Happy (Belated) Birthday, John Lennon

Yes, I know, this post is late. I apologize.

But this being the year that John Lennon turns 70 and the 30th anniversary of his tragic death, I thought I should give a little tribute to a musician who I consider one of my idols.

Lennon  is one of the few “classic” musicians today that everybody knows. Whether “A Hard Day’s Night” or “Strawberry Fields Forever” or “Imagine,” everyone has one John Lennon song that they love. But Lennon was more than a musician to many–and to me. He is larger than life, yet at the same time the vulnerability in his music brings him “back to Earth,” in a sense. Listen to the simple guitar picking and solitude of “Julia,” an ode to his deceased mother, or the bitterness of “Norwegian Wood,” and you will see a side of Lennon that contrasts the bombastic, “we’re more popular than Jesus” confidence that he exuded publicly.
But what makes him so compelling and mystifying? It’s because John Lennon’s music speaks to us, rather like Bob Dylan’s did in the 1960s (note: I was not alive then, but I’ve read and seen enough footage of Dylan to make that statement). What he did in his private life was interesting, yes–but his music said more than anything else he did. When he was with the Beatles, Lennon spoke for a world on the brink of change–his early work expressed the childish optimism of the early 1960s, his mid-Beatles work like Rubber Soul shifting into a maturity and rawness that would define his music. Works like Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band reveal the surrealist Lennon, the psychadelic Lennon, the Lennon that was not afraid to explore the possibilities of the human mind. And then, when the Beatles broke up, he delved into his personal life–his religious beliefs (“God”), his faith in humanity (“Imagine”), and his newborn child (“Beautiful Boy”). His activism revealed his willingness to care, his unyielding desire to see no man lift sword against another. It was this optimism that helped a nation in turmoil through the Nixon administration and the war in Vietnam.

Lennon, first and foremost, wrote about himself. But something about him–perhaps the fact that he was such a major public figure, or perhaps just the raw talent in his songwriting–makes us see a little bit of ourselves in him. I know that when I’ve hit rough patches, Lennon’s music has helped me spiritually; when I feel lost, I turn to the message that rings throughout Lennon’s songwriting:

All You Need Is Love.

Happy Belated Birthday, John.

 

Christine O’Donnell and Sexism in the Media

Recently, Christine O’Donnell, Republican/Tea Party candidate for Delaware’s senate seat, said:
“There’s certainly a double standard and I don’t often quote Gloria Steinem but she said you can look at a double standard if they wouldn’t attack the male opponent that way and there’s no doubt that they wouldn’t say the things they’re saying about me, they wouldn’t do the things that they’re doing if I weren’t a woman. I’m not whining but there certainly is a double standard especially when it comes to conservative woman.”
Now I’m not saying that the media is equal or perfect. There have been examples of sexism in the media, going back to Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. But I tend to doubt that Christine O’Donnell is being criticized because of her gender. None of the attacks against her have had ANYTHING to do with her sex. I may not be a member of the media per se, but I know that I would criticize Chris Coons if he said “I am a Warlock” or if he said that he couldn’t remember major parts of the Constitution after claiming that he is a “constitutional expert.” I don’t care one way or another whether O’Donnell is a woman, what I CARE about is that our elected officials know about the Constitution before they run for office (granted, the First Amendment never specifically uses the words “separation of church and state,” but O’Donnell couldn’t remember several other amendments). I’m not sure what to make of the “witchcraft” controversy, to be honest. Do I find it odd and slightly concerning? Yes. But it’s not as if O’Donnell doesn’t have a right to do it.
This is just O’Donnell playing the sexism card. If a woman is treated badly by the media SPECIFICALLY due to gender, then by all means they should speak out. But O’Donnell is just trying to stir up the pot–to win back voters. If we can’t criticize someone because they are a certain gender, then that’s just as terrible as criticizing someone because of their gender.

 

The Gulf Oil Spill- Moving Forward

by Daniel Fuchs

The Gulf Oil Spill that for the past month or so has been the center of a great deal of news coverage and discussion is a clear indicator of what needs to be regulated in terms of drilling and what needs to be changed on a worldwide scale.
Let’s start with regulation. Isn’t it clear that offshore drilling–or, at the very least, offshore drilling to the depth that these companies were willing to go–needs to be regulated considerably? If you drill that far out, there’s no way to fix errors. It’s simply too far down in the ground. That’s partly why this pipe is so much more difficult to fix than others. IF we continue to drill at the rate we are doing now, it needs to be monitored–not by a country but by an internationally-sponsored organization–so that these disasters can be avoided.
But I think the more pressing issue is the problem with oil as a whole. At long last, hasn’t it become clear that gasoline is simply too costly a source of fuel to continue to rely on? I’m not saying we need to switch fuel sources immediately–it’s unreasonable to think that the entire human race will simply switch fuels in a day, month, or even a year–but there needs to be serious consideration as to what–and when–our new fuel sources will be. The G8 Environmental Conferences and the Kyoto Protocol have been TOTAL failures–let’s get the leaders of the world together, put them in a room, and not let them leave until there has been considerable progress. The world can’t hear “We’ll think about it” any longer–it needs to be thought about today.

 

Best of 2009: Movies

by DJ Fuchs

1-Inglourious Basterds

There isn’t a lot to say about this movie that hasn’t already been said. The look, the acting, the plot twists–it was just all done superbly. Tarantino draws from the past 60-70 years of film history and brings so much to the table. The soundtrack was eclectic and weird for the genre, but every song seemed to fit its purpose and in most cases actually made the film much more striking (I highly suggest that everyone who saw the movie watches the interview with Quentin Tarantino that comes with the Inglourious Basterds soundtrack- it really provides good insight into his music choices and movie soundtracks in general). And if Christopher Waltz, who played the film’s central antagonist, doesn’t win an Oscar for his brilliant performance, then I WILL boycott the Oscars next year.

2-District 9

The choice between Inglourious Basterds and District 9 was a tough one. District 9 takes the conventions of the modern science fiction film and revises them, turning this seemingly odd film into a relatable story. By setting the story in Johannesburg, South Africa, there is an underlying history that follows the movie, but is never obviously mentioned. The aliens in this movie are not savage murderers but are hardened by the human mistreatment in their “District”. Sharlto Copley,who plays the main character, Wikus, does a superb job in conveying the sadness that comes with the tragedy that both he and the aliens have experienced.

3-TIE- Up/Fantastic Mr. Fox

Pixar has always given us gems, and Up is no exception. Pete Docter and the rest of the Pixar staff craft a brilliant tale that is simple and fun in its initial plot, but also deals with the main character’s (Carl Frederickson, voiced by Ed Asner) old age and loss in life. It’s mature without trying to be, funny without being too childish, and proves that animation can be used to convey deep emotion.

Fantastic Mr. Fox, on the other hand, is just plain fun but, like Up, does deal with mature issues. The animated adaptation of Roald Dahl’s book of the same name, the story deals with a family of foxes and the series of problems that their patriarch (George Clooney) inadvertently sets the family into while stealing from nearby farmers. Wes Anderson’s trademark wit and beautiful direction work masterfully in this film. The movie could be interpreted as a message against massive corporations (the farmers), or a story of a father’s hubris, but no matter how it’s perceived, it’s a story about a family struggling to survive and succeeding–which, in these tough economic times, is exactly what we all need.

4-A Serious Man

One of the Coen Brothers’ finest movies, A Serious Man is the story of a middle-age teacher, Larry Gopnik, and his struggle in dealing with faith despite the terrible luck he has recieved. His wife has been cheating on him, his son’s Bar Mitzvah is near, and he is having problems with a particular student of his. It’s an incredibly dark comedy, but one that is sincere in its character and story.

5-The Hangover

By far the funniest movie this year, The Hangover felt different than many other mainstream comedies. It was raunchy, yes, but not in a pointless way; all of the absurd humor comes from the story rather than randomly, and eventually all pieces together nicely. Even with that, most of the humor actually comes from the interaction with the three main characters, which is incredibly fluid and convincing.

6-Avatar

This was a tough choice. I really wanted to adore Avatar, but in the end, it’s not THAT great. The art and imagery is absolutely stunning, yes, and the plot isn’t totally terrible, but the movie failed to capture me like I hoped it would (which says more about hyping movies up than the actual movie itself).

Things I WANT to see, but have not been able to:
-Precious
-Nine
-Up in the Air
-The Hurt Locker
-Star Trek

What do you think of the list? Good? Bad? Did I miss something? Comment!

 

Wild Card Preview – New York Jets @ Cincinnati Bengals

             On what should be an icy Saturday afternoon in Cincinnati, the Jets and Bengals square off in what will most likely be a defensive battle. Neither team scores many points, as the two clubs are in fact the lowest scoring teams in the playoffs. The Jets offense is led by rookie Mark Sanchez, who, like the rest of him team, has had an up and down season. After starting strong (winning his first three career starts), Sanchez cooled off drastically, throwing 14 interceptions over his next 7 starts. The Jets went the way of their quarterback, losing 6 of those 7 games. When all appeared to be lost, the Jets defense, led by Pro-Bowler Darrelle Revis, stepped up their game and carried the Jets to wins in 5 of their last 6 games. The Jets offense has shied away from Sanchez in their last few games, and looked towards Thomas Jones to run the ball behind a strong offensive line. At this point in the season, Sanchez could become the Jets’ greatest strength or largest weakness; he has shown flashes of brilliance, but is under the cloud of being a rookie in the playoffs, which never spells success.

            The Bengals are built similarly to the Jets, although Cincinnati’s passing game is more stable. Led by a resurgent Carson Palmer, the Bengals return to the playoffs for the first time since 2005. It was in the 2005 NFL Playoffs that Palmer was sidelined with a knee injury that he did not fully recover from until this season. He had a solid year, despite the loss of the Bengal’s top receiver, T.J. Housmandzadeh. Still, Palmer has many offensive weapons, such as Chad Ochocinco and Laverneus Coles. Cincy’s running game, like the Jets, is the main focus of the O. Cedric Benson gets the bulk of the carries. The defense isn’t full of superstars, but was very strong this season, finishing 4th in the NFL in total defense. Because of the defense, Cincinnati got off to a great start in 2009, rolling off 8 wins in their first 11 games and clinching the tough AFC North division easily. The Bengal’s biggest problem all season was the lack of the “big play”. No one on the team  has the ability to really break the game wide open, and that factored in to  many of Cincinnati’s 6 losses this season.

The Verdict: Two very similar teams are matched up in this one; both rely on a solid defense and a powerful running game. It should be a defensive battle throughout, and with the teams so evenly matched, I believe it will come down to the quarterbacks and their ability to make the big play at the end of the game. In the end, Palmer will best Sanchez, but not by much. Cincinnati 23, New York 16

 

Album(s) Review: The Beatles: Remastered

by Daniel Fuchs

There is nothing more special in life to find something that truly inspires. To find an icon, an idol, or a guide in life brings completeness. For this writer, The Beatles are just one of those icons. From their early work to the post-breakup songs (John Lennon, in particular- Give Peace a Chance), these truly benevolent songwriters continue to inspire with their creativity, ingenuity, and influence upon modern music.

But that’s not why I’m writing this. Last September (I’m terribly sorry about this delay), the Beatles’ studio albums (as well as the Past Masters albums, which compile their notable singles and B-sides) were re-released in full form for the first time since 1987. It’s a big deal.

If you haven’t listened to the Beatles, these are absolutely an essential (I would suggest not getting the massive and expensive Box Set unless you truly want it; get a few of the albums and then go from there if you’d like) for any music fan’s collection. They sound great, the music’s great, and they will provide endless enjoyment. But are these albums worth buying again?

Well, there are two arguments. If you own the library, it can be a little bit daunting to spend that much on a CD (or you could go to your local library if they have the CD, I highly recommend it). On the other hand, the sound has really been improved. The songs sound fresh, and probably the best examples of this are Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and Revolver, both of which sound fantastic with the new remasters. If you’re low on cash, wait until there’s a price drop or buy a used copy; if you’re an audiophile, however, you will love the sound. Or, perhaps, you could pick up one or two of your favorite albums.

Extras:
The Remasters come with “Mini-Documentaries” for Mac and PC users, but they really don’t amount to much other than a 3-minute intro to the album.

Overall:
Of course, I could never give any Beatles album a bad rating, simply because the music is so good. So I’m going to give the remasters two scores:

People Who Don’t Own The Music/Audiophiles: A+ –> Must Buy

Casual Fans/People who own the songs: B+ —> The Music’s Great, but it might not be worth it to buy them all

Coming Soon: 2009: Daniel’s List

 

MA Special Senatorial Election to Fill Kennedy’s Seat: A Prediction

The polls close in 1 hour, and it’s time to render a prediction as to the outcome of the election.  For the Dem’s, Coakley has been the front runner since the beginning.  Some say that she’s ahead by up to 20-25% (compared to 2nd place Capuano).  We all know that Pagliuca and Khazei are dragging behind their more well known opponents.

Prediction: Coakley squeaks by on top, but not by nearly as much as some think.   Also,Pagliuca and Khazei will pull out respectable 3rd and 4th place placements.

Capuano may turn some off with his aggressive style and bulldog-like apparatus, but his relentless liberal pounding and unwavering attacks of the Bush-Cheney era will undoubtedly attract many Massachusetts voters.  He also has the Washington experience that many older voters look for when choosing a candidate.  Pelosi, Mrs. Patrick, and Dukakis’ endorsements don’t hurt either.

Coakley is well known across the entire commonwealth; she’s the only candidate who’s been on a state-wide ballot before.  Not many people have complaints about her time as Attorney General and Middlesex County DA, following in the footsteps of failed gubernatorial candidate Tom Reilly.  She’s well spoken and non-controversial and the only candidate with connections to the often neglected Western Mass.  I had the pleasure of seeing her in person well before Ted Kennedy passed and she declared her candidate-ship.  In person, she is charming, engaging, and almost irresistible as a candidate.  Furthermore, she’s as close to a “normal person” as you can get; a resident of Medford with a modest worth and a seemingly regular lifestyle. Bill Clinton also recently endorsed her and recorded a phone message to be sent out to the voters.

Pagliuca struck me as a dunce.  I don’t think that he actually is, but he really seems like one.  His facial expressions and responses during the debates seemed rehearsed and unnatural.  He’s got one advantage though: $.  Co-owner of the Celtics, he’s worth hundreds of millions of $$$$$$$’s and can afford to bombard the airways with images of him superimposed over those of Kennedy.  He also has a giant green tour bus, “the jobs express,” that he parades around the state, much to my annoyance.  Although he’s always spouting out liberal platforms, I think that he’s a clown-in-disguise.  A former Romeny supporter and big-business man, he probably wishes that he could run as a republican.  In our humble commonwealth, however, this is ill-advised.

Khazei got the Globe endorsement.  But, I don’t think that anyone cares since it’s Khazei.  He has no actual experience and claims that he can operate as a US Senator without any outside influences.  Kennedy knew how to manipulate these outside interests to aid MA, to the benefit of all of us.  Khazei is a nice guy and has good intentions, but isn’t suited for such a position.  I could see him perhaps as a rep. from somewhere eventually, but not in the near future.  If the Globe had picked Coakley or Capuano, I think that some people would have taken it to heart.  Khazei is just so far off of a lot of people’s radars that it went very unnoticed.

For the Republicans, why does anyone care?  The only way that the Repub. candidate has a chance is if the Dem. literally implodes.  I don’t mean makes a mistake; I mean actually physically falls apart, biologically, on themselves.  An unlikely scenario indeed.

Personally, I like Coakley and Capuano.  Capuano’s personality turns me off and I don’t see him being a good bipartisan kind of Senator.  Coakley, however, I can see fulfilling that role.  But she is less assertive and may have a lower profile in the Senate, meaning less power for the people of MA.

Now, I am going to venture actual predictions.  Note: I haven’t reviewed any polls in the last few weeks, so I am basing this totally on what I feel:

Coakley: 45-55%                                                                                            Brown: 80-90%

Capuano: 35-45%                                                                                          Robinson: 10-20%

Pagliuca: 7.5- 12.5%

Khazei: 5-10%

Please note that only 10-20% of registered voters have turned out, which could drastically flip things.  For example, Coakley’s supporters may not bother to vote, believing that she’s safely ahead.

We’ll see how this turns out; I could be totally wrong!

 

Newton South Politics and “Diversity”

As we all know, Newton South, in addition to the town itself, prides itself on its openness and diversity. Our school had the first GSA in the nation and has a very large METCO program. We have students of all religions, races, nationalities, and sexual orientations. However, despite all of this acceptance and diversity, I see one group that is rejected: Republicans.

Most people reading this will likely be surprised by this statement. Many of you may think: “What are you talking about.  “That’s completely different. That’s a choice!” or “We don’t have any republicans at our school!” These both are understandable arguments, even the latter. First of all, there are republicans, though very few. Secondlly, people have the right to hold their opinions, no matter how drastically different they are from those of others.

As a Republican (gasp…), I have personally felt uncomfortable, self conscious, and threatened every time politics have come up in the class room and outside of it, specifically in history classes. Even today, someone brought up Sarah Palin, and the kid sitting next to me deliberately called her stupid. Although I can see people’s doubts about her, she is clearly not stupid. She has succesfully led Alaska throughout her term as governor. This event only brought of memories of the 2008 election. Every singly day, I had to listen to my history teacher go on and on about how corrupt our country is under George Bush and how great the US will be when Obama becomes president. She encouraged us to discuss the election and claimed to be a unbiased during these discussions, but would clearly inject her opinions and shoot down any that disagreed with her’s, usually mine.

Although I am happy to see our school so accepting of all people, I am concerned by their relations towards conservatives. The students are so eager to be politically correct and make everyone feel very open and safe, but don’t realize the way they make Republicans feel. Thus, if students want to truly be accepting of all, they must be accepting of students with different opinions.

So, next time you’re discussing politics in history class. Don’t be so quick to criticize others or their opinions. Make an effort to make them feel comfortable and give them an opportunity to share their views, no matter how crazy them seem to you. Republicans are people!

 

Iran: A Nation Plagued With Conflict

Iran has had a history of sour moments ever since the Islamic Revolution of 1979.  Its US relations deteriorated almost immediately as a group of students seized US embassy personnel, convinced the Americans were spies.  Only after a year and a half were the majority of the victims set free.  Iran also experienced challenging times when Saddam Hussein attacked for control of the Khuzestan region, a section of Iran with rich oil fields. Iran’s once united and intimidating army had dissipated during the pandemonium of the revolution, however, Iran was able to defend itself by utilizing a desperate strategy. Iran used sheer numbers to push back the advancing Iraqi army.  Coupled with Saddam’s use of chemical weaponry, a staggering 500,000 to 1,000,000 lives were lost.  Even after the war came to a close Iran still couldn’t function properly.  Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was elected as president, and made a valiant and relatively succesful effort at rebuilding Iran’s economy. However, he failed to have a lasting impact with statements he desired to convey, statements concerning freedom.  Even the subsequent president, Mohammad Khatami could not create a free and democratic Iran.  These two presidents have always puzzled me. In the revolution of 1979, the current shah (the former manner to which a leader is referred) was accused of being overly Western and non-Islamic.  However, the democratic ideologies of the West are reiterated by Iranian presidents after the revolution. Enlighten me if you have anything to share concerning this topic, because for me, this simply doesn’t make sense.

Why am I informing you about Iran’s past? It’s because, as I’m sure you’ve heard from the news, violence and turmoil have once again reappeared. On June 12th, 2009, the citizens of Iran voted, the race being mostly between former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and reformist Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Let me remind you, the vast majority of Iran consists of youth, most of them tired of Ahmadinejad’s rule.  When the results were announced and Ahmadinejad was pronounced president, defeating Mousavi by a landslide, the people of Iran regained their revolutionary fervor and crowded the streets in protest.  Many believed the votes had been set up, that Ahmadinejad would win no matter the circumstances, so they violently and boldly defied their government for depriving them of their political voice.  This violent outburst has lived on for three months, even after the US stopped covering stories heavily as they had been doing for the first few weeks.  As a man of Iranian descent, I assure you, the violent protests have been continuing for three months.  Despite the dying will of the people, the ongoing arrests, the censorship of news leaving the country, and the denial of access to websites such as Facebook and Twitter, Iranians continued to stand firm.  Although now the protests have dimmed down, and websites and phone lines have been unblocked, there is still contempt and rebellious anger within the people.  I witnessed with my family the beginnings of the revolution, the videos students and youth recorded on their mobile devices.  Everyday new horrors were seen, a woman shot while guarding her children, police savagely beating protesters, or even an uninvolved family’s home turned upside-down by the conflict. As each day passed, protests lessened in number and in frequency.  Connection to the world outside of Iran was quickly revived. Turmoil seemed to have finally come to an end.

Until today, Qud’s (Jerusalem) Day, September 18th, 2009.  In the face of unrelenting repression, protesters regained their strength and marched through the streets, waving their green fabric, their symbol of freedom.  Although not as large as previous demonstrations, it reminded the Iranian government that they are not to be forgotten and that they are willing to do anything for their cause.  With Mr. Mousavi himself joining some of the rallies, it is clear that the spirit of revolt is present and will not succumb to the savage repression Iran is enforcing.

This has occurred at a momentous time.  Next week, Ahmadinejad is to travel to New York to attend the United Nations General Assembly. Because of these outbursts, Iran appears to be unstable, causing Ahmadinejad’s authority and rule to seem weak.  So what else did Ahmadinejad do on Qud’s day besides controlling the riots? He reiterated his belief that the Holocaust never happened, that it was a myth. He stated that fighting with Israel was a religious and national duty for Iran.

Allow me to end on this note.  As you can see, Iran is a complicated country of political pandemonium, unrest, violence, and corruption.  I encourage you to delve into Iran’s history and share whatever thoughts and remarks you may have.  My current conclusion on the supposed ‘republic’ of Iran is this: As long as Iran incorporates religion into government, the country will never know peace.  Iran must revert to its ancestral ways, the ways of the Persians. Persian emporers held a reputation for religious tolerance, even the for their slaves and prisoners of war.  But that is just my opinion on the matter. Please share yours!

 

The oddest court cases of all time

A justice system allows for a lot of great things. It can settle a dispute without violence. It can ensure that everyone (mostly) gets the same treatment when charged with a crime.

It also allows for some extremely ludicrous court cases. For instance,

Case 1: The Million Dollar Pants

Power corrupts, and absolute legal power makes you stupid. Thus, Judge Roy Pearson launched a lunatic legal siege on a dry cleaner over a lost pair of pants, claiming $67 million compensation. That’s right, 67 million dollars. These pants must have been hand spun out of golden thread and stitched with Elvis’s hair.

To reclaim his loss, Pearson manipulated the legal system into a game of “hunt the poor people,” pursuing the immigrant owners of Custom Cleaners for over two years.

Pearson claims the cleaners lost the pants. They claimed they found them later that week, but he disagreed. They then offered him $12,000 compensation, but he demanded the more reasonable figure of $67 million.

After a full 2 years of not realizing his insanity, Pearson lowered his claim to 54 million. That’s like a million times the cost of the pant, which Pearson claimed was for his inconvenience and mental anguish.

In the end, Pearson lost the case, lost his job as an Administrative Law Judge, was divorced by his wife, and now faces bankruptcy. He then learned the ill of his ways, apologized to the world and bought a new pair of pants.

Ha ha, just kidding.

He actually filed for the court to reconsider the decision, and when they refused, he launched a full appeal.

Cases 2, 3, &4: Ecclesiastical Court Loves Trying Animals

Lets start with a with a happy ending.

Jacques Ferron was a Frenchmen who was caught having “fun” with a donkey. It being 1750, this really wasn’t as uncommon as one would think, but Jacques made the mistake of being caught. He was immediately sentenced to hang. Case closed right?

No, not at all.

French animal law stated that when a human and a non-human creature copulate, both must be hung by the neck until dead–regardless of whether or not the animal was consenting. The people of the town were appalled by this law and banded together to save the donkey. All of the citizens, collectively signed a stating that they had known the “she-ass for four years, and that she had always shown herself to be virtuous and well-behaved both at home and abroad and had never given occasion of scandal to anyone”. Therefore, “they are willing to bear witness that she is in word and deed and in all habits of life a most honest creature.” As a result, the donkey was acquitted of all charges. Yay happy ending.

Now a not so happy story.

In 1474 Switzerland, a chicken laid a yolkless egg. No big deal right? Well back then it became a national crisis that required the attention of the entire world lest it be engulfed by the fiery rage of Satan.

Legal proceedings were immediately set in motion to charge to chicken “for the heinous and unnatural crime of laying an egg”. The world feared that if said egg hatched, it would yield a basilisk. In compliance with the law of the time, the cock was appointed an attorney. After much debate amongst themselves, they pled not guilty.

The prosecutor began to argue that the chicken was evil, the egg was evil, they both were in league with Satan, witches wanted them, witches were evil, etc. The chicken’s lawyer proved to be pretty useless and agreed to everything the prosecutor said. His argument however was that laying an egg was an involuntary act. It wasn’t the chicken’s fault that Satan made it lay an evil act.

None of the law books of the time contained a record of Satan making such a compact with one of brute creation. So, what does a prosecutor do if such a case has never been recorded within a book of law? Reference the other book of law, the Bible.

He argued that although the Devil did not make compacts with those of brute creation, he did sometimes possess them, as stated in Matthew 8:28-34. It was at this point where the cock’s attorney essentially gave up. The cock was convicted and burned at the stake… along with his egg.

But the Swiss Ecclesiastical court has had weirder cases in the past. In 1451, the court went ahead and sued a pond of leeches for the offense of there simply being too many leeches. When it comes to most Ecclesiastical court cases against animals (and there are many more) it isn’t usually customary for the offending animals to be present for the silly proceedings. Yet, the Bishop suing the leeches was instructed to bring them in to the local magistracy so that they could hear the notice they were being served.

The leeches were gathered in a pile before the court and were told they had three days to leave the area. For some reason, the leeches didn’t fear the threat of God’s wrath and stayed put. The court responded by taking another course of logical legal action; they performed an exorcism on the leeches. Apparently, this worked. Granted, the leeches didn’t pack their bags and leave as much as they just kind of died.

Case 5: Playground Battle Goes To The Courts

One day after a soccer game, professional soccer player David Beckham handed his jersey to a pair of friends, ages 9 and 10, neither of whom wanted to let go of it. A dispute that should have ended with a game of Tug of War and a ripped jersey instead ended in court. The parents brought in lawyers to decide which kid grabbed the jersey first.

You know there’s a problem with our problem solving skills when a nine-year old comes home complaining about not getting an autograph from their soccer hero and the parents hit “SPEED DIAL-LAWYER”.

Case 6: The Twin Defense

Mr. Raj was a 27-year-old Malaysian entrepreneur of sorts, working as a transport logistics manager moving a fiercely demanded product with a massive profit margin. In other words, he was a drug trafficker. Eventually he was caught and charged with transporting 166 kilos of cannabis and 1.7 kilos of raw opium in 2003. The penalty for smuggling the stuff in Malaysia is death by hanging

The prosecution had a perfect case. Mr. Raj was caught in the act and the prosecution also had DNA evidence somehow. The only problem was that there were two Mr. Rajs. You see, R. Sathis Raj and Sabarish Raj were identical twins, and they decided to pull a Parent Trap. When questioned as to “Who dunnit?” each man pointed the finger at the other, blurring the line between good Raj and evil Raj.

Ultimately, both men were set free as neither the prosecutor nor the judge and jury could figure out which one was guilty. They couldn’t even be certain which twin was arrested at the scene of the crime.

Case 7: Voting Machine Makers Sue To Prevent Testing

Sequoia Voting Systems sued to prevent Princeton computer scientists from examining their voting machines on the grounds that it would hurt their business. Fair enough, scientific reports confirming that the machines can’t count and often don’t turn on probably would hurt their business. Election clerks ordered the study when they found that the machines had miscounted the number of voters, and since the sole function of the machines is “count the number of voters” that’s kind of a serious problem.

If Sequoia had actually won the case, it would mean that companies can sell you things and you are legally barred from complaining if they don’t work, or even checking if they do. Under this framework Apple could start shipping white-painted bricks in boxes saying “iPod” and you couldn’t complain.