The Friday Bacon

The image is of bacon grease filtering into the grease cup. I feel remiss for not posting this before the New York Times and Yahoo. But at least I got there before Ric Romero. If there isn't already a patron saint of bacon, Jason Day deserves that honor.

Coming Home

The DOD recently decided to continue not awarding the Purple Heart to solders with post traumatic stress disorder. The blogosphere has been set aflame with the debate over the issue with one side arguing that this would make a substantial step toward acknowledgment, reducing stigma, and treatment of the disease within the military, and the other side trying hard to find new ways to say that PTSD doesn't exist while not overtly saying that.

This was followed the next day with the revelation that military suicides have reached a new record and have surpassed the rate of suicide in the general population. The close timing gave me pause to think about the significance of the two stories in relation to each other. I am not saying that awarding a medal for having PTSD would reduce suicide among military veterans. I just think that there needs to be a better way of serving those who have done their service to protect us. Having veterans among my family, friends, and co-workers, I have found that many of the combat vets are too proud too seek help even when they need it. You would think that psychologists could find a way to communicate directly with a soldier's experience and explain that getting treatment doesn't detract from their valor or self reliance. But I am not a soldier and I don't have any answers. I just don't like the toll that the psychological wounds of war are taking.

Evamaloutions

I think the real issue is not clearly explained in debates over creationism. In discussion over changes to curriculum it becomes apparent that what is being debated is the position of science in our society and the deference due to science in examination of nature. I don't think that the scriptural interpretive preference of an obnoxiously vocal minority should have any bearing on how we regard the statements of experts on matters of fact. The point is not that fundamentalist Christians are trying to hijack our culture through the indoctrinating power of the already failing public school system, but that they intentionally avoid narrowing the issue or focusing on details because this is a discussion they loose as soon as rationality prevails.

In case you were wondering this post was not provoked by anything in particular but is tangentially related to the posts this week regarding stumbling upon websites anthropomorphizing of animals and showing that the efforts by religious fanatics to destroy science is not restricted to right wing Christian maniacs.

Posted from a Palm Treo mobile device.

Palin Strikes Back

For those worried that the Daily Show might run out of material during the next four years of an Obama administration, the Internet's savior, Sarah Palin, has come through again, launching her own new SarahPAC. Political Action Committees are compelled under federal law to comply with certain regulations, but they spend a lot of money in a city where Benjamin Franklin speaks. What exactly constitutes "a better, safer, and stronger America in the 21st Century" should provide many punchlines in the near-term. Hopefully Governor Palin's four year vacation from federal electoral politics will help her develop coherent policy positions, but I don't imagine her supporters want to hear anything more than catch phrases.

In a slightly more disturbing twist, there is a group known as PalinPAC which stole the catchy name, and as of this writing has received 2588 hits on their website. The most telling mark of something resembling the political version of a scam is that their mission page mentions the values and issues of the Republican Party, but doesn't, at any point gto into any meaningful depth on what exactly those values and issues are. The one page that might reveal the thinking behind the leaders of the group, about their Religious Values has a bible quote, and a very interesting quote which is reproduced below.

Every problem we have can't be George Bush's fault like many believe. Why don't we look to and ask the Congress and House of Representatives what they have been doing about our country's problems? The Democrats wanted control and got it. But what have they done with it?

Obviously nothing a group that supports Sarah Palin would agree with.

Enforcement of the Convention Against Torture

Perhaps the winds of change are blowing through the District of Columbia, for a change. Professor Manfred Nowak has spoken publicly about his belief that George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld should be brought before a court because of the conditions of imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay. A video of an interview with CNN's Rick Sanchez is posted for context below.



For those readers unfamiliar with the various levels of complicity, such as John Ashcroft's infamous quote, Condoleeza Rice's admission, or Dick Cheney's admission from Taxi to the Dark Side, a few highlights are presented below by liberal pundit Rachel Maddow, for a quick brief.

To summarize the argument even further into condensed legal flavor, Article 4 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment compels member states to prosecute allegations of torture, casting a wide net to catch everyone between the interrogator to those who knew about it and did nothing, in theory. The Text is quoted below.

1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture. 2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.

This, to state the obvious, is the largest test of the new administration. How will Obama handle these allegations? I hope this is a question that is being asked again in the White House and in various agencies of the Federal Government, to the logical conclusion that these allegations must be investigated as a matter of legitimacy. How the Rule of Law is enforced will set the tone, as it a lack of credible enforcement of the law as it is written set the tone of the Bush Administration. Simply issuing a subpoena to  former officials will not work, just ask Karl Rove. There can be no pleading and begging for a notionally independent branch of government for morsels of information and the respect due such an august body. Flaunting of Congressional subpeonas must stop, and the words of the anointed, yet not confirmed, Attorney General, Eric Holder, are encouraging, if unsettling to certain people, such as Alberto Gonzalez. Unfortunately for the shamed former AG seems to rest precariously on the words of John Yoo, former counselor in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. 

The Difference Between Infantaside and Abortion

You are probably seeing this article in your Google search because you misspelled "infanticide."

This posting is only slightly related to the title. On Friday Obama signed an executive order reinstating funding for groups that perform or provide information regarding abortion overseas. Reversing the "Mexico City Policy" of George Bush and the right wing religious extremists that supported him. Editorials across the nation declare that this has inflamed the national furor over abortion again, but this was the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and those people had their undies in a twist for this day in advance.



It is really upsetting to me that the national abortion debate never rises above our worst and most base instincts. People on both sides straw man each others position's and are disrespectful of their opponents ideology to the point of deliberately lying to their own supporters. What is most interesting to me is that the Supreme Court has heard some well thought out policy arguments in its handling of the issue and it is unfortunate that some of these thoughts don't trickle down into the national debate. For instance the supreme court ruled a law criminalizing use of contraception out of respect for the dignity of family and marriage and the privacy of marital intimacy. Kind of throws a clog in the pro-family rhetoric the right wing slings about.

When it comes to women in the workplace and abortion I feel stupid for never putting two and two together until I read the opinion of The Court in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey.

The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.

505 U.S. 833, 833 (1992) Hurrr I'm a durrr. Given the nature of the glass ceiling and the thinly veiled questions women get in job interviews regarding whether they are "planning to have a family", and the correlation between attitudes regarding abortion and attitudes regarding women in the workplace, I can't believe it took the Supreme Court to point out this conclusion to me.

Speaking of Religious Zealotry

Isn't there something in the Bible about graven images? One of those "commandment" thingys the fundamentalist religious fanatics keep trying to force onto public land?

I Know What You Mean

Here I was innocently looking for pictures of cute hippo babies and there is this story about a hippo that was separated from its mother by the tsunami and it started hanging around with a tortoise. Awww, cross species cuddling right? And, BAM! the author has to throw in some anthropomorphizing religious BS.

Honeycombs are perfect because..

I was reading an interesting article today about honeycomb. It was a story about a child talking to anthropomorphized bees, and 3/4 of the way through it starts talking about the Qua ran, and God's plan. And I wondered why, and why it was catered to children. It was part of an interesting BOOK SERIES in PDF format for your downloading pleasures.

The Friday Bacon

Bacon and Rabbit stew

Comments

We have recently decided to moderate a comment for the first time. Being advocates of not just free speech but offensively free speech this decision burns us like white phosphorous. I often say that if people aren't trying to take your freedom of expression away from you, then you aren't actually using it. However, we here at the Fringe Element agree that this is not the place for unrestrained purely profane textual outbursts.

We like to think that every time we use an offensive word it is as carefully chosen as every other word we use in our works of expression here. When we swear or present an offensive concept it is to either focus the attention of the reader on the emotion evoked by the idea or calculated to knock the reader off balance in order to shock you the reader out of comfortable ways of thinking, or the word may be chosen simply to properly express our own emotional response to a situation in the news. But vulgar outbursts by anonymous posters have no potential of adding value to what we are trying to do here. Though it pains me to say even that much. If this post was a purely vulgar attack from a person that identified themselves it might have value as an expression of that person's emotional reaction to our content, but as an anonymous outburst from the tubes its just the kind of behavior that would embarrass the poster's mother. Really, you should think of what your mom would say if she saw you filling the wholesomeness of the intertubes with your potty mouth.

Anonymous posts have been a source of much enjoyment for me personally. Contributing to a blog has given me the opportunity to be exposed to the kind of virulent criticism, madness, and ad homenim attacks that can only be generated by painfully sane and mundane minds. I am glad that the intellectual hurdles involved in operating a computer, gaining access to the Internet, surfing the Internet, literacy, and posting a comment don't include the ability to think clearly and express oneself. If they did, the log cabin would be a much less entertaining place.

So we have decided to continue rejecting anonymous profane comments without context as a matter of policy. This is because, without posting your name to such a comment, we are unable to verify whether or not it is an actual person making said comment, thus we do not have to worry about violating an individual's freedom of speech. So if you feel the need to simply leave a profane remark, have the character and gumption to put your name to it. Also, this type of comment doesn't benefit anyone, even the individual responsible for it. It doesn't serve to elevate the discourse, provide any more information that might be lacking from the original posting, or doesn't meet the aforementioned 'mother' criteria, it only makes the commenter vent some emotion and lowers others' opinions of him or her. If on the other hand, you feel passionate about a particular subject and are offended by our thoughts, conceptualizations, ideas, or writings, and comment in a form such as 'fuck you, X is (positive adjective) because Y', this type of comment would be acceptable. So, in summary, please try to keep your comments above the level of an elementary school ad hominem. Thank you for reading, and we hope that you continue to enjoy our content here at the Fringe Element.

Tons of Talk

As reported yesterday, there is an ongoing debate of some intensity into the various types of war crimes that are being committed by both sides in the conflict, about issues arising from use of human shields to use of white phosphorus artillery shells in heavily populated areas. However, there is a new report about the conduct of Israeli soldiers which has been underreported. The story has since been deleted from the Ha'aretz website, but is posted here for your perusal. Two of the most important aspects of the laws of war govern the uniforms worn by combatants and the targeting of civilians in urban areas. The aforementioned report bears on exactly these problems. Though it might be the case that witnesses were mistaken about the identity of soldiers wearing emblems of Hamas, however even the mere allegation that Israeli soldiers were targeting buildings known to contain civilians in order to make them evacuate goes beyond the pale. This latest report, combined with reports that one of the largest hospitals in the Gaza Strip was attacked by white phosphorus and tank shells, should necessitate a response from the Hague and the United Nations if international law is going to be effectual at all during the 21st Century. But perhaps such words are empty, and will ultimately serve to alleviate the suffering felt by both sides of the conflict.

Elsewhere, there is a lot of talk aimed at calling a halt to the ongoing operations. In Egypt, officials are reportedly getting close to hammering out a ceasefire agreement, but the fundamentally conflicting goals of both sides, centering around the ongoing embargo of commercial goods aimed at stemming the flow of weapons into the Gaza Strip, stand in the way of any lasting resolution. The United States is firmly behind the government of Israel as the foreign ministers of the two countries signed an agreement obligating the U.S. to assist in preventing smuggling into Gaza and the re-arming of the militant wing of Hamas in the event of any ceasefire, whether it is formal or informal. Elsewhere, the Arab world is split into two camps, one which supports the U.S.' position in the conflict met in Kuwait, while the other camp, which is opposed, even virulently against the campaign, met in Qatar. The latter group urged member states to diplomatic and economic ties with the state of Israel. Because of this split, neither side was able to achieve a quorum sufficient for the Arab League to issue a statement in response to the conflict, ultimately proving both gatherings to be diplomatically useless in terms of finding a solution to the intractable problem of Middle East peace.

The Friday Bacon

More Questions than Answers

The Fringe Element has yet to comment about the ongoing Israeli military operations in Gaza, because there was seemingly little to be added to the current discussion. However, that silence must now come to an end, as we wonder the true purpose of the operations.

According to Israeli officials, the stated purpose is to make sure that Hamas can no longer fire rockets into the southern areas of Israel from the Gaza Strip. Yet, during the six month cease fire that expired just before the beginning of operations, Hamas did not fire a single rocket in violation of the ceasefire, though a handful of rockets were fired by smaller, shall we say fringe, militant groups. This is a matter of fact, and is readily admitted by Israeli officials. 

So, disregarding the question of who initially broke the ceasefire, because of the rampant violations thereof, not the least of which being the Israeli embargo, we have to wonder why Israeli officials chose to attack the Gaza Strip in the way that they have done so far. Of course, electoral politics gives us a quick answer. The government of Israel has enjoyed carte blanche from the Bush Administration in everything they do, upto and including expanding settlements in the West Bank and continuing to build the separation wall, both of which are violations of international law.  But the reins of the executive branch are about to turned over to a new leader, whose support for Israel has yet to be meaningfully tested. In combination with this factor, Israel itself will soon hold elections for Prime Minister. With the campaign in Gaza enjoying tremendous support amongst the general Israeli population, the various personalities in the running are trying to out-do each other to support the operation. In addition, the 20% Israeli Arab minority has been completely disenfranchised as their parties will not be able to participate in the coming election. 

Yet, this still does not fully explain the rationale behind this operation. If one keeps asking questions, the answers keep leading to darker and darker answers. For instance, the Israeli military has been using some fairly advanced ammunition in the current operation, and the question must be raised whether the Israeli military, and more broadly the Israeli government, is using this as an opportunity to test the finest weapons that the world has to offer in battlefield conditions. For instance, the use of white phosphorus in artillery shells, although illegal to use against civilian targets is not necessarily against international law if used to create a passive smoke screen. But, it is definitely illegal if it is used against the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in Gaza, which supplies essential foodstuffs to half of the enclave's population. A more insidious weapon is what is known as Dense Inert Metal Explosives, also referred to as DIME. This type of explosive, with a small blast radius, allows for specific targetting of hostile forces. However, it has also been found to be extremely carcinogenic. The apparent signs of a DIME-inflected injury, internal burns without shrapnel and entry wounds without exit wounds, have been appearing in civilian casualties. 

Looking deeper into the situation, I have been left wondering if the Israeli operation is intent on forced displacement of the entire population of the Gaza Strip. Israeli forces have been dropping leaflets and warning civilians that they are going to be in the path of military operations. But, with the territory entirely surrounded and controlled by the Israeli government and for all intents and purposes cut off from the rest of the world, where are the refugees supposed to go? As is usually the case with military operations, civilian bystandards are often left with more questions than answers, and given the opacity of Israeli policy and motives behind the ongoing operation in the Gaza Strip, the rest of the world is left to wonder about true intentions. 

The real question that should be asked in capitals around the world, the United Nations, and the Hague is whether or not to begin investigating whether the Israeli government is committing war crimes. 

Weaseling Out of Things

With the new year and the change of administration in Washington there has been a tendency lately for retrospective looks at the outgoing Bush administration which has reminded us of all that has gone wrong in the last eight years and all that the Bush administration and its collaborators have to answer for. This tendency has in turn provoked the apologists for the Bush regime who are now using the unitary executive theory as a shield rather than a spear. The result is conversations like the one on the Diane Rehm show this morning where lawyers acting as apologists for the nefarious acts of Bush policy sound like panicky weasels trying to slip out of anyone having to take responsibility for the wrongs they have done. These pundits try to appear to be centrists, but the way they use arguments regarding pragmatic politics to evade moral accusations that there has been wrongdoing on the part of the Bush administration paints these men as the worst caricature of the sleazy lawyer.

The BART killing

I have been trying to keep the start of the new year on this blog light with video game reviews and silly articles. I have avoided discussing the conflict in the middle east even though that is the most significant international news right now.

But the riots of last night and the, execution style, police killing of Oscar Grant III are too much to ignore. These are very much subjects which we at The Fringe Element are concerned with. I'll start with the widely viewed video.




I don't know much of the story but people attribute Officer Johannes Mehserle's apparent shock to his mistakenly using his firearm when he intended to use his tazer. I am not sure how this is much better. As you can probably guess from previous articles, we here at The Fringe Element don't approve of liberal use of tazers by police, considering them to be a substitute for lethal force only. Whereas countless news stories indicate that police around the country treat this otherwise useful device as a shortcut to incapacitate any person the officer finds inconvenient to deal with.

In this case the use of a tazer would have been substantially less likely to cause death. I suppose that difference in outcome is supposed to mitigate the severity of the actions of the officer in this case in the minds of some people. But again, I don't consider a tazer to be non-lethal force. Neither do its proponents who call such devices "less lethal." In the same category as rubber bullets. The idea is to incapacitate with sufficient force to be sure to incapacitate with a single use. In many cases, the requisite amount of force to do so with such certainty is enough to kill. Again, I am not arguing against the use of tazers, I am arguing that people at large, and particularly the police, need to stop thinking of using a tazer as less serious than using a firearm.

The Friday Bacon

His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Norton I, Emperor of these United States and Protector or Mexico.

One hundred and twenty nine years ago today, Emperor Norton passed away leaving this world a sadder and more mundane place without him. Without trying he brought more unity, peace, and mirth to this world then most men of a hundred times his means. We should all strive to be like his Imperial Majesty. All hail the Emperor!

Of Urinals and Broken Zippers

This is a picture of the pull tab from someones fly in the bottom of a uninal at my work. Its been there since before Christmas. Just wanted to share that with you.

Harvest Moon: Tree of Tranquility

For Christmas my wife and I decided to spend our Best Buy gift cards on the Harvest Moon game. For those of you unfamiliar with the series, the game revolves around your character as you farm your ranch, raise livestock, get married, and have children. Its basically simulated farm life with some corny environmentalism thrown in as plot. As if working your farm by yourself isn't enough work.

This version has all the familiar elements from the previous games in the series. Cows and chickens, corn and tomatoes, picking stuff of the mountain to give as gifts to woo your intended. In this version there is a greater variety of crops and livestock to choose from. There are winter grains like buckwheat and you can raise an ostrich to ride around town.

However, the downsides to this version are much more profound. The first thing you notice is that the voice sound effects sound like adults in Charlie Brown cartoons and are just as intelligible. "Waa waa waa waa." You notice this because every time you start the game the muffeled trumpet sound attempts to say the games name and every time your character pets an animal it says, "there there." Which I guess is an artifact of poor translation from the Japanese version.

The most aggrivating part of the game is the first hour. Because it takes an hour to get through the introduction. The game forces you to wander around town and have an extended conversation involving gift giving with every citizen of the game before even beginning the toutorial. Like most games, the toutorial is entirely unnessary. Of course while trapped in the insultingly unnessary toutorial, the game's writers decided it was also necessary to force you to interact with the games most unplesant character who spends the toutorial insulting you even as you easily accomplish the tedious tasks he sets before you.

Once you get through the god awful plot and asanine toutorial the game is actually quite fun. Like all the games in the Harvest Moon series, its enjoyable to pretend to be farming your own ranch and the motion controls on the Wii enhance the feel of the game. Its got flow.

The Friday Bacon

I just thought I would toss up some stuff generated by the Bacon meme.

Sex in Marriage? None For Me, Thanks.

Another study showing that high and mighty religious posturing about abstinence not only doesn't prevent premarital sex, it only increases the danger. Since abstinence only attitudes put the idea in the heads of these kids that prophylactics are witchcraft.