To prevent layoffs on the heels of a sharp decline in advertising revenue, Freedom Communications--the parent company of The Orange County Register--today offered voluntary severance packages to employees, according to sources.

"If not enough people opt out, then there will be layoffs," a veteran of the paper told the Weekly.

The package under consideration includes two weeks of pay for every year of service, plus $50 for every $1,000 of base pay and 26 additional weeks of paid health insurance.

Dozens of employees--perhaps as many as 50 or more--need to accept the package to prevent the company from taking more drastic steps. The company delivered the news through department supervisors. There was no companywide meeting.

"People were initially shocked, followed by a feeling of, 'Well, I'm not surprised given the downsizing going on in the industry,'" said a Reg employee.

In July, new Freedom Communications CEO Scott Flanders announced that he was re-organizing the company's newspaper divisions to cut costs.

A company spokeswoman did not return a call for comment at the time of this post.

Ironically, the Irvine-based company is willing to push out (much needed) veteran employees while spending millions of dollars a year to launch journalistically questionable spin-offs such as Squeeze OC and OC Post.

Protest the failing war on drugs at noon on Friday, Sept. 29, at the Federal Courthouse in Santa Ana.

Yesterday in Modesto the DEA raided the California Healthcare Collective, a medicinal marijuana dispensary.

From the Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a pro-medipot NPO:

The Modesto medical cannabis dispensary California Healthcare Collective (CHC) was raided Wednesday by a task force made up of local and federal agents. Law enforcement conducting the raid included the Modesto Police Department (MPD), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Police allegedly seized 60 pounds of dried marijuana, 30 pounds of edibles, two pounds of hashish, $16,000 in cash, two vehicles, and multiple firearms, in the raid on the dispensary. In addition to the dispensary, police raided the homes of multiple dispensary staff. According to local news, a total of seven search warrants were issued.

Those arrested include two operators and two staff. Generally, dispensary staff volunteer their time in exchange for free medicine. All face life in prison for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute marijuana.

Modesto initiated a ban on dispensaries in December 2005; however, the banning ordinance contains a provision allowing for non-profit groups to exist. CHC claims to be just such a non-profit. Regardless, the City of Modesto and the DEA worked together to bring down this dispensary. As a result, ASA is organizing statewide protests. Our own Ronald Reagan Federal Building in beautiful downtown Santa Ana will host its own gathering of those willing to stand in support of the Modesto Four, organized by local boy Adam G.

"It's a joke," says Adam. "The DEA had no business being there. Patients are testifying it was a clean operation. They went to see their doctor for a recommendation to pursue alternative therapy that is legal in this state. Just like acupuncture. Just like aromatherapy." In fact, Adam and ASA believe this move further jeapordizes marijuana patients, many of whose lives are already at risk. "Right now patients in Modesto are suffering," says Adam. "They're forced to go elsewhere to get their meds, either far afield or to the black market—which is dangerous. You can't trust anyone; you could get robbed. Who's suffering? The terminally ill. Patients with chronic pain."

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

1) Attend the protest at Ronald Reagan Federal Building, 411 W. Fourth Street, Santa Ana, tomorrow (Friday, Sept. 29) at 12 noon. CLICK HERE FOR MAP

2) Print out fliers with information on the Modesto raid to distribute at the event (or just around) - CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD FLIER

3) Call Adam at (949) 315-1097 or email adamwithasa@gmail.com to help make signs. If you're making your own signs, Adam recommends "nothing profane. Nothing illegal. Pro-medical marijuana, stop the drug war, keep the DEA out of our lives, leave the sick and dying alone. Stuff like that."

Make Signs, Not War

"For the last 50 years people have been sitting on their asses because they're afraid of the Federal Government. People need to get tuned in and get out there to protest; they don't understand that the power is with the people, not the politicians. The quicker people get up and do something, the quicker something happens."

–Adam G., Americans for Safe Access

Smith: Sad (AP)

Hot off the Associated Press:

Anna Nicole Smith's 20-year-old son died from a lethal combination of methadone and two antidepressant drugs, a U.S.-based pathologist who conducted a private autopsy said Wednesday. Toxicology tests showed Daniel Smith had methadone, Zoloft and Lexapro in his system when he died Sept. 10 in a hospital room in the Bahamas where his former Playboy playmate mother was recuperating from giving birth to a daughter, according to Cyril Wecht.

Wecht, one of the nation's premier dead-guy checker-outters, was hired by Smith to conduct a private autopsy on her son.

Not to get terribly self-referential, but this incident reminds me of a comment I made recently on OCBlog in regards to their lame attempt to ridicule Cassie DeYoung for (gasp) attending a fundraiser. Their problem: this particular event had such speakers as Attorney General Bill Lockyer, State Parks Commission Chairman Bobby Shriver and Joel Reynolds, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. All are vocal opponents of the 241 toll road extension that would violate San Onofre State Beach like a billionare violating a stripper.

I act like Foothill-South is not a form of traffic relief. That is the particular lie I am trying to debunk today, and that is what my information is focused on. And saying Foothill-South is an OPTION for traffic relief is like saying methadone is an OPTION for heroin relief. It might take the sting away, but it just doesn't quite do the job, does it?

Apparently poor Danny Boy agreed with me; hence his decision to reinforce his methadone troops with antidepressant reinforcements. Unless it wasn't his decision...

Okay, enough unhealthy speculation from this particular boy (who is feeling much happier now, thanks - just say no to antidepressants!). But, considering Daniel's death in the same room where his mother had just given birth to a daughter, queering up what ought to have been a celebratory time, I can for the first time sincerely and sorrowfully say: poor Anna Nicole Smith!

Here's the background: On Tuesday, Orange County DA spokeswoman Susan Kang Schroeder took the extraordinary step of sending an agencywide email that not only challenged the ethics of LA Times reporter Christine Hanley, but also urged county prosecutors to use "extreme caution" when dealing with her.

Schroeder's Sept. 26 email is available here.

Today, Steve Marble, editor of the Orange County edition of the Times, defended Hanley, who has spent several months investigating Schroeder and her husband, Mike Schroeder, a top adviser to DA Tony Rackauckas and Sheriff Mike Carona. Marble called Susan Kang Schroeder's actions a "shocking personal attack" by a public official.

Here's Marble:

Susan Kang Schroeder's letter to her staff about our reporter Christine Hanley was full of errors and misstatements. It was a shocking personal attack, and particularly inappropriate coming from the public official responsible for press relations at the district attorney's office. It is also worth noting that the letter falls into a running pattern of attacking reporters engaged in investigative work. Christine is a veteran reporter and The Los Angeles Times has complete confidence in her integrity.

Sources say Times management sent a private communication to DA Rackauckas, calling Schroeder's email a "serious breach of ethics" and requesting a meeting.

Early Wednesday evening, Schroeder confirmed that the DA has agreed to a one-on-one meeting with Marble. How much progress can be made is unclear. Rackauckas relies heavily on Schroeder for media strategy and rarely deviates from her stance. And for her part, Schroeder isn't backing down.

She issued the following statement:

I like and respect Steve Marble. I regret that he is forced to defend a reporter whose actions are indefensible. I gave Ms. Hanley a 22-hour written notice to give her side of the story. She declined. I detailed specific misconduct by her in my letter to the Orange County prosecutors who work in my office. I am puzzled that the content of the letter would be "shocking" to Mr. Marble. On multiple occasions I have met with him to discuss Ms. Hanley's actions and to implore him to investigate her conduct.

I would hate for the readers to be left with the false impression that Mr. Marble was ambushed with any of the facts I included in my email yesterday. But instead of conducting an investigation into her actions, the LA Times has made a sweeping, general denial. During the 26 hours they spent before responding to my letter, they did not entertain even the possibility that any of the allegations could be true. Instead, the Times resorted to calling me names and attacking my integrity.

The Times claims that I have engaged in "a running pattern of attacking reporters engaged in investigative work." If so, why have I cooperated and offered quotes to other media outlets and publications that have written unflattering and negative things about the District Attorney's Office and me? Is "investigative work" within the Times a euphemism for fabricating facts, breaking promises, and behaving unethically?

We are very disappointed in the Times' response, but we are always hopeful that they will stop being defensive, cease in the name-calling, investigate the facts, and agree to change their behavior. The Orange County District Attorney looks forward to meeting with Mr. Marble.

And the rest of the country thinks LA has all the fun.

We live in era in which many resources are dwindling, but there's still one thing California has in abundance: rich people. According to a review of tax records for the years 1999-2004, done by the NewTithing Group of San Francisco, California has 407,000 households with $200,000 or more in adjusted gross income, and those households also have a total of $1.04 trillion in investment assets (and that's not counting pensions or real estate holdings). That makes California number 1 in big money households, with almost twice as many as the state in second place, New York. And according to a story in this morning's San Francisco Chronicle, the rich are different from you and me-- well, from me, at least-- because California's rich are cheap bastards.

From the Chronicle:

Despite ranking first in wealthy people, California ranks 21st among states for actual gifts per wealthy filer as a percentage of assets. Affluent Californians donated an average of $19,000 per household -- 0.74 percent of their investment assets and 3.24 percent of their adjusted gross income. Using the percentage of assets as a measure corrects for cost-of-living differences.

In Utah, the most-generous state, gifts per wealthy filer averaged $38,000, which came to 1.63 percent of assets and 7.4 percent of adjusted income. Utah's population was 62.4 percent Mormon in 2004, according to the Salt Lake Tribune. Mormon adults are expected to tithe 10 percent of their incomes to the LDS church.

Wealthy people in Oklahoma, Nebraska, Minnesota and Georgia were the next most-generous.

[…]

"If wealthy Californians were as generous as affluent households in the most-charitable five states, California giving would increase by $3.7 billion," said NewTithing director Tim Stone.

If I were Mr. Stone, I wouldn't be counting on that extra $3.7 billion showing up anytime soon.

Just a little something to remember the next time that someone tells you government social programs should be replaced with good ol' private charity.

The on again, off again war between the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County District Attorney's media affairs office is on again. Today, DA spokeswoman Susan Kang Schroeder sent an agencywide email "warning" staff about Times investigative reporter Christine Hanley. Schroeder claims that Hanley is "unethical," "reckless," "harasses people and their families," and wastes taxpayers dollars by filing "frivolous" public records requests. She advised prosecutors to use "extreme caution" with the veteran reporter.

The email comes months after Hanley began research for an indepth profile on Schroeder and her husband, Orange County GOP heavyweight Michael J. Schroeder, an insurance company owner and top adviser to both DA Tony Rackauckas and Sheriff Mike Carona. (He is also the former chairman of the California Republican Party and close pals with Congressman Dana Rohrabacher.) The Schroeders have said they would not cooperate for any article written by Hanley.

At the time of this posting, Hanley said she was preparing a formal response. (Check this website for any updates.) However, a Times OC source told the Weekly that Schroeder's email is "ridiculous and an obvious preemptive strike." Other sources at the paper claim that the GOP power couple has complained to Times management about Hanley and the possibility of a hostile profile for more than six months.

Here's a copy of the Schroeder warning:

----- Original Message -----
From: Schroeder, Susan
To: AllStaff@da.ocgov.com
Sent: Tue Sep 26 12:02:00 2006
Subject: WARNING -- UNETHICAL LA TIMES REPORTER CHRISTINE HANLEY

Dear colleagues:

We are lucky in Orange County because the Orange County press corps, for the most part, sets the gold standard. They are ethical, hardworking people who have an important job to do. The media often helps us find witnesses, solve crimes, and help inform the public that justice is done.

Unfortunately, in every profession there are bad apples. Christine Hanley is a reporter for the Los Angeles Times. She was recently assigned to cover our office. She used to cover our office four years ago. She has engaged in repeated unethical behavior including the manufacturing of facts. She is reckless and does not care about the truth. She has been repeatedly confronted about her false stories. She refuses to change.

You should exercise extreme caution in all contacts with her. Because of her past unethical practices, some attorneys in our office refuse to talk with her. I have listed a few of her "greatest hits." I have plenty more examples in greater detail. If you would like to learn more, please feel free to contact me.

In the interest of fairness and balance, I gave Ms. Hanley the opportunity to respond to the issues I set below. She refused to participate.

1. In January 2002, she requested an interview with the District Attorney. He initially declined. Christine Hanley pursued the interview. She promised that she would be the only person involved in the story and she would be fair and balanced. As a result, she was granted an exclusive. She broke both ground rules. When confronted about the violation of the ground rules, she first said her editors "made (her) do it." When told that her position was unacceptable and unethical, she changed her position and stated that she never agreed to the ground rules in the first place.

2. In June 2003, Christine Hanley wrote a story comparing "four Orange County prosecutors" to gang members when there were no such facts supporting the article. She also wrote "it is not clear who reported the shooting" when she could have learned the truth through a simple phone call. The deputy district attorneys in the story had done nothing wrong. When confronted with the truth, she was unremorseful and defensive.

3. In September 2005, Christine Hanley wrote a story accusing our office of obstruction of justice and prosecutorial misconduct. She based this story on a grand jury transcript which was available to her and to the public. There was no excuse for this fabrication because the grand jury transcript directly stated facts contrary to her position. When confronted with the factual errors, she first denied there were errors. When she realized that she could not deny the factual errors because of the transcript, she admitted that she did not have time to read the entire transcript. She offered to write an article correcting the factual errors. She even requested permission from her editors to do so and was granted permission. She was granted an hour-long interview with one of the deputy district attorneys accused of the obstruction of justice and misconduct so she could finally get her facts right. She failed to write the story correcting the facts.

4. Christine Hanley harasses people and their families if she decides she does not like them. She does not like our office because we have brought attention to her factual errors and unethical behavior. She frequently harasses our office and the County requesting nonexistent documents. Her requests are insulting and harassing. She often does not even bother picking up many of her so-called urgent demands. More importantly, it costs thousands of taxpayer dollars to process her requests. A few weeks ago, she even went as far as contacting and harassing my family members. Hanley most recently submitted another public records request in September 2006. The action occurred a few days after we complained to the LATimes and after the LATimes was warned that this letter was going out. Her frivolous actions have cost the County thousands of dollars.

5. Ms. Hanley threatens you with legal retaliation if she does not like what you are doing. She will try to get you into legal trouble if you have the audacity to challenge her ethics or dare to bring attention to her factual errors. In May 2006, she emailed the LATimes attorney and County Counsel alleging that I was "spending awful lot of county time ..." responding to her articles. Instead of seeking the truth and abating her unethical behaviors, she accused me of wasting taxpayer dollars and engaging in illegal activities for sending her emails challenging the facts contained in one of her articles and her breach of ethics.

Finally, beware of the Trojan horse invitations. Be very cautious about agreeing to go to lunch, dinner or drinks with her. If you insist on paying your own way (like I always do as a practice with reporters) she will accuse you of putting that on the County's expense account. If you do accept and allow the LATimes to pay, she may accuse you of being unethical for accepting influence.

She cannot be trusted to keep her word or to cover our office accurately or fairly. Please exercise extreme caution when speaking with her. She will seem friendly in the beginning. If you have further questions about this or want to know what you should do in dealing with her, please do not hesitate to call me.

Susan Kang Schroeder
Public Affairs Counsel
susan.schroeder@da.ocgov.com
Office 714-347-8408
Cell 714-292-2718

CLICK HERE to read The Times Orange County's response to Susan Schroeder's letter.

It was such a good story that David Letterman worked it into last night's monologue. And before Letterman, there was our own Matt Coker pointing out the story on the Weekly's ur-blog, A Clockwork Orange. The story: according to London's Daily Mirror, Arnold Schwarzenegger had taken his commitment to the environment to a previously unimagined level and gotten rid of his beloved Hummers. Even though this election year has seen Arnold undergo a revival tent's worth of conversions on a wide range of issues, it still seemed almost too good to be true-- the equivalent of Dracula selling his coffin or Dr. Frankenstein swearing off used body parts. And as it turns out, there's nothing "almost" or "seems" about it-- the story was just too good to be true.

Both the L.A. Times and the San Francisco Chronicle have looked into the cavernous depths of Arnold's garage and discovered that he still has four Hummers. Four-- that pretty much gives him a lock on the insecure-male-desperately-trying-compensate vote.

Speaking of desperate, this is just another black mark for the Mirror, which only a few years ago, was on its way to being a very respectable newspaper. In 2002, the Mirror was hailed for demonstrating a newfound devotion to fact-driven, hard news reporting under the direction of its editor, Piers Morgan. That devotion, alas, only lasted two years. In 2004, Morgan was fired after it emerged that the Mirror had faked some photos of British troops abusing Iraqis. After such a disgrace, where can someone like Morgan find work? America, of course. American TV, to be specific. Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan was the obnoxious English judge on NBC's American Idol knockoff, America's Got Talent. From editor of one of his country leading newspapers to being the Simon Cowell-lite on a third-rate American talent show who is most famous for making a 12 year old contestant cry-- it's not as good a story as Arnold Schwarzenegger giving up his Hummers, but it is true.

Having previously suppressed, ignored, and dishonestly redacted scientific reports that proved politically inconvenient, the Bush administration has taken the next logical step.

The Environment News Service reports:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is closing its Headquarters Library to the public, as well as its own staff, effective October 1. The decision, formally announced Wednesday in a Federal Register notice, cites lack of funding for the closure.
The Headquarters Library collection contains 380,000 documents on microfiche, including technical reports produced by EPA and its predecessor agencies, a microforms collection that includes back files of abstracts and indexes, 5,500 hard copy EPA documents, as well as more than 16,000 books and technical reports produced by government agencies other than EPA.

This shutdown is the latest in a series of agency library closures during the past few weeks, government watchdogs said, and as with the other library collections, the books, reports and research monographs in the EPA Headquarters Library have been boxed up and are currently inaccessible to anyone.

"EPA is busily crating up and locking away its institutional memory," said Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that more than 10,000 EPA scientists and other specialists are protesting the library closures as hindering their ability to do their jobs. "Despite its 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' public statements, EPA has no coherent plan let alone a timetable for making these collections available."

The agency has not said when any of the materials at the library will again become available to its staff or the public either via the Internet or through inter-library loans. It has no dedicated funds for digitizing hard copies, making microfiche available online or re-cataloguing the tens of thousands of documents that will be relocated to large storage areas called "information repositories."

Ruch criticized EPA for failing to at least issue public notice for its closures of its regional libraries in Chicago, Dallas and Kansas City. The three libraries provide services for the general public in 15 states and 109 tribal nations.

But the library closures have generated interest from Congress and House Democrats have asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate the effects that the EPA library closures will have on access to environmental information and the impacts on scientific research, regulatory quality and enforcement capability.

Think of it as streamlining-- you don't have spend time pretending your own experts don't know what they are talking about, if no one can read their reports in the first place

There are now 171 cases of people sickened by E. coli tainted spinach from Salinas Valley. But don't worry, the Schwarzenegger administration has a plan.

True, the source of the infection hasn't been identified yet, though the Sacramento Bee reported last week,

The spinach-packaging company in the cross hairs of an investigation into a nationwide E. coli outbreak has struggled to manage its wastewater and is in violation of a state water disposal permit, according to public records and state officials.

But those violations, disgusting though they may be, may not be at the root of the problem.

And we do have a fairly good idea of where this particularly virulent strain of E. coli, known as E. coli O157:H7,in question may have originally flourished. Writing in the New York Times, Nina Planck explains,

It's not found in the intestinal tracts of cattle raised on their natural diet of grass, hay and other fibrous forage. No, O157 thrives in a new — that is, recent in the history of animal diets — biological niche: the unnaturally acidic stomachs of beef and dairy cattle fed on grain, the typical ration on most industrial farms. It's the infected manure from these grain-fed cattle that contaminates the groundwater and spreads the bacteria to produce, like spinach, growing on neighboring farms.

The fecal matter on cattle farms should be contained in "waste lagoons", but those shit pits often leak into waterways or allow their contents to seep into the groundwater.

So which does the governor's plan focus on? Strict enforcement in the spinach fields, or trying to secure the fields from outside infection? Neither. Susan Kennedy, the governor's chief of staff, intends to hold meetings to discuss "best practices" in shit-free spinach growing, but no concrete plan has emerged from any such meeting yet. But the action-hero governor isn't waiting on best practices, he's already sprung into action and proposed a plan: an advertising blitz.

The Bee reports:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he plans to promote California spinach in a commercial to help the industry rebound from the E. coli bacteria scare.

"We have to help the industry because every so often something like this happens, and we all have to really work together to help them again to get back because they are losing millions of dollars every day," Schwarzenegger said.

If that sounds more like the governor is more concerned with spinach sellers making money than the public health, there may be a reason for that.

David Murdock owns the company that distributes the charmingly-named Natural Selection foods, the brand that has been sickening people across the country. David Murdock is a good friend of Schwarzenegger's. How good? The L.A. Times' Robert Salladay notes that "Murdock and his company, Castle & Cooke, and its executives have donated $304,600 to Schwarzenegger's various campaigns since 2002."

The green of that much money could make spinach look good to any politician, let alone a champion fundraiser like Schwarzenegger, no matter how green around the gills it is making those who eat it.

Over at Rising Hegemon, Attaturk notices a slight variation in the covers on this week's Newsweek. See if you can spot the difference.

Yep. That's right. The editors of the international editions of Newsweek simply don't understand the tremendous importance of Annie Leibovitz reminiscing about her life and work. Those editors prefer instead to focus the reader's attention on the resurgence of the Taliban and the current carnage outside Kabul with some downbeat story, "Losing Afghanistan". Fortunately, the editor of the U.S. edition of Newsweek realizes that United States didn't get to be "the greatest nation in the country"* by paying attention to its problems (especially when there's an election coming up).

(* "The United States, for all its faults, is still the greatest nation in the country."-- the immortal words of Spiro T. Agnew, Richard M. Nixon's first vice president, and still the only vice president to plead No Contest to bribery charges after being forced to resign from office.)

Five days after we pointed you to a Washington Post story on two ethically challenged local congressman, both got a curtain call for being among the 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress. For their eyebrow-raising, borderline illegal land dealings, Reps. Ken Calvert (R-Riverside, but his district includes parts of South Orange County) and Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar, whose district also takes in a chunk of North County) are ranked alongside such scoundrels as Katherine Harris (R-Florida), Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania) and Senator Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) in the rankings curated by the nonprofit Beyond Delay. Delay, of course, is a play on that most corrupt of recent congressional crooks, Tom DeLay, and you've no doubt noticed that everyone mentioned above is a Republican. But Beyond Delay spreads the scorn around, also including as most corrupt Democratic reps William Jefferson (D-Louisiana), Allan Mollohan (D-West Virginia) and Maxine Waters (D-California). And Beyond Delay's list of 5 congresspeople to watch includes darling of the anti-war movement, Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania). The 17-term congressman's "ethics issues stem from abuse of his position as Ranking Member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee to benefit clients of his brother, Robert 'Kit' Murtha, a registered lobbyist," report the watchdogs.

It says right here that our Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger has sold his eight Hummers after converting to the cause to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. You'll recall that then-action star Schwarzenegger was the one who convinced Hummer's manufacturer to sell the all-terrain military vehicles to civilians, becoming the first person to purchase one in 1992.

George Bush has fundamentally reshaped the "conventional wisdom" of American political life in a way that most presidents can only dream of. Ronald Reagan elicited only agreement, at least rhetorically, that "the era of big government is over." George Bush has elicited agreement that "those claiming to have been tortured by the United States have no rights that the United States is bound to respect" in any ordinary legal sense, as by having to show up in court. America will be paying for that reshaping for many, many years to come.

That's Sanford Levinson, who holds the W. St. John Garwood Centennial Chair in Law at the University of Texas Law School, writing on the Balkinization law blog about the deal on the use of torture in interrogating suspects in the "Global War on Terror" (or whatever it's currently called) which has been reached by Senate "rebels" and the White House. It's a little breathtaking to realize how much closer the United States is today to being a country that officially endorses torture than it was just Monday. But that's the sad reality of it.

More from Levinson:

So now we have a disgusting capitulation by the almost-tragic figure of John McCain, whose near-nobility has been thoroughly corrupted by his desire to be President (though there's no real doubt he'd be a far superior President to the incumbent) that removes any real prospect of a remedy for those tortured by the United States. No serious person could possibly believe that the US will ever actually prosecute any member of the CIA who engages in tortue--and we've know for at least two years now that the OLC memos are all about the CIA and not, in any serious way, about the military--and the capitulation deprives anyone victimized by the United States of a day in court. (And, of course, even if someone can get to court, as did the Canadian Mr. Amar, craven judges will allow the mantra "state secrets privilege" to trump any claim of right. So much for the "Equal Justice Under Law" carved over the US Supreme Court.)

So are we on our way toward an American versio of what Ernst Fraenkel termed "The Dual State" (1941), in which a fairly ordinary legal-state co-existed with a lawless one that felt free to do just whatever it wanted vis-a-vis its ideological opponents, secure in the knowledge that there would never be a legal remedy (at least not until Nuremberg) for anything the regime did? No, I don't think the Bush Administration should be compared with the Nazis, but, as I've been repeatedly arguing vis-a-vis Carl Schmitt, I believe that we ignore the legal thinking and analysis that took place during Weimar and its aftermath at our peril. It is no great compliment to say that we are, as yet, nowhere near the Nazis. It should be enough to realize that the often brilliant analysts responding to the great crisis in their personal and professional lives may have something to teach us today about how political institutions operate under stress (and where demagogic and opportunistic politicians realize that there are potential gains to maximizing public fears of the Other).

This so-called "compromise" means, purely and simply, that we don't even profess to take seriously the minimal conditions for "the rule of law" with regard to those determined, often by fiat judgment, to be "the worst of the worst." What is even more dispiriting is that there is no reason to believe that the Democrats will defeat this disgrace, as they could through a filibuster that would simply delay its passage beyond the November elections, the whole point of this charade, because they are fearful of being tarred as "friends of the terrorists." There is, that is, no "opposition party" in America with regard to one of the deepest issues of our time. THAT is George W. Bush's biggest victory, helped along by Tom Daschle's (and John Kerry's and Hillary Clinton's etc.) absolutely disastrous decision in 2002 to write Bush a blank check on Iraq in order to focus the attention of the American electorate on prescription drugs for the elderly.

Also at Balkinization, Marty Lederman, focusing more on the legal nuts and bolts of the matter, explains Three of the Most Significant Problems with the "Compromise".

As reported here (Rock Stars My Destination by Chris Ziegler) Costa Mesa's true Supernova started up the litigation machine to win their rightful name back from the come-lately Supernova put together for the CBS reality show Rock Star: Supernova. And today they won. Press release says:

Under the terms of the settlement, the Orange County rockers will continue to retain the rights to the name "Supernova." [Reality TV magnate Mark] Burnett's band, which is anchored by drummer Tommy Lee and recently named reality show contestant Lukas Rossi lead singer, may use the name "Rock Star Supernova"--the name of the CBS TV reality show which gave birth to the new band. The remaining settlement terms are confidential.

This is the second happiest conclusion possible, just under Supernova getting a special reality show all their own. Congratulations to the plaintiffs. Say hi to the guys at myspace.com/supernovaarmy or shake hands live at the following shows:

10/14 - SAN DIEGO - Hot Monkey Love Cafe
10/15 - POMONA - Bamboozle Festival
12/01 - SALT LAKE CITY, UT - In The Venue
12/02 - DENVER, CO - Gothic Theatre

To hell with stem cell research - now they're just being silly.

From today's Sludge Report:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Human embryonic stem cells can partly restore vision in blinded rats, and may offer a source of transplants for people with certain eye diseases, researchers at a U.S. company reported on Thursday.

Great. Exactly what we need - rats with enhanced eyesight. Coming soon: eighteen-legged spiders that shoot acid and cockroaches with mounted artillery.
Three blind mice were unavailable for comment at press time, but the Farmer's Wife, their official spokesperson, reports to have "never seen such a thing in her life" as such blatant discrimination against disabled mice in favor of disabled rats.

First off, behold the new look of the UC Irvine student newspaper New University's website. Much improved. Second, take a gander at Linda Domingo's story on social science professor David Neumark's recent address to the all-new Social Science Dinner Club gathered in the University Club. Neumark essentially argued against increases in the minimum wage and for the return of state-sponsored slavery. Okay, so we're making up the slavery part (we think), but Neumark does contend that a higher minimum wage makes it harder for the working poor to find work, making them the pooring poor, we suppose.

"If you think about firms that have some choice about how to produce things [by using low-skilled or high-skilled labor], when you make whatever you're talking about more expensive, they are going to use less of it. If you raise the price of low-skilled labor, they are going to substitute away from that low-skilled input toward other inputs," said Neumark, according to Domingo's reporting.

Neumark pointed to stats that show as the price of gasoline and cigarettes have gone up, people have used them less. It follows that the same holds true for businesses who must dole out more for labor, he said.
Lucky for him, the same does not hold true for the UC system, which no doubt doles out a comfortable salary to Mr. Smarty Pants.

The pope has trotted out what might be his third semi-apology for his remarks at the University of Regensburg that have angered Muslims. Or it might be his fourth semi-apology. I pretty much gave up on following the apology coverage when it became clear that the U.S. media was completely surprised that Benedict could have insulted, or could have been perceived as insulting, another religion. It seems no one on American television, or spilling ink in our newspapers, remembers that 10 years ago, when Benedict was still Cardinal Ratzinger, he dismissed Buddhism as just a form of mental masturbation.

In his latest semi-apology, the pope claimed today that no "attentive reader" of his speech could believe he said anything objectionable. In a nice bit of serendipity, the pope's speech got an attentive reader today, Irvine's own Kevin Drum. Drum, who writes the Washington Monthly's blog, Political Animal, is famously reasonable. And relentlessly moderate, though somewhat liberal. Also, infuriatingly evenhanded, all too often. But painstakingly civil, always. Usually less an animal (the blog's title refers to a passage from Aristotle's Politics), than a nice Political Glass of Warm Milk. And so what did he conclude after reading Benedict's speech?

The reference to Islam near the beginning of the speech was entirely gratuitous and disingenuous, as were Benedict's subsequent crocodile tears over the idea that anyone could have taken offense at his remarks.

Of course, as the pope's apologists are quick to point out, the reference to Islam was just one part of the speech, and must be kept in the context of the whole speech, which was about faith and reason. Well, Drum read the whole speech, and here's what he calls his "nickel version":

Mohammed was a violent man. Violence is unreasonable. God loves reason. Draw your own conclusions.

Playing devil's advocate, let me just say in the pope's defense, that at least this time he didn't call anyone a mental jerk-off. Clearly he's grown as a person since ascending the throne of St. Peter.

If you're someone who wants to visit Laguna Beach, but is so filled with inertia that you can't be bothered to step outside your front door, there's good news-- MTV is here to help. MTV, which has already had great success in reducing Laguna Beach to nothing more than a gaggle of impressively self-absorbed teenagers with its show "Laguna Beach: The Real OC", has taken the next step in reduction, and reduced Laguna Beach to lines of binary code that give anyone with a computer the chance to pretend to be a part of a gaggle of impressively self-absorbed teenagers.

The New York Times reports that MTV is rolling out Virtual Laguna Beach this week,

an online service in which fans of ["Laguna Beach: The Real OC"] can immerse themselves — or at least can immerse digitized, three-dimensional characters, called avatars, that they control — in virtual versions of the show's familiar seaside hangouts.

"You can not only watch TV, but now you can actually live it," Van Toffler, the president of the MTV Networks Music, Film and Logo Group, said in an interview.

Yes, you can actually live it-- it'll be just like the real thing, only no Schwarzeneggerian-style groping.

"The worst thing they can do is kiss — and it's Catholic school kissing," said Matt Bostwick, an MTV senior vice president. "The lips touch, but the bodies don't."

What the Virtual Laguna Beach will have instead of roaming hands is the one thing MTV has become synonymous with: youth-oriented marketing opportunities.

One of the appeals of virtual worlds for MTV is the possibility that advertising can spill over into the real one. Visitors might buy a digital outfit for parties using currency they earned watching an infomercial or checking out a new product for an MTV advertiser. Then, they might decide that they would like to buy the same outfit for their offline selves, and, with a few clicks of the mouse and some real dollars, have one shipped to their home. In trial form, Virtual Laguna Beach has advertising relationships with brands including Cingular, Pepsi-Cola, Secret and another Viacom company, Paramount.

And to give it an extra touch of OC verisimilitude, MTV will soon be introducing class-- or at least, cash-- distinctions:

For instance, residents of Virtual Laguna Beach will have the opportunity later this fall to get a virtual car and a virtual house for a gold membership fee of $4.99 a month. For $5.99, a platinum membership will get them status: V.I.P. access to nightclubs and other events to be staged "in world."

It's probably for the best that all those events stay "in world", because the real world is bound to disappoint fans of Virtual Laguna Beach, for reasons the Times story clearly illustrates.

During a demonstration last week at MTV, Mr. Bostwick played the role of an avatar named Violet Jade whom he configured — scrolling through an extensive menu of eye shapes, hair colors, skin tones and so on — to look like a typical character on the show: blond, tan and scantily clad.

Violet Jade is a tanned and nubile blond teen. Matt Bostwick, on the other hand, is the one in the stripped shirt in the picture below.

Welcome to the real world.

(photo via New York Times)

The clever folks at the Center for Fire Research and Outreach, part of UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources, have launched a very useful website-- the Fire Information Engine Toolkit. Among the tools in the kit is one that can offer an assessment of the vulnerability of your home, or any other building in California, to wildfire. And after you assess your vulnerability, you can find information on the site on how to mitigate the fire hazard.

The site also offers real-time wildfire news from around the world, and maps of recent and current wildfire activity in the state. Considering the impressive percentage of California's native flora that is designed to burn (pdf file), it's best that the state's fauna be as well-informed as possible.

For good measure, we also received this link to a Washington Post article on Orange County congressman Ken Calvert (R-Riverside; his district includes southernmost Orange County) and Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar; his district includes northernmost Orange County), along with House Speaker Dennis Hastert, making millions off the sale of separate land parcels they own near government projects overseen by the House. Here is the relevant section on our local reps:

Last year, Calvert, the California Republican congressman, and a business partner bought a four-acre parcel near the March Air Reserve Base in Riverside County, Calif., for $550,000. He then secured $8 million for a planned freeway interchange 16 miles away, an additional $1.5 million to support commercial development around the airfield, and sold the property less than a year later for almost $1 million.

Calvert spokesman Bob Carretta pointed to the findings of a Los Angeles-based watchdog group that concluded that Calvert's profit was in line with the rise in market values in the area.

Miller, the other California Republican, helped secure $1.28 million in last year's highway bill for street improvements near a planned residential and commercial development in Diamond Bar, Calif., that he co-owns with a top campaign contributor.

Kevin McKee, a Miller spokesman, said the road improvement was a mile away from the development and had been designated by Diamond Bar officials as their top priority.

We'd just hit the send button on that last post when we received this concerning the county's "reluctancy to let sunshine in" on their Aliso Creek clean-up project. It's an email exchange between local do-gooder group Iris Project and county Supervisor Tom Wilson, whose district includes Aliso Creek:

From: Iris Adam [mailto:iris@uci.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 7:17 AM
To: Thomas Wilson

Dear Supervisor Wilson,

The Iris Forum looks for commonalities -- this is where solutions lie.

The Iris Forum is a diversified portfolio of opinions on a single issue resulting in an ongoing intentional shift toward finding commonalities in issue of the day. The Iris Forum is the first multipartisan environmental think tank dedicated to an on going dialogue regarding the biological, social and economic effects of human activities on our environment.

A single topic (the Aliso Creek Corridor), six political parties (a Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian, Natural Law, and an Independent), along with the experts, sit down together for a conversation. The Iris Forum is known for inspiring dialogue from diverse perspectives, resulting in broadened awareness of humanity's relationship with the environment.

Ideally, for an Iris Forum on Aliso Creek, we would like to see three experts brought in:
1. A neutral party who can briefly explain the proposed dams on the creek and proposed watershed issues
2. A representative from The Athens Group
2. A representative from the Voices of Wilderness

Schedule for an Iris Forum:
1. Welcome and Statement of Purpose (10-15 minutes)
2. Neutral expert (10-15 minutes)
3. The Athens Group (10-15 minutes)
4. The Voices of Wilderness (10-15 minutes)
5. Iris Forum with Republican, Democrat, Natural Law, Green, Libertarian, Independent, and a Facilitator
a. Conversation (30 minutes)
b. Commonalities (30 minutes)

Please let me know if the Iris Forum can be of service to you at the Aliso Creek Watershed Stakeholder Meeting.
Tuesday, October 3,
4:00-5:30 PM
Laguna Hills Community Center
25555 Alicia Parkway, Meeting Room C, Laguna Hills, CA 92653

Sincerely,
Iris
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Iris Adam, Founder
Iris Forum
http://www.irisforum.org/

Here is Wilson's reply:

From: "Wilson, Thomas"
Date: September 15, 2006 1:42:12 PM PDT
To: 'Iris Adam' , "Wilson, Thomas"
Dear Iris,

I certainly appreciate your offer to assist us in our efforts to address the on-going issues in Aliso Creek; however, I am confident that we have already launched a viable, success-oriented approach which includes many of the components you reference in your recent memo to me.

I thank you for your interest and your proposal of service but I sincerely believe we have a strategy in place that will produce the positive results expected.

Thank you,

TWW

You know how the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency announced recently they are joining forces to clean up stinky Aliso Creek (finally), which spews its filth into South Laguna's Aliso Beach? Yeah, when have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, eight years ago. Anyway, you'd think such an announcement would be embraced by the local environmentalists who have worked tirelessly to clean that cesspool up. But, in the LA Times story on the agreement, Penny Elia, who chairs a Sierra Club task force dedicated to cleaning up the waterway, was skeptical.

"They promised us we would have an opportunity to bring in our own scientists for a second opinion or a peer review for this super project. And--wham, bam we have a press conference announcing it."

But the agreement was hailed by Larry McKenney, manager of Orange County's Resources and Development Management Department, who promised environmentalists will have a say on the $45 million project to restore wildlife habitats along the creek and clean the water that runs through it.

Meanwhile, Roger von Butow, the Laguna Beach activist who has most closely monitored the work (or, more accurately, lack thereof) just sent this to us. He's pissed over the composition of a county designated Aliso Creek Technical Review Committee, and especially it being headed up by his most dreaded enviro-foe, Garry Brown of the Orange County Coastkeepers. Roger ticks off his problems:

--Neither Garry Brown nor his CoastKeepers ever attended a single Aliso Creek Watershed Study Meeting, the ones held monthly from late 1998-2004, hosted by the USACE & County of Orange.
--Aliso Creek is in Region 9, Cal EPA.
--CoastKeepers is in fact a Region 8, Cal EPA group out of New Porsche, with little effect, engagement & zero eco-product (history or success) in Region 9.
--Miraculously, he has been picked to head up the Aliso Creek Technical Review Committee.
--This is an outrage, to pass over legitimate Region 9 leaders with local grass roots involvement.
--Is this what the Sierra Club & South Laguna Civic Association intended by dragging in a Region 9 MIA with a questionable personal background?
--Shouldn't long term Region 9 groups be allowed to be part of this selection or appointment?

Von Butow then points to a couple Weekly stories that detail Brown's, um, colorful background: Poo Fighters and Garry Quite Contrary. Von Butow also directs those interested to the Times archives to read about Brown being a consultant to Iger & Associates, the powerful state lobbying firm whose clients include the pavement-happy Building Industry Association. Brown used to head the BIA's Baldy View chapter in San Bernardino County.

More Roger:

--It was Clean Water Now! who "outed" GB regarding his double-dipping employment: One check from CoastKeepers, one check from the "loyal opposition" at IGER a while back.
--So why HAS GB been chosen by Larry McKenney (County of Orange) to head up the most critical committee in this new series of Aliso Creek meetings?
--Is GB going to "green wash" or fast track controversial projects by invoking the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sacred & hollowed name (Keepers Alliance)?
--Where's a good investigative reporter when you need them?

Good question.

There's good news if you're one of those people infuriated by the sight of some idiot behind the steering wheel with a cell phone pressed to his head talking and not paying attention while driving-- that idiot's days are numbered. Come Summer 2008, that idiot will be replace by the new and improved idiot behind the steering wheel with a cell phone headset welded to his head talking and not paying attention while driving.

Governor Schwarzenegger is scheduled to sign SB1613 into law today. The law will ban blathering away on a handheld cell phone after July 1, 2008, but if you have a hands-free set up (e.g., a headset) you'll still be free to blather. Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Washington, D.C. already have similar laws. But what these other states don't have is a governor who can squeeze money for his reelection campaign out of the cell phone companies the same week he signs such a law.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports, "Schwarzenegger had a fundraiser with the cell phone industry earlier this week." That entertaining fact is more than just a tribute to the governor's unrivaled cash extraction abilities-- abilities that must have former champion fundraisers like Pete Wilson and Gray Davis, as well as a goodly portion of the world's pickpockets and conmen, shaking their heads in stunned admiration-- it's also a sign of how non-threatening this bill is to the cell phone industry. In fact, whereas most business groups howl and whine whenever a new regulation touching them is enacted, this time only one company, Sprint-Nextel, protested the bill. And why should the others protest? After all, this bill will help them sell new accessories while distracting attention away from the real public safety problem involved in using cell phones while driving, which is… using cell phones while driving.

According to the Chronicle, the bill's author, Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), maintains that "data from the California Highway Patrol showed that not only were cell phones the No. 1 cause of distracted driving accidents, but that hands-free technology substantially reduced the number of crashes". Without wishing to cast any doubts on the number crunching skills of the Highway Patrol, I note that the only peer-reviewed study of the effect of hands-free cell phone technology on driving safety to examine actual accident data and cell phone records, instead of the actions of volunteers who knew they were being monitored, comes to a very different conclusion.

In 2003 and 2004, the Virginia-based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research center, studied traffic accidents in Perth, Australia, where hands-free technology was already legally mandated. After reviewing 744 cases, the Institute concluded, "There is no safety advantage associated with switching to the types of hands-free devices that are commonly in use." Summarizing the findings of the study for The New York Times when it appeared in the British Medical Journal in 2005, Rae Tyson of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said,

"There just doesn't seem to be any safety benefit by restricting drivers to hands-free phones… It's the cognitive overload that sometimes occurs when you're engaging in a conversation that is the source of the distraction more so than the manipulation of the device."

With wry understatement, the study, which appeared after those other states passed their laws, does advance one possible solution to the safety problem posed by using cell phones while driving:

"While a possible solution in the future is to change mobile phones so they cannot be used when vehicles are in motion, the likelihood the industry would embrace such a change seems remote."

No cell phone use while driving? Not only is it a "remote" possibility that the industry "would embrace such a change", but one can easily imagine the industry standing by almost silently while a law that introduces new regulations but keeps people chatting on cell phones in cars is passed, and even stuffing money into the pockets of a governor who would sign such a law.

The funniest moment at a recent Hollywood press screening for The U.S. vs. John Lennon came when the mug of a certain despised newsmaker--who was at the height of his evil powers in the early 1970s--filled the screen and the attending media responded with a loud, sustained hiss. Here's a hint: the newsmaker WAS NOT Richard M. Nixon; his craggily, misshapen, sweat-stained fright mask would flash onscreen immediately after the solicitor of the hiss to indifferent entertainment journalist silence. Nope, the talking head that got the universally applied snake impression was none other than Geraldo Rivera. Ironically, Rivera, in this documentary, testified for the main figure defying authority--white knight John Lennon--and not the criminal Republican administration then in power that was trying to silence the peacenik Beatle. That Fox newsman Geraldo cheerleads for the criminal Republican administration now in power obviously was lost on Geraldo, but not this smirking crowd of scribes.

In our current New Film Reviews, you'll find Robert Abele's take on Mike Judge's new film Idiocracy. It's not exactly a rave, but we've slammed other films much harder 'round here:

IDIOCRACY
The strange irony of Fox off-loading the new (yet long-completed) Mike Judge comedy without screenings, trailers, posters, or marketing is that in the IQ-obliterated future Judge's movie envisions, the biggest evil in the collective sanding of our brains is arguably advertising. Luke Wilson plays a present-day average joe experimentally frozen by the Army and forgotten about until he's accidentally awakened in 2505, where he discovers a slovenly, sophomoric, masturbatory, junk food-engorged world of mental midgets who first imprison him, then make him Secretary of the Interior once they realize he's probably the smartest man in the world. It's an eat-your-cake-and-have-it-too concept--stupid humor as dystopian satire--but this low-boil affair from the Office Space auteur wears out its dumb-and-dumbest playbook early on. When we see CGI cityscapes of neglected, barren skyscrapers and monuments tilting, it's somehow appropriate: the movie just feels off. If you crave a lively and funny trek through the farcical possibilities of unchecked dimwit power, Judge is still your guy. Just go rent Beavis and Butt-Head Do America instead.

That preview appeared as Idiocracy was opening in theaters all over Orange County and Long Beach. And when someone in the office got reports that Judge's film did not suck and was instead a brilliant observational piece on the sad direction this country is headed in, we decided to give the film a second look. Well, to be perfectly honest, that "someone" was Publisher/Editor Will Swaim, the "reports" were the feelings of one of Will's trusted friends and the "we decided" was Will saying he wanted the film re-screened and re-reviewed.

And so, our intrepid film writer Greg Stacy sashayed into his local ginormoplex, caught the picture in a clearly un-packed house and--lo and behold--loved it just as much as Will's friend. You can read his reconsideration of the film here and in this week's print edition.

But, funny story about that piece appearing in a paper designed to tell Orange Countians what to do and see and hear and smell and eat this weekend: Idiocracy will already be gone from Orange County and Long Beach theaters by then. As Greg writes, "Fox is dumping this thing like a radioactive turd, releasing it to but a handful of cities, with no TV or radio ads, no posters, no media press kits . . . basically, the only way you'll know this movie exists is if you happen to run into Judge somewhere and ask him what he's been up to lately." And Fox's strategy seems to have worked.

Informed of this development, Greg had this to say: "Sweet mother Mcree... those Fox borstords! There's an idiocracy running that place."

"…wandering stars, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever." Jude (1:13)

Jude, brother of James, obviously wasn't thinking about the Newport Beach Walk of Fame in his Epistle, but it's still a fairly apt description Newport Beach's attempt at combining celebrity and paving materials.

Like The General Epistle of Jude, which is tucked away in a little trafficked part of the New Testament, the Newport Beach Walk of Fame has found a home far from both its original intended location, Balboa Pavilion, and possible public attention: next to the pay phone in the office of an RV park. An entertaining little story in today's Los Angeles Times describes the Walk's wanderings. Following the Walk's creation at a semi-gala ceremony in October 2004, where some of the actors and producers of "The OC" pressed their hands into wet cement, things became steadily less gala. No more handprints were sought. The plans to ensconce the Walk in the Balboa Pavilion fell through, "for reasons city leaders can no longer recall", according to the Times.

The cement blocks instead wound up in limbo at the headquarters of the Newport Beach Conference & Visitors Bureau.

Until a few weeks ago, two of the handprints were displayed in the bureau's lobby window, and the rest were lined up along the bottom of a conference room window.

Tourists lay on the ground outside the windows, in position to pose for snapshots, said Jessica Roswell, marketing and public relations manager for the visitors bureau.

Although the Walk of Fame drew about 200 visitors a month, the search for a permanent home languished, Roswell said.

Finally, on Aug. 29, the Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort came to the rescue.

The 100-acre RV park and marina on Backbay Drive began displaying the celebrity handprints on a tilted wooden rack next to a pay phone in the main office.

Having set the bar so low when it comes to Walks of Fame in Orange County, Newport Beach may soon be outshone by the usually more dowdy Anaheim. Anaheim has its own plans for a Walk of Fame, one not located next to the counter where RV owners inquire about the sewage hook-ups for their motor homes.

Imagine that, Anaheim and Newport Beach go head-to-head on a tourist attraction, and Anaheim emerges the more glamorous. If that happens, the image Jude couples with his description of wandering stars might also fit Newport Beach: "raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame". (Or maybe not-- Newport Beach has never been very big on shame.)

Most teachers love a good visual aid to drive home the point of a lesson, and Gary Weddle, a science teacher at Ephrata Middle School in Ephrata, Washington, has a hell of a visual aid: his beard. The lesson, though, has nothing to do with science.

Weddle was so caught up by the news in the days after 9/11 five years, he forgot to shave. And when his thoughts finally did turn again to shaving, he decided to use his stubble to make a statement and vowed to let his beard grow until Osama bin Laden was killed or captured. According to the Associated Press, Weddle thought he'd only be growing out his whiskers for "a month or so". The beard is now over a foot long.

Considering the Washington Post recently reported that there is no one in the U.S. government with overall responsibility for capturing bin Laden, it's unlikely Weddle will be picking up a razor anytime soon. Let's just hope that that none of his science classes involve bunsen burners.