The Face of Courage

The way it is

"Now remember, when things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is."

-The Outlaw Josey Wales

"It shall be life"

[Josey Wales approaches a troop of Comanche warriors that live in the valley he's occupied]

Josey Wales: You be Ten Bears?

Ten Bears: I am Ten Bears.

Josey Wales: I'm Josey Wales.

Ten Bears: I have heard. You are the grey rider. You would not make peace with the Bluecoats. You may go in peace.

Josey Wales: I reckon not. I got no place else to go.

Ten Bears: Then you will die.

Josey Wales: I came here to die with you. Or to live with you...Dyin's easy for men like you and me. It's the livin' that's the hard part. When everything you care about's been butchered or raped.

[Josey Wales proposes that they share the valley and what is has to offer]

Ten Bears: These things you say we will have, we already have.

Josey Wales: That's true. I ain't promising you nothing extra. I'm just giving you life and you're giving me life. And I'm saying that men can live together without butchering one another.

Ten Bears: It's sad that governments are chiefed by the double tongues. There is iron in your words of death for all Comanche to see, and so there is iron in your words of life. No signed paper can hold the iron. It must come from men. The words of Ten Bears carries the same iron of life and death. It is good that warriors such as we meet in the struggle of life... or death. It shall be life.


Ten Bears: So will it be.

Josey Wales: I reckon so.

-The Outlaw Josey Wales

Tears in Rain

"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...Attack ships on fire off the shores of Orion; I've watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments...lost in time...like tears in rain."

-Replicant Roy Batty, Blade Runner

"When you can snatch the pebble from my hand..."

[After easily defeating the boy in combat]

Master Po: Ha, ha, never assume because a man has no eyes he cannot see. Close your eyes. What do you hear?
Young Caine: I hear the water, I hear the birds.
Master Po: Do you hear your own heartbeat?
Young Caine: No.
Master Po: Do you hear the grasshopper that is at your feet?
Young Caine: [looking down and seeing the insect] Old man, how is it that you hear these things?
Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?

-Kung Fu

To see how Young Grasshopper fared in his training click here...

Brothers in Arms

"This book is dedicated to those, who though they were not killed by its' shells, were destroyed by the war."

-Dedication from All Quiet on the Western Front

"Good morning, Worm, Your Honour"

If it pleases the Court, the Crown will present evidence of the finest barrister in all of the the Colonies...

[Click here to see the exhibit submitted by the Crown]

Aliens: You Will Believe

Reports of UFO sightings have increased dramatically over the last few decades. Through a Glass, Darkly proposes that this exponential increase in reported activity is not simply the product of over-active imaginations or practical jokers but rather a deliberate move by aliens in preparation for their eventual direct contact with the human species.

The frenzy over UFOs began in the early part of the last century and peaked in the 1950s during the Space Race with the Soviets, incidentally right after our entrance into the Nuclear Age – a key fact, I believe, in the timing of their appearance. Reported sightings increased dramatically and after many were proven to be hoaxes the conventional wisdom became that all UFO sightings were the work of pranksters or delusional hillbillys – a belief that this publication believes the US Government was more than happy to encourage.

When faced with the circumstance of increasingly frequent and sometimes even direct contact by alien races with ordinary citizens the government must have felt that in order to avoid widespread panic it had to not only find plausible explanations for the sightings but also discredit the individuals involved in the contact to avoid reasonable people from taking it seriously. In that way, the status quo could be maintained and the pandemonium that would erupt if the public became aware of continuous and systematic contact by aliens could be avoided and power preserved.

Despite the Herculean attempts to silence witnesses, discredit testimony, and dismiss reports there has been an incredible amount of documentary evidence of their presence that has eluded dismissal. Following the lights in the night sky in Phoenix in 1997 (shown below) and the popularity of the show The X-Files, there was a renewed interest in uncovering the truth about this phenomenon.

In support of that goal director James Fox assembled credible eye-witnesses from the world over at the National Press Club that included Air Force generals, astronauts, military and commercial pilots, and government (including FAA) officials to tell their stories and challenge the conventional wisdom that all UFO sightings were being made by Bubba in the field. His documentary, “I Know What I Saw” would cause even the most hardened skeptic to consider the evidence.

Additionally, this publication has spoken with individuals who work in top-secret installations who have provided credible testimony about alien technology being reverse-engineered. Perhaps the rapid rate of technological development in the 1950s from which the microchip and manned space-flight resulted can be attributed, in part, to the discovery of an alien craft at Roswell, New Mexico in 1947 and the reverse-engineering of the systems and construction of that craft.

Note: Compare the following photo of a “Black Triangle” class UFO (a common type) taken over Belgium in 1990 with this UFO on Google-Earth at 30 30'38.82"S 115 22'56.14"E:

So the question arises: If they're already here, why don't they just land on the White House lawn and say, “Take me to you leader”? I think the answer lies in ourselves.

Assuming that an alien species has the technological ability to traverse the mind-boggling distances of space they probably have the ability to watch our TV, too. What would any potential explorers of a foreign land do to predict the natives reaction to their arrival? I would offer that taking a look at their art and their stories would likely give a pretty good indication as to the nature of their response. In this case, considering movies like Independence Day and War of the Worlds, they are right to assume that their arrival would be met with nuclear warheads and F-22 Raptors.

One must assume, though, that an alien race that has the ability to traverse galaxies also has the ability to wreak planetary-scale destruction. To illustrate this, we have that capacity and simply getting to the Moon is a challenge. Operating on the assumption that they have this ability their decision not to use it probably means that their intentions are not harmful. I think it also must be noted that if an alien race has been around long enough and is intelligent enough to traverse the infiniteness of space then they probably have developed a level of consciousness where conquest and destruction no longer hold any attraction.

So then why all the contact? Why all the fly-bys and close encounters of the Third Kind? The answer brings us back to the original proposition: us. I believe the point of the ever-increasing contact is to build the general acceptance of their presence and a degree of comfort that will prevent us from nuking the world when they arrive and allow us to integrate into the Galactic Community peacefully. The appearance of fantastically complex mathematical shapes in fields known as 'crop circles' is, I believe, one of the techniques employed to build that understanding. This process may take centuries. But when the Universe is 14 billion years old and recorded history only extends back 5,000 years, waiting a few hundred more is immaterial. And we can only wonder if the sudden and unexplainable transition from bone-toting caveman to sunglass-wearing, iPhone-toting modern man in the span of a few thousand years was not also the result of a push from the Stars. Considering the vastness of space is it likely that we are truly alone?

In the end, we are left with more questions than answers. Perhaps some of us will live to see the Earth's first contact with the rest of the Galactic Community. In the meantime, all we can do is keep looking up.

Photo Essay: Insurgent Day-job

The Bare Necessities

Water is a crutch. Sleep is a crutch. Air is crutch.

All you need is anger and a bladed edge.

"I challenge you to a duel"

This paper will offer a proposal to re-introduce legalized dueling, an ancient tradition, on the grounds that it would provide a forum for injured parties to address their issues directly, reduce criminal violence and the burden on the courts of adjudicating certain disputes, and encourage more polite behavior overall. Each of these subjects, along with a description of the proposed system, will be discussed in greater length following a short, and hopefully entertaining, history of this fine tradition.

History

Dueling first emerged out of the medieval system of trial by combat. This form of judicial process emerged in Germany in the Middle Ages and was used in cases where neither side could offer a preponderance of evidence to persuade the court. The two parties would then engage in mortal combat, the idea being that the outcome would reflect God's wish and, by default, the truth. If the defendant were to be defeated he would be immediately executed (assuming he survived the match). If he defeated his opponent, however, or successfully held him off until sunset, he would win his freedom. Accordingly, if the plaintiff admitted defeat and surrendered he would be deprived of his rights as a free man and was potentially liable for damages inflicted on the defendant. This form of adjudication remained an available option to parties until the 16^th Century when it began to fall out of favor for some reason.

As an interesting side note, in order to ensure a truthful verdict, the court required that both parties abstain from using witchcraft to gain an advantage. As such, an oath was required before the judges in which both parties had to state:

Hear this, ye justices, that I have this day neither eat, drank, nor have upon me, neither bone, stone, ne grass; nor any enchantment, sorcery, or witchcraft, whereby the law of God may be abased, or the law of the Devil exalted. So help me God and his saints.

Out of the system of trial by combat emerged the modern duel and with it, in order to ensure fairness, a set of rules to govern the action, a primary set being the Irish dueling code which ultimately served as the basis for the American dueling standards. Aside from establishing the parameters of the dueling space, the weapons to be used, and the terms of the engagement, the code outlined the various conditions under which the duel was considered over. Possible endstates included:

• to first blood, in which case the duel would be ended as soon as one man was wounded;
• until one man was so severely wounded so as to be physically unable to continue;
• to the death, in which case there would be no satisfaction until one party was mortally wounded;
• or, in the case of pistol duels, one shot per party. If neither man was hit and if the challenger stated that he was satisfied, the duel would be declared over. A pistol duel could continue until one man was wounded or killed, but to have more than three volleys of fire was considered barbaric and, if no hits were achieved, somewhat ridiculous and embarrassing.

Although dueling had fallen out of fashion by the late-19^th Century, a modern form of it re-emerged over the skies of Europe during the First World War. Fighter pilots, usually the descendants of European aristocracy, battled in aerial combat in what were oftentimes one-on-one dogfights. In the early stages of the air war, the medieval code of chivalry was held in high regard with pilots oftentimes not engaging if they saw their opponent's guns jam but as time passed and the losses grew, the honor code that had been adhered to gave way to ruthless savagery that the Baron Manfred von Richtofen echoed when he said, “If I am alone with an opponent ... only a jammed gun or an engine problem can prevent me from shooting him down." Perhaps it was in the skies over Europe's killing fields in World War I that chivalry finally died. Nevertheless, for at least a brief period and amidst the horror of the newly-mechanized wars, the aerial dogfights of the First World War brought back the tradition of the gentleman's duel.

The Modern Duel

Now that the reader has some familiarity with the history of dueling and the form it took in its various stages we can turn our attention to how this practice can be adopted again today. There are a number of parameters that must be outlined upfront: 1) both parties must be over the age of 18, 2) the consent of the challenged party is required, 3) all duels shall take place in a public space and before witnesses to avoid unfair play, 4) the terms of the duel shall be agreed upon by both parties, in writing, prior to its execution, and 5) neither party shall be held liable, criminally or civilly, for injuries or damages sustained in the course of a properly executed action.

Many readers will surely contest that the reinstatement of such a practice will further no significant public interest but Through a Glass, Darkly takes issue with this view. For one, it would provide a recourse for aggrieved parties to settle their differences in a matter satisfactory to them that would prevent those same individuals from seeking vengeance in a criminal manner. That would, also, lessen the burden on the courts to resolve such disputes and preclude the state from having to prosecute those who otherwise may commit those crimes. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, knowledge of the real possibility of being challenged to mortal combat is likely to influence individuals to be polite and far more considerate of the effect their actions have upon others. One need not look any further than medieval Japan, 18^th Century England, or the American South before the Civil War to realize they share a common denominator aside from an established practice of dueling – courtesy was a foundation of their culture.

Evidence of this byproduct was noted in the 1836 text, The Art of Dueling, where the author writes:

“The practice is severely censured by all religious and thinking people; yet it has very justly been remarked, that ‘the great gentleness and complacency of modern manners, and those respectful attentions of one man to another, that at present render the social discourses of life far more agreeable and decent, than among the most civilized nations of antiquity; must be ascribed, in some degree to this absurd custom.’”

For the interested reader, the full text of the work can be found here.

Ultimately, it is this publication's opinion that the fundamental psyche of the human animal has not significantly changed in the last 100,000 years and that one of its primary components is a capacity for violence. Our society, however, in a fit of arrogance and delusion, has convinced itself that it has somehow transcended this primordial urge and that its expression can be repressed indefinitely. This faulty assumption only results in the frequent uncontrolled expression of this potential in a manner that is truly unpredictable and generally far more harmful in the end than it need be. Michael Douglas' character in the film, Falling Down, illustrates this phenomenon perfectly.

A controlled forum for the expression of that primordial urge can prevent such disastrous outbursts and until Mankind evolves into the next stage of its existence such an outlet is necessary.

The Status of Dueling Today

For most readers dueling has a negative connotation, the likely result of the fact that the most famous duel in American history resulted in the killing of a notable Federalist by the then-sitting Vice President. And its lack of popularity at the time of the founding of the country may also arise from the encouragement that George Washington gave to his officers to deny challenges during the Revolutionary War to avoid losing men outside of the war effort. Nevertheless, the legal status of dueling in American jurisprudence is rather unclear.

Since the founding of the country there have been no common law cases that have established any precedents as to whether or not dueling remains a viable alternative to civil litigation. There is no Constitutional ban on the practice nor are there any Federal statutes dealing with it (aside from a section of the Uniform Code of Military Justice preventing service-members from participating in it). A number of states have banned the practice in their constitutions with the penalties ranging from disqualification from holding all official office at one end to felony prosecution at the other. Unfortunately, although some states have no specific law prohibiting dueling participants may be held criminally or civilly liable under existing penal codes.

Conclusion

In summary, it is this publication's hope that the reader will consider the various arguments for the reinstatement of this ancient practice and judge them on their merits. Perhaps in the future this solution will be available again to those for whom the options of walking away and civil litigation sometimes simply do not suffice.

Shanah Tovah

"When the truth is found to be lies and all the hope within you dies - then what?"

-Rabbi Marshak, A Serious Man

Jailhouse Advice

"You oughta spend a little more time dealing with yourself and a little less time worrying about what your brother does."

-Ferris Bueller's Day Off

Photo Essay: As the Crow Flies...