|
| As you probably could not avoid learning, two widely known people died yesterday. One from cardiac arrest, the other after a long fight with cancer. To my mind, an appropriate response includes concern for their families and loved ones, who are certainly hurting during such a time.
However, as the corporate media has surely not mentioned, more than just two people died on June 25, 2009.
At an average of 105 deaths per month in 2009 alone, between three and four Darfuries died yesterday. This, after most of the rest of the world has watched for more than five years and done almost nothing.
Almost 200 women died yesterday because they did not have access to legal and safe abortion.
Around 1,500 people died in the Congo, even though the war "ended" five years ago.
More than 4,000 died in Africa because of AIDS, in large part due to Vatican and Republican Party opposition to the distribution of, and education regarding, condoms.
Across the globe, more than 5,000 people died yesterday simply because they do not have access to clean water, while an estimated 16,000 children died because they do not have enough food. When was the last time you heard anybody in the corporate media talk about food or water shortages, in the context of global over-population?
When was the last time you heard a politician that you support speak to this issue, or any of the above issues?
It goes without saying that we could expand this list almost indefinitely. The point is that people are dying completely preventable deaths, every hour of every day, while most news outlets in the United States seem content to tell us all about the latest starlet fashion faux pas, who is getting paid too much to play sports, which American car company has a shitty plan to improve their sales figures, the summer fashion choices of a host of celebrities, and the latest manufactured reality-TV scandal. Oh, and if somebody died and they were famous, they will probably tell us all about that, too. But preventable (or U.S. foreign policy caused) deaths around the globe? There is little time to cover that.
| | |
|
Introduction
The following consists of three described scenarios, each with one or more related questions. I pose the questions out of serious curiosity as to how certain mindsets think about certain situations. If you do not find yourself in the named audience for a particular question, feel free to skip it or answer in some other way (for example, if I were to pose a question to a Libertarian and you aren't one, you might say "well, my friend is a Libertarian and I think he would say...").
Scenario 1
A man named Scott is accused of assassinating a civilian, for both political and religious reasons. While in custody, he claims that many similar acts are imminent around the country.
This question is most specifically for those who believe that the U.S. is justified and morally faultless when it subjects unrepresented and never-proven-guilty prisoners to "harsh interrogation techniques" (in seeming agreement with the likes of Dick Cheney and Jack Bauer).
- If Scott is unwilling to give the police any and all information he has regarding other assassination plots, should he be tortured?
Scenario 2
Two men (both U.S.-born citizens), who do not know each other and are unrelated in any way, are each accused of committing a murder, coincidentally within 48 hours of each other. Both men have different (but equally fervent and extremist) religious and political beliefs. Both seem to have committed the alleged acts of murder for revenge against perceived wrongs and to frighten their perceived enemies into changing their behavior.
First question:
- Based on just the above information, would you call either man a terrorist?
Additional information:
The first man, named Scott, is known to have been a member of anti-government and anti-taxation groups, one which has been involved in an armed confrontation with the FBI, and another group which denies the authority of the federal government. He has furthermore been convicted of possessing explosives (which his ex-wife says were intended to be used for similar goals as the murder he is now accused of). The site of his alleged act of murder was a church.
The second man, formerly named Carlos, has no criminal record and has not yet been proven to be associated with any extremist groups (religious, political, or otherwise). When apprehended, he was found to be in possession of three guns and approximately 175 rounds of ammunition. Some evidence suggests that he may have considered attacking religious institutions.
- Now would you call either man a terrorist?
Here's even more information:
Scott has been charged with first-degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault.
Carlos has been charged with capital murder and fifteen counts of terrorist acts.
Oh, and Scott is a white Christian, while Carlos is a black Muslim.
- Now would you call either a terrorist? And, given the above information, do the charges seem fair to you?
Scenario 3
Consider a man named William who lives in Indiana, where the age of consent is 16. Suppose that he somehow knows with some certainty that Mr. Taper, a 25 year old man living in his neighborhood, has been having completely consensual sex with different girlfriends, all of whom are 17 or 18 years old. Never mind that it's none of William's business, nor that it is none of the business of the rest of his neighborhood. Now, imagine that William is morally outraged. He gossips to his friends and neighbors, and posts fliers around town, accusing Mr. Taper of raping children, calling him "Taper the child raper!" Now, suppose some particularly emotional and volatile person(s) in the neighborhood assault Mr. Taper in a parking lot, landing him in critical condition at the hospital.
Thus, the following questions are for all, but are especially directed at viewers/readers/fans of such media personalities as O'Reilly, Hannity, Goldberg, Coulter, Limbaugh, et cetera.
- Relative to the above situation, is William a liar?
- Is he guilty of slander and libel?
- Should he be considered, at the very least, somewhat responsible for his rhetoric?
- Is it reasonable to expect William to at least consider the possibility that his dishonest claims might have had something to do with landing Mr. Taper in the hospital?
Obviously, my proposed scenarios and questions bare quite a bit of relation to the facts surrounding the assassination of Dr. George Tiller. I've purposefully tried to avoid the potentially incendiary topic of abortion. Perhaps a topic for another day.
| | |
| LEO recently gave me the opportunity to write another music review, and it was published this week. I also decided to try making an audio version of the review, which you can listen to by clicking the play button below.
Here's the original text of my review, followed by a link to the review on LEO's website, and a scan of the slightly edited version that appeared in print.
Blood
OSI
(InsideOut)
<heavy repose>
For the third time, Jim Matheos and Kevin Moore have combined progressive metal and almost ambient electronica, producing an intriguing genre-bending album. This release welcomes Gavin Harrison on drums, with guest vocals on one track by Mikael Åkerfeldt.
The paradox of capacious atmospheres against thick riffing, over Moore's almost terminally laid-back vocals, seems designed to demand repeated listens for full appreciation. Heaviness is present but restrained, with the meticulous groove of the drums and the exacting guitar chops employed in direct service of the overall compositions, or not at all. Albums with this much programming often sound completely artificial, a problem Blood deftly avoids – the production is perfect, but also alive and breathing, almost leaping from the stereo to reward the careful listener.
OSI's newest is one of those uncommon, diverse and nuanced records that you both love getting lost in, and playing – loud, on real speakers – for anybody who is willing to listen.
To see the online copy of the review and check out LEO's website, please click here.
Also worth mentioning is that if you spend the extra two or three dollars to get the two-disc version of the album, you get the deliciously heavy "No Celebrations" with Tim Bowness guesting on vocals, plus a cover of the Elliott Smith song "Christian Brothers," and an extended version of the second track from the album. To view the official website for OSI, click here.
| | |
| Tom Tomorrow rings in the new year with a look back at 2008.
To see the full Part 1 strip, click here. To see the full Part 2 strip, click here.
Happy New Year!
| | |
| I made a trailer for one of my two favorite movies, The Darjeeling Limited, directed by Wes Anderson. I hope you enjoy it, and are encouraged to check out the movie, if you've not yet seen it.
And here I should write a little essay about why I love this movie, and the previous four, as well. Perhaps later.
| | |
|
