George Washington’s Farewell Address, which was published on Sept. 19, 1796.

The two documents are the bookends of the American Revolution. That revolution began with the inspirational language of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote much of the Declaration of Independence; it ended with somber warnings from Washington, the nation’s first president.

After chairing the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and serving eight years as president, Washington announced in a newspaper essay that he would not seek another term and would return to his home in Mount Vernon. The essay was later known as the “Farewell Address.”

Washington began his essay by observing that “choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene” while “patriotism does not forbid it.” The new nation would be fine without his continued service.

But Washington’s confidence in the general health of the union was tempered by his worries about dangers that lay ahead – worries that seem startlingly contemporary and relevant 229 years later.

A yellowed newspaper page from 1796 that contains George Washington's Farewell Address.
George Washington’s Farewell Address printed in the Virginia Herald with this introduction: ‘The importance of the following Address has induced us to lay it before our Readers; as early as possible, for their gratification.’ Courtesy of The Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association, CC BY

Focus on the domestic

Washington’s Farewell Address is famous for the admonitions “to steer clear of permanent alliances” and to resist the temptation to “entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition.”

Important as those warnings are, they are not the main topic of Washington’s message.

During the four decades that I have taught the Farewell Address in classes on American government, I have urged my students to set aside the familiar issues of foreign policy and isolationism and to read the address for what it says about the domestic challenges confronting America.

Those challenges included partisanship, parochialism, excessive public debt, ambitious leaders who could come to power playing off our differences, and a poorly informed public who might sacrifice their own liberties to find relief from divisive politics.

Washington’s address lacks Jefferson’s idealism about equality and inalienable rights. Instead, it offers the realistic assessment that Americans are sometimes foolish and make costly political mistakes.

Rule by ‘ambitious, and unprincipled men’

Partisanship is the primary problem for the American republic, according to Washington.

“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration,” he wrote. Partisanship “agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection” and can open “the door to foreign influence and corruption.”

Though political parties, Washington observes, “may now and then answer popular ends,” they can also become “potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

Washington’s fear that partisanship could lead to destruction of the Constitution and to the rule of “ambitious, and unprincipled men” was so important to him that he felt compelled to repeat the warning more than once in the Farewell Address.

A man in old-fashioned clothing, standing on a pedestal surrounded by elegant sculptures and images.
Portrait of George Washington standing on a pedestal holding his Farewell Address in his right hand, 1798. From the New York Public Library, photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images

Politicians’ ‘elevation on the ruins of public liberty’

The second time Washington takes it up, he says that “the disorders and miseries” of partisanship may “gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual.”

Sooner or later, he writes, “the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.”

So why not outlaw parties and rein in the dangers of partisanship?

Washington observes that this is not possible. The spirit of party “is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind.”

Americans naturally collect themselves into groups, factions, interests and parties because that’s what human beings do. It’s easier to be connected to local communities, states or regions of the country than to a large and diverse nation; even though that large and diverse nation is, by Washington’s assessment, essential to the security and success of all.

The central problem in American politics is not a matter of devious leaders, foreign intrigue or sectional rivalries — things that will always exist.

The problem, Washington warned, lies with the people.

Excesses of partisanship

By their nature, people divide themselves into groups and then, if not careful, find those divisions used and abused by individual leaders, foreign interests and “artful and enterprising” minorities.

Political parties are dangerous, but can’t be eliminated. According to some people, Washington observes, the competition between parties might serve as a check on the powers of government.

“Within certain limits,” Washington acknowledges, “this is probably true.” But even if the battles between political parties sometimes have a useful purpose, Washington worried about the excesses of partisanship.

Partisanship is like “a fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest instead of warming it should consume.”

Where is America today? Warmed by the fires of partisanship or consumed by the bursting of flames? George Washington suggested that provocative question more than two centuries ago on Sept. 19, 1796. It’s still worth asking.

Robert A. Strong, Emeritus Professor of Politics, Washington and Lee University; Senior Fellow, Miller Center, University of Virginia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

About The Conversation

We’re a nonprofit news organization dedicated to bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. We can give away our articles thanks to the help of foundations, universities and readers like you.

Voodoo Medicine

/ Richard L. Marrash / Leave a comment

I’m making a very brief post today. I simply want to bring to your attention the attached essay by Dannagal Young published in the Opinion section of today’s edition of the New York Times. The writer recounts her personal experience as someone who out of desperation tried everything to cure the pernicious brain cancer that afflicted her husband, including misguided remedies. The latter were offered by those dismissive of scientific medicine and, not surprisingly, were totally ineffective. I suppose Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s MAHA initiatives to disparage vaccine therapies and defund important NIH and CDC research are driving or encouraging the public’s return to a time when superstitious practices were accepted ways to cure disease. To quote the writer:

“I see what MAHA is offering. It’s not really about making America healthy. It’s about giving people the illusion of agency in a complicated and scary world.“

Take the time to read the essay; it’s worth it, if only to provide a moment to pause and think about what is happening to our public understanding of science and its methodology.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/20/opinion/cancer-science-maha-grief.html?unlocked_article_code=1.QU8.N-VT.PY3uxX7uI3cX&smid=url-share

This article is a cautionary tale, sorely needed today. It recalls to my mind a similar grasping for a magic cure for cancer back in the 1970s and ‘80s when people began touting treatment with Laetrile (some substance found in apricot or peach pits, if I remember correctly.) When it was debunked here in the USA, some people went out of country and began visiting a variety of charlatans in Mexico, who claimed they could cure cancer… and cheaply! No cure ever took place by using Laetrile, but the deaths of the patients did, i. e. cancer doesn’t give a sorcerer’s damn about religious rituals or conspiracy theories, it just keeps rolling along. Only continuous scientific and medical research—yes, some of it funded by Big Pharma (for those “in-a-perfect-world” types who feel they absolutely must point that out) but most of it depending on government funding—will solve the incredibly complex puzzles of the human body. Not by saying, “Abra Cadabra” or putting the tail of a newt under the patient’s pillow, but by slow, methodical application of scientific method. That the people of this nation appear to be sliding back into some form of pre-modern superstition (where science and medicine are reviled while Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his anti-science allies are allowed to destroy the bastions of the most advanced medical research on this planet) shows, to an astonishing degree, the colossal, cataclysmic ignorance in our public discourse and its elevation as our national standard for modern healthcare.

Operation Overlord-Epilogue

/ Richard L. Marrash / Leave a comment

For those who have previously read and commented on my D-Day posts, I offer my somber greeting on this annual memorial to the patriotic men and women of the “Greatest Generation”, those who served across the world in our armed forces as well as the civilians at home who stepped up to manufacture the war machines necessary for victory in World War Two. America was a nation united, not by ethnicity, religion, or political affiliation, but rather by a public culture of genuine belief in the worth and dignity of every human being and the liberal values embodied in our Constitution, laws, and social norms. And they possessed the willingness to make any sacrifice to preserve those values. For that, they willingly went abroad to fight and die to deter and defeat the tyrannical plague of Nazism and fascism that had spread across Europe and the Far East, and threatened to engulf the entire world in a vicious and racist authoritarian blight, cynically punishing freedom of thought and expression and individual liberty unhampered by any effective opposition. The latter had been eliminated through the mechanisms of propaganda based on dissemination and continuous repetition of lies, half-truths, disinformation, dehumanization of opponents, along with the weaponizing of social institutions: the churches, the judiciary, schools and universities, corporations, and the media. The goal of those measures is to create a public perception that sees what the authoritarian regime wants the public to see, substituting that false perception in the place of reality. And only that manufactured perception–no matter how bizarre or contrary to fact–is hailed as truth and truly patriotic. Anyone in opposition–no matter how soundly developed and grounded in fact their position–is deemed an enemy of the people. No criticism of the regime or the Fuehrer, the supreme leader, can be tolerated. By definition, what the leader deems good is good for the state. The leader is the state.

That is what the Greatest Generation fought to eliminate from the world: the tyranny of authoritarian government, the loss of liberty and freedom of expression, the assault on human dignity. That’s what the Founders worried about, by the way, and thought about long and hard, applying the grim lessons of European history to their deliberations. They devised a Constitution with safeguards against the unrestricted accumulation of power in the hands of an unaccountable government. They gave us a democratic republic, but they cautioned us to take care lest we lose it (Ben Franklin, 1787).

A true democracy can tolerate in its midst diversity of opinion and even that which it finds offensive. That’s what freedom of speech and assembly means. What a true democracy cannot tolerate is the insidious transformation of constitutional government and the rule of law into irrelevancies to be ignored or weapons to be deployed against critics.

Do you ever wonder if the Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves?

I won’t belabor the point any more. Memorial Day was one week ago, a day when we remembered the fallen from all of our wars. Today remember the generation of World War Two, who fought the ugly blight of totalitarianism and hateful racist policies that saw the murder of countless innocent people across Europe and Asia.

Remember the heroism of D-Day, 6 June 1944, the beginning of the end of the Second World War.

If interested, read my previous D-Day posts for other details.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

IN MEMORIAM (uncles, father-in-law, father):

George Marrash, US Army, WWII, DOW France, 1944

Tony Marrash, US Army, WWII

Sam Sadie, US Marine Corps, WWII

Louis Gramesty, US Army, 8th Air Force, WWII

Elias T. Marrash, Auto-Ordnance Co., Thompson Submachine Guns, WWII

Memorial Day 2025

/ Richard L. Marrash / 2 Comments

Enough longwinded speeches. Enough artificial emotions. Enough manufactured poignant metaphors.

REMEMBER THE FALLEN

Remember why the fell, in what cause: Freedom from political oppression, from religious fanaticism, and from vicious and diabolical prejudice.

In Europe: They fought fascism, and the fascist dictators who were masters of “Big Lies” and deadly actions that turned most of Europe into killing fields for the sacrifice of the innocent to the false idol of the master race and other specious and self-serving myths.

In Asia: They fought to resist the falling dominoes of countries threatened by communist dictatorships and savage coercion into collective action on behalf of the state and the “people.”

In the Middle East: They fought mindless, violent fanaticism that knows no bounds, having defined the will of Providence as its exclusive possession and determined to bring all the world under its rigid theocratic heel.

They fought and died. They held back the tide of evils that continue to threaten us today. Indeed, those evils are gaining strength and spreading their poisonous atmosphere in every direction. The sacrifices of our fallen brothers and sisters in over a century of conflicts cry out to us to keep faith with them. Do not stay silent in the face of evil: lies, deceit, wanton aggression, and lawlessness.

REMEMBER THE FALLEN … AND IN WHAT CAUSE THEY FELL

Habemus Papam

/ Richard L. Marrash / 2 Comments

That announcement provides an easy and convenient verbal prop for making a post. We have a Pope! With the news of the election of Pope Leo XIV as successor to the late Pope Francis I, we are treated to a novel turn of events. It happened quickly, between the first vote in the evening and another the next morning. White smoke in less than twenty-four hours! A surprise to all, baffling even the official Catholic punditry that closely followed and commented on the candidates among the Cardinals gathered in Conclave at the Vatican to elect one of their own to become the Supreme Pontiff. Robert Francis Prevost, American, born in Chicago, and considered a long shot for the papal throne, defied most of the predictions and stupefied his American friends and fellow clergy from his university and seminary days. Might this qualify as a black swan event?

Rather than finding his American heritage a hinderance, his fellow cardinals recognized his profound pastoral understanding of the global mission of the Church as an Augustinian missionary priest who had spent decades serving poor communities in remote areas of Peru. Although he grew up in Chicago, Illinois, Robert Cardinal Prevost spent almost two-thirds of his life serving the Catholic Church internationally, not only as bishop in Peru, but also in Rome when Pope Francis I appointed him Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops and President of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America. His missionary experience in Peru made him particularly attuned to issues of social justice, poverty, and inclusion—aligning him with Pope Francis’s priorities for reaching out to poor and marginalized communities. Colleagues point to his years as an Augustinian friar that emphasize his humility, collegiality, and theological reflection. So although he was raised an American (with dual citizenship since he became a Peruvian citizen in 2015), Pope Leo XIV clearly represents the global commitment of the Church and the sharp focus on social justice promoted by his papal namesake, Pope Leo XIII.

When he emerged from behind the curtains and stepped forward on the loggia to greet the throngs of Catholic (and, of course, many non-Catholic) well-wishers, he spoke in Italian: La Pace Sia Con Tutti Voi! “Peace be with all of you!”

He went on to stress unity, dialogue, and missionary evangelization, and he invoked the blessing of his predecessor, Pope Francis. “This is the peace of the Risen Christ: a disarmed peace, a disarming peace, humble and persevering, it comes from God, God who loves us all unconditionally.” His speech reflected themes of humility, perseverance, and God’s unconditional love. Love … isn’t that an idea that we overlook these days? Don’t we tend to find it hard to love those that are not just like us? Don’t we prefer to denounce them for their difference, to eject them from our presence? We can’t abide their poverty, their otherness, and so we ignore their human need for compassion, dignity, and justice. Despite all that we profess about our integrity, our ethics, our compassionate society, we thrust them away from us and treat them as human rubbish. I say this in defense of humanity, not criminality. The latter must be dealt with by the laws that deal with crimes and criminals, and apply the appropriate consequences. But the former calls for humane treatment, fairness, and compassion, the basic traits of any civilized society that claims to value every human person as a child of God.

We should all take time to reflect on the inaugural message spoken by Pope Leo XIV, our American compatriot, and commit to expunging hatred and division from our hearts, to promoting mercy and the love of God for all of his creatures. You don’t have to be Catholic to do this. I’m not. And as His Holiness begins his pontificate, let us join him in saying: La Pace Sia Con Voi! Pax Vobiscum! Peace Be With You!

Corruptio Optimi Pessima, Veritas Autem Vos Liberabit

/ Richard L. Marrash / 1 Comment

I don’t know how to begin, or what to say. All of us have seen the news. An incredible breach of operational security……by those charged with safeguarding the nation and its vital interests! What can you say or do? Those placed in charge have failed in the most elementary aspect of professional tradecraft–securing classified information (whether or not the word CLASSIFIED appears on the document or has been formally stated). Highly sensitive, mission critical information must be protected according to the required procedures and safeguards. Those are not suggestions. It is the law. If you don’t know that, and if you argue that “I didn’t see any classification notice” on the information or “no one mentioned that information was classified,” you do not belong anywhere close to a responsible position in the intelligence community. This security failure would never be tolerated in a new, junior member of the IC. It is catastrophic when it appears at the highest levels and among several of the heads of the most sensitive agencies.

These leaders of the most important agencies of our government used a marginally secure system, Signal, for a top-level discussion of classified information and even brought in a total outsider–a journalist–and were totally unaware of his presence on the discussion thread, while they went ahead and dumped restricted intelligence into the discourse, which should have been held in a SCIF (sensitive compartmentalized information facility). All while preparing to send U. S. pilots into enemy territory to conduct a dangerous operation.

As expected, the President has played down the breach, and, true to form, has attacked The Atlantic journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg, incredibly, for being responsible for having been placed on the discussion thread. He was placed there by Mike Walz, President Trump’s national security advisor. The Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, denounced Goldberg, The Atlantic, and the media and claimed that he did not disclose classified information. The other members present on the Signal discussion dodged any responsibility during their testimonies before the Senate subcommittee that began looking into the security breach. Except for a few courageous souls willing to face the Trumpian/MAGA attack machine, most Senate and Congressional Republicans have remained mute on the seriousness of the incident.

So while our current Government denounces Canada, the EU, NATO, Ukraine, and cozies up to Russia and its wannabe Tsar Vladimir Putin, the gates of our security system are thrown open. Russian, Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian hackers, among others, will hardly need to break into the system to seize our most sensitive information. They can just get a Signal account and wait for the clueless amateurs to simply leave lying around what these adversaries are seeking!

It goes without saying that these lightweights should never have been confirmed by the Senate for positions of such grave responsibility. Too late now, but at a minimum, Walz and Hegseth should resign. The others should receive at least official reprimands. But none of that will happen. The administration has continued to denounce Goldberg and the media in general for concocting a “hoax”, Mr. Trump’s favorite tactic when his actions or policies are criticized. It is the classic play of the demagogue: deny, deflect, distract. Instead of attacking him, the government should be praising the fact that Jeffrey Goldberg pulled himself offline once he understood that he was privy to a sensitive operational discussion conducted by top U. S. officials! At first, he thought it was a sham invitation to the group, but when the attack was ultimately reported in the news, Goldberg realized that somehow he had been included in a highly sensitive Signal thread–a discussion where operational details were revealed that could have forewarned our adversaries and endangered the lives of the U. S. servicemen who were carrying out the attack. We were very lucky this time.

This is not the United States of America that I recognize. Like many others of my generation, and those before and since, I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States both in military service and again in federal service in the intelligence community. I have never retracted my commitment to that oath either as military or civilian. I am bound by it until the day I die. I am certain that nearly all of my fellow Americans who have served their country feel the same way. But I am outraged and distressed by the reluctance of the White House and the Congress to demand complete accountability and by the irresponsibility of officials serving at the highest levels of our government. We dodged a bullet this time, but it must not happen again.

Whatever your political feelings, you should feel ashamed that we have come to this state of affairs. As Americans, it appears that we cannot even count on our leaders to protect our national interests. Their duty to do so is enjoined by their sworn oaths to the Constitution. To avoid any future disaster due to reckless, avoidable breakdowns in security, we must insist on complete transparency in getting to the bottom of this thoughtless blunder. Instead, we are being subjected to denial and deflection and the whining excuses of those who have shown us clearly that they possess neither the character nor the professional qualifications for the high offices they hold. They have demonstrated their woeful incompetence to the whole world. It is inexcusable. May God save the United States of America.

Lieb Vaterland Magst Ruhig Sein

/ Richard L. Marrash / Leave a comment

I begin this post with an email exchange between Linda, and myself. Linda is my longtime friend from our University of Michigan days and a frequent email correspondent :

Read about the influencer behind the Tech Bro turn to the Right politically. I’d only recently heard of this man.  Take a look. 

Linda

“The Dubious History of America’s Most Famous Monarchist,” by Jamelle Bouie, The New York Times, Jan. 22, 20251

In a recent article describing the country’s progressive inclination toward oligarchy, I did read a reference to someone touting monarchy for the United States. Thanks for sharing this NYT article with me, Linda, it makes clear who that “American monarchist” is and what he is about. 

The article Linda shared with me got me to thinking about some troubling current events, and I jotted down my thoughts as follows.

For my own part, the greatest threat to our nation is illustrated by the pardoning of the entire roster of January 6 insurrectionists. Many duly convicted of violent sedition and insurrection. This smug bunch and their affiliated anti-government militias, and similar groups and individuals whether organized or simply like-minded, have now become an unofficial, private army for Trump to call on whenever he feels the need. Remember his directions to the Proud Boys, “stand down and stand by.” He has empowered them to act beyond the reach of legal consequences by showing his readiness to pardon them–so, then: “Stand by,” America, for any future actions he will decide to use them for. Exaggeration? I think not. He referred to them as “patriots,” “political prisoners,” and “hostages.” But they are criminals, unquestionably, observed in their violent actions and words on TV screens all over the world, and subsequently convicted according to law. Yet, the President is even now indicating he will invite some of them to the White House!

In the 1930s, while he was tightening his hold on political power in Germany, Adolf Hitler had his Sturmabteilung (SA), popularly known as the Brown Shirts, thugs wearing swastikas, who went around harassing and beating those who opposed him and his Nazi party. We have just experienced the first step in that direction.2 Count on the Trump Administration to push forward with its agenda heedless of constitutional and institutional norms. The Constitution and the rule of law apparently need not apply to Trump and his coterie of sycophants.

That Trump has a taste for the use of naked force to achieve his ends comes as no surprise. He is deploying thousands of active-duty military to the southern border and launching mass deportations of illegal immigrants. No serious person disputes that both ineffective control of the border and the broken immigration system have been for decades thorny, unresolved problems that both political parties failed to address. But at least a preliminary attempt was offered in the bipartisan immigration bill that Trump scuttled lest it interfere with his 2024 election campaign. Conservative Republicans as well as Democrats had worked on the bill together and believed its passage would have been a step forward and provided something to continue to build on. Trump, on the contrary, prefers to use brute force to make that happen. While only a couple of days in office, already he is aiming his ire and vindictiveness at the institutions of government and the employees of agencies that have aroused his resentment for a host of personal grievances including such offenses as: DEI, wokeness, LGBTQ, and of course the sin of disloyalty of the various offenders on his enemies list. The way of the dictator does not bode well for the nation once known as the “land of the free and the home of the brave” where today the emboldened Executive Branch of the US Government goes forward increasingly unchecked by the cowed Legislative Branch and empowered by the acquiescent Judicial Branch. This nation appears ready to raise its outstretched arm in salute and shout, “Sieg Heil!”

Now, every time I think about the consequences of what these actions are leading us to, Benjamin Franklin’s warning reverberates in my mind. When asked following the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 what kind of government the delegates had established, he replied tersely: A republic, if you can keep it. I try to be optimistic, but I’m not sure we can.

[Note: the title of this post is from the German patriotic anthem, Die Wacht Am Rhein. The translation of the verse is, “Beloved Fatherland, May you be at peace.” I wanted to share the laudable sentiment, but at the same time let the German words resonate with a warning about the trend toward extremist nationalism that I have tried to describe in this post.]

___________________________

  1. The NYT article identifies a “prolific Internet commenter” named, Curtis Yarvin. The author of the piece summarizes his political philosophy: “The path to national renewal, Yarvin argues, is to unravel American democracy in favor of rule by a benevolent C.E.O.-monarch drawn from a cadre of venture capitalists and corporate oligarchs.” ↩︎
  2. See the guest essay in the New York Times, January 5, 2025, } “For Many of Us, Jan. 6 Never Ended,” By Aquilino Gonell. Mr. Gonell is a former sergeant in the Capitol Police and the author, with Susan Shapiro, of “American Shield: The Immigrant Sergeant Who Defended Democracy.” ↩︎

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

AMERICAN HEROES WHO DEFENDED THE U. S. CAPITOL ON JANUARY 6, 2021

These officers and their families remain under threat by right wing extremists because of their testimonies before the January 6 Committee and current legal actions involving the insurrectionists of that day. Several have appeared on television and in the newspapers to bear witness to the “criminal behavior” of those who attacked and brutalized them and their colleagues defending the U. S. Capitol. Obviously, I can’t mention here all of the names of the dozens of Capitol Police and D. C. Metropolitan Police who suffered similar violent experiences at the hands of the mob.

Harry Dunn, Capitol Police (Retired, wounded on Jan. 6)

Michael Fanone, DC Metropolitan Police (Retired, wounded on Jan. 6)

Aquilino Gonell, Capitol Police (Retired, wounded on Jan. 6)

Brian Sicknick, Capitol Police (RIP, died of wounds received on Jan. 6)

Daniel Hodges, DC Metropolitan Police (Wounded on Jan. 6)

Steven Sund, Capitol Police chief, (Scapegoated, resigned under pressure)