#the organized crime is incidental

[redbean-nom]

tbobf makes a lot more sense if you think about boba's organization as bounty hunter syndicate instead of a crime syndicate - basically a union competing with the bounty hunters guild and the pyke smugglers. he still works for the hutt cartel (the twins with the mouse towel) but now he has a union

[lord-squiggletits]

Now I may be overgeneralizing a bit, but I feel like in certain fics as well as the audiences for those fics, there's a weird tendency for the writers/audience to treat Optimus as if he's some sort of goody two shoes who doesn't care about his own race because of his love/respect for organics and it like...bothers the hell out of me honestly lol.

Like if you would rather focus on Cybertronian politics and ignore/even retcon out the organic destruction caused by the war, I totally get it. People find the Cybertronian politics way more interesting, there's not really as much lore on the aliens of the TF universe besides humans, you're tired of the Decepticons being bad guys, yeah like I get it.

I just find it incredibly off-putting when people (in fics or otherwise) try to frame Optimus prioritizing organics as legitimate criticism of him when it's not?????? Like his stance across multiple continuities is universally "organics are equal beings to us, we brought the war to their planets, they don't deserve to be hurt or exploited by us" and I don't fucking get how people can possibly frame that as a bad thing. HOW are mfs in this fandom treating Optimus as if his empathy/care for organic races makes him annoying or self-righteous or selfish like what.

[gynoidgearhead]

[Image caption: post by attorneyryan reading as follows.]

This advice might save your life: 1. Don't make small talk with cops. It makes ZERO difference if you have "nothing to hide." 2. Don't trust cops. They don't know the law and they're legally allowed to lie to you. 3. NEVER consent to a search. No matter how innocent you are. 4. NEVER make a deal with cops. They do not have ANY legal authority to offer you a plea deal. They're trying to trick you into making a false confession. Many innocent people can be saved by this advice.

[End caption.]

[microtheory]

If the Nuremberg Laws were Applied…

-Noam Chomsky

Delivered around 1990

If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged. By violation of the Nuremberg laws I mean the same kind of crimes for which people were hanged in Nuremberg. And Nuremberg means Nuremberg and Tokyo. So first of all you’ve got to think back as to what people were hanged for at Nuremberg and Tokyo. And once you think back, the question doesn’t even require a moment’s waste of time. For example, one general at the Tokyo trials, which were the worst, General Yamashita, was hanged on the grounds that troops in the Philippines, which were technically under his command (though it was so late in the war that he had no contact with them — it was the very end of the war and there were some troops running around the Philippines who he had no contact with), had carried out atrocities, so he was hanged. Well, try that one out and you’ve already wiped out everybody.

But getting closer to the sort of core of the Nuremberg-Tokyo tribunals, in Truman’s case at the Tokyo tribunal, there was one authentic, independent Asian justice, an Indian, who was also the one person in the court who had any background in international law [Radhabinod Pal], and he dissented from the whole judgment, dissented from the whole thing. He wrote a very interesting and important dissent, seven hundred pages — you can find it in the Harvard Law Library, that’s where I found it, maybe somewhere else, and it’s interesting reading. He goes through the trial record and shows, I think pretty convincingly, it was pretty farcical. He ends up by saying something like this: if there is any crime in the Pacific theater that compares with the crimes of the Nazis, for which they’re being hanged at Nuremberg, it was the dropping of the two atom bombs. And he says nothing of that sort can be attributed to the present accused. Well, that’s a plausible argument, I think, if you look at the background. Truman proceeded to organize a major counter-insurgency campaign in Greece which killed off about one hundred and sixty thousand people, sixty thousand refugees, another sixty thousand or so people tortured, political system dismantled, right-wing regime. American corporations came in and took it over. I think that’s a crime under Nuremberg.

Well, what about Eisenhower? You could argue over whether his overthrow of the government of Guatemala was a crime. There was a CIA-backed army, which went in under U.S. threats and bombing and so on to undermine that capitalist democracy. I think that’s a crime. The invasion of Lebanon in 1958, I don’t know, you could argue. A lot of people were killed. The overthrow of the government of Iran is another one — through a CIA-backed coup. But Guatemala suffices for Eisenhower and there’s plenty more.

Kennedy is easy. The invasion of Cuba was outright aggression. Eisenhower planned it, incidentally, so he was involved in a conspiracy to invade another country, which we can add to his score. After the invasion of Cuba, Kennedy launched a huge terrorist campaign against Cuba, which was very serious. No joke. Bombardment of industrial installations with killing of plenty of people, bombing hotels, sinking fishing boats, sabotage. Later, under Nixon, it even went as far as poisoning livestock and so on. Big affair. And then came Vietnam; he invaded Vietnam. He invaded South Vietnam in 1962. He sent the U.S. Air Force to start bombing. Okay. We took care of Kennedy.

Johnson is trivial. The Indochina war alone, forget the invasion of the Dominican Republic, was a major war crime.

Nixon the same. Nixon invaded Cambodia. The Nixon-Kissinger bombing of Cambodia in the early ’70’s was not all that different from the Khmer Rouge atrocities, in scale somewhat less, but not much less. Same was true in Laos. I could go on case after case with them, that’s easy.

Ford was only there for a very short time so he didn’t have time for a lot of crimes, but he managed one major one. He supported the Indonesian invasion of East Timor, which was near genocidal. I mean, it makes Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait look like a tea party. That was supported decisively by the United States, both the diplmatic and the necessary military support came primarily from the United States. This was picked up under Carter.

Carter was the least violent of American presidents but he did things which I think would certainly fall under Nuremberg provisions. As the Indonesian atrocities increased to a level of really near-genocide, the U.S. aid under Carter increased. It reached a peak in 1978 as the atrocities peaked. So we took care of Carter, even forgetting other things.

Reagan. It’s not a question. I mean, the stuff in Central America alone suffices. Support for the Israeli invasion of Lebanon also makes Saddam Hussein look pretty mild in terms of casualties and destruction. That suffices.

Bush. Well, need we talk on? In fact, in the Reagan period there’s even an International Court of Justice decision on what they call the “unlawful use of force” for which Reagan and Bush were condemned. I mean, you could argue about some of these people, but I think you could make a pretty strong case if you look at the Nuremberg decisions, Nuremberg and Tokyo, and you ask what people were condemned for. I think American presidents are well within the range.

Also, bear in mind, people ought to be pretty critical about the Nuremberg principles. I don’t mean to suggest they’re some kind of model of probity or anything. For one thing, they were ex post facto. These were determined to be crimes by the victors after they had won. Now, that already raises questions. In the case of the American presidents, they weren’t ex post facto. Furthermore, you have to ask yourself what was called a “war crime”? How did they decide what was a war crime at Nuremberg and Tokyo? And the answer is pretty simple. and not very pleasant. There was a criterion. Kind of like an operational criterion. If the enemy had done it and couldn’t show that we had done it, then it was a war crime. So like bombing of urban concentrations was not considered a war crime because we had done more of it than the Germans and the Japanese. So that wasn’t a war crime. You want to turn Tokyo into rubble? So much rubble you can’t even drop an atom bomb there because nobody will see anything if you do, which is the real reason they didn’t bomb Tokyo. That’s not a war crime because we did it. Bombing Dresden is not a war crime. We did it. German Admiral Gernetz — when he was brought to trial (he was a submarine commander or something) for sinking merchant vessels or whatever he did — he called as a defense witness American Admiral Nimitz who testified that the U.S. had done pretty much the same thing, so he was off, he didn’t get tried. And in fact if you run through the whole record, it turns out a war crime is any war crime that you can condemn them for but they can’t condemn us for. Well, you know, that raises some questions.

I should say, actually, that this, interestingly, is said pretty openly by the people involved and it’s regarded as a moral position. The chief prosecutor at Nuremberg was Telford Taylor. You know, a decent man. He wrote a book called Nuremberg and Vietnam. And in it he tries to consider whether there are crimes in Vietnam that fall under the Nuremberg principles. Predictably, he says not. But it’s interesting to see how he spells out the Nuremberg principles.

They’re just the way I said. In fact, I’m taking it from him, but he doesn’t regard that as a criticism. He says, well, that’s the way we did it, and should have done it that way. There’s an article on this in The Yale Law Journal [“Review Symposium: War Crimes, the Rule of Force in International Affairs,” The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 80, #7, June 1971] which is reprinted in a book [Chapter 3 of Chomsky’s For Reasons of State (Pantheon, 1973)] if you’re interested.

I think one ought to raise many questions about the Nuremberg tribunal, and especially the Tokyo tribunal. The Tokyo tribunal was in many ways farcical. The people condemned at Tokyo had done things for which plenty of people on the other side could be condemned. Furthermore, just as in the case of Saddam Hussein, many of their worst atrocities the U.S. didn’t care about. Like some of the worst atrocities of the Japanese were in the late ’30s, but the U.S. didn’t especially care about that. What the U.S. cared about was that Japan was moving to close off the China market. That was no good. But not the slaughter of a couple of hundred thousand people or whatever they did in Nanking. That’s not a big deal.

[absolutebl]

This Week in BL - Actually a pretty fab line up right now

Organized, in each category, with ones I'm enjoying most at the top.

NOV 2024 Week 5

Ongoing Series - Thai

Love Sick 2024 (Sun iQIYI) ep 11 of 15 - This is where the teen awkward comes to grab me by the throat. No other Thai BL does this better than Love Sick (except maybe Make it Right). And it’s always a challenge to watch because Phun is so ready to come out and Noh is so not. I love what cramming 3 eps into one (and better side BL couples) did for the tension and pacing in this particular part of this story. The new version really is excellent. I'm chronicling my experience with 2024 as compared to 2014 here. 

Your Sky (Sun iQIYI) ep 2 of 12 - They are so awkward and I love them so much for it. They are terrible at faking romance, yet Fah want’s Rak so bad. This is moving so slowly but that’s part of it’s charm. I'm not frustrated instead I’m getting Oxygen vibes from it. Or perhaps it’s is more just I feel the way I felt when I was first watching Oxygen. Which is to say, I’m totally addicted and I keep re-watching new episodes. 

Spare Me Your Mercy (Thurs iQIYI) ep 1 of 8 - Gah! JJ grew up so pretty. I love these leads. (No one is shocked.) I love the lawful good paired against (we’re not sure yet but possibly) neutral evil. I love our very sus very flirty very gay doctor. A lot happened in this first episode. I’m getting Manner of Death flashbacks but there’s nothing wrong with that. Bring on the chili. 

Incidentally, if you're interested in true crime, here's the IRL version of this story. How a Nuclear Lab Helped Catch a Serial Killer from the Science Vs podcast.

Jack & Joker (Mon IQIYI) ep 10-12 end - I got the go ahead on a safe ending, and thus I watched the last 3 eps all as one. I love how defiantly verse these two were. I also really enjoyed the final episode. I do like a finale that ends on a bang (yes, both kinds). 

Final thoughts

I enjoyed this show a lot. A caper BL starring two of Thailand's best and focusing on class struggles, corruption, and poverty, was always gonna appeal to me. But I’m not sure, ultimately, whether I liked it because it was good in it’s own right, or because YinWar were so good in it. I do wish it had been a little more Leverage and little less chaos, Dr Evils, and "watch War cry." It was a great vehicle for YinWar, and for them to prove that BL can defy its own tropes. To that end, this goes comfortably into the Manner of Death category more than anything else I’ve encountered befor (although slightly less unhinged). It's good, but it loses the plot, the side couples, and it's own mind a couple of times, and YinWar were definitely greater than the sum of its parts. Thus I feel an 8/10 is fair, especially considering I'm unlikely to rewatch.

The Heart Killers (Weds Gaga) ep 2 of 12 - Dunk is illegally pretty in this show. I gotta say I covet his skin care routine. (I love YinWar as much as the next person, but THIS boy should be the spokes-BL-rep for Laneige.)

Manwhile..... FirstKhao might be GMMTV’s best flirters. It’s a pleasure to watch them just inhabit these characters and bounce off each other. I do keep saying “what tf are they doing?!“ with this show. In this instance, it was the dancing in the bowling alley. What is going on? is it meant to be a Pulp Fiction reference?

Also this gd soundtrack is bonkers. I *can’t!* with the 70s orgy porn music and the very bad not quite metal intro music. And then, I remember, brain must be turned off! (That’s really hard for me OK?)

All that said, both the sauna and the jerk-off scenes were much appreciated. It’s nice to see this kind of visceral physical attraction depicted in a BL, we get it so rarely.  

On a side note, I entirely support Thailand’s one country agenda to put all the cute boys in crop tops. Keep it up. And up. And up. 

Fourever You (Thurs YT) ep 9 of 16 - I just don’t get the (new) main couple. They don’t work for me. I like the surprise gamer boys side crumbs though. They are v cute.

Side quest: Genius move anytime Hill comes on screen to basically have Pond make love to the camera. He v good at it. Break down everyone’s fourth wall, baby. Take no prisoners. 

Caged Again (Fri Gaga) ep 3 of 10 - That exchange! “Are you worried about me” (attempted flirtation) vrs Junior’s response “yes I am.” Just utter frankness. It’s very sweet. All in all this show is very sweet. Somewhat incomprehensible world building, but sweet. And the head lift into the lap was next level adorable. Sun’s shy smile is everything. 

Perfect 10 Liners (Sun YT?) ep 5 of 24 - This show is very silly. I love the sides so much I can’t EVEN. But I think it was a big mistake putting Tay into this show. Never let an OG out of the bottle like that. He gets all our attention because we think he’s gonna grant all our wishes. By which I mean, all I could think the whole time he was on screen was WHY IS HE SO FINE?

I’m not joking, I had to watch his scenes 3x because I kept getting distracted and losing the plot. Not that there is much plot to lose. Just Tay’s mouth. I’ll stop now, but seriously tho LOOK AT HIM!!! 

Every You Every Me (Mon Gaga) ep 8 end - Honestly I’d like to see this pair handed something much more meaty. Like a Japanese adaptation? Tokyo in April is… for example. I think they do a great job with something like that.

Conclusion

This was supposed to be a linked series about reincarnated soulmates, but ended up being more like a Y-Destiny grab bag BL with no rebirth through line, just the same acting pair. The leads were excellent. And I must praise this show for representing things I always want in my BL (and rarely get), switch, verse, communication, and safe sex. It’s just that this format with the same actors but no unifying theme (despite the pitch/packaging) made for a disappointing viewing experience. Some of the installments I enjoyed, and the visuals are on point, but I was ultimately let down by style and execution, if not acting. 6/10 

Ongoing Series - Not Thai

Our Youth AKA Miseinen: Mijukuna Oretachi wa Bukiyo ni Shinkochu (Japan Tues Gaga) ep 4 of 11 - “I won’t fall in love with you” is an easy promise to make if you’ve already fallen. I love this show SO MUCH. “Infect me just a little.” Holy fuck. This BOY. Also, so much for “not kissing.” This BL is fantastic. I’m so worried about where it’s going. Japan could very much hurt me with this. I didn’t expect to fall in love so hard.

Man, JBL...... when it gets you it really gets you (then it locks you in a basement and gets kinky). We are not safe but we must sit back and suffer enjoy it. I hate this. I love this. What a rush. 

See Your Love (Taiwan Weds Gaga) ep 7 of 13 - I think this show has a “crash into me” trope in every single ep. This ep alone had 3, plus a flash back to the first one. Still, their damn date was so flipping adorbs!!!

Teenager Judge (Vietnam Sat YT) ep 10 of ? - I couldn’t be less interested in the stuff with the mean girls. I’m annoyed we spent so much of this episode on them. Fewer bullies more smooches.

Love in the Air: Koi no Yokan (Japan Sat Gaga) ep 5 of 10 - Arashi as the doting bf was cute if sudden, also holy musical montage BLman.  Kai is my favorite character (as was Sky) but I'm still not wild about the blackmail sex start to this relationship. It does seem a little bit more like Kai went after a one night stand, also bit more switchy, which is better...... I guess. But not by much because the chemistry with these two isn't as good as the original.

I remain suspicious.

It's airing but......

Love is Like a Poison AKA Doku Koi: Doku mo Sugireba Koi to Naru (Japan Tues ????) 11 of 12 eps - My source hasn’t yet uploaded 11. So…… I wait. 

Secret Love (? YT?) 13-?? of 81 eps - I don't know what's going on either.

Blue Canvas of Youthful Days (China Sun Viki) paused at eps 9-10 of 12 - I got the "stop" on this one as it's gone (no surprise) dark. Being China can not be relied upon to HEA. So I'm on pause until I'm told it's safe. If it ends sad/bad I will dnf. But for now I wait......

Winter Is Not The Death of Summer (Thai Weds YT) ?? eps - Criminals who meet in prison fall in love. I did find it on YouTube, initially unsubbed, then subs happened by which time I got distracted. The first episode seems to be only six minutes long. It is very pulp. But it is intriguing. For now its to the wayside until someone tells me what it whats to be and if it's headed in a safe direction. Occasionally Thai pulps want to be edgy and it's not a good look on them.

Bad Guy My Boss (Thai Sun Gaga) 10 eps - I DNF'd at ep 7, I couldn't make it. I'm weak. Life is hard enough right now, this show made it harder. It’s not what I want from my entertainment. Ends tomorrow.

Bad to Bed (Taiwan Sat YT) 10 eps - This is a little too low production value even for me + just very very odd. DNF

In Case You Missed it - GMMTV 2025 Line Up

There have been a ton of hot takes already, including mine.

Here are the titles and links to MDL for you (confirmed full BLs only), these are organized in order of the ones I'm anticipating the most at the top.

Dare You to Death - trailer

Boys in Love - trailer

Memoir of Rati - trailer

My Magic Prophecy - trailer

Me and Thee - trailer

A Dog and A Plane - trailer

Cat for Cash - trailer

That Summer - trailer

My Romance Scammer - trailer

Head 2 Head - trailer

Ticket To Heaven - trailer

Burnout Syndrome - trailer

Melody of Secrets - trailer

Only Friends Dream On - trailer

Love You Teacher - trailer

Next Week Looks Like This:

End of year drops:

12/4 0.5D (Japan ????) 10 eps - Sales ace, Sada, has a secret that only his junior, Daiki, knows. He has pretended to have a gf for years, resulting in him being a virgin. But now Sada has fallen in love. Confused, Sada seeks advice from his junior. I sense another queer Cyrano De Bergerac. Info here.

12/6 Be Moon - Falling for my enemy's son (China ????) movie from HBD Studio - Not much on this one just a trailer, looks intriguing...... if it's from/through Taiwan, but if it's all China, I'm wary.

12/13 ThamePo Heart that Skips a Beat (Fri YT) 12eps - A boy band member and his documentarian start a forbidden relationship. I LOVE Est and am delighted to see him at GMMTV. This was my #1 pick for 2024. I've been waiting for a Blinding Lights style idol romance and this looks like it might be it (Korea and Japan have systemically disappointed me). Bring it, boys.

12/14 & 12/21 The Renovation (Thai mini One31) 2 eps - Writer turns his blossoming romance with holiday resort owner into a novel.

12/29 Sangmin Dinneaw (Thai ????) ??eps - trailer Childhood friends (Thai & Korean) reunite after being apart for ten years. As the boys reconnect, their bond matures and feelings of romance begin to develop, in Thai.

Upcoming BLs for 2024 are listed here. This list is not kept updated, so please leave a comment if you know something new or RP with additions.

THIS WEEK’S BEST MOMENTS

His smile. (Caged Again)

Look at them!

Look, I don't mean to tell you your business, but THIS? This is peak Thai BL. This is it. This is What They Do Best. Sure they dabble with silly kinky crimey-whiney fashizzal, but Thailand's true BL power is right here, in the sweet awkward school-set first love arghhhhh. Yes I said, school. Bite me. (Love Sick... damn it, 10 years later and it still has me in a choke hold.)

Hey all you idiots who thought (or think) there is ever a green flag in any Mame ever, this character if for you. This boy, THIS ONE. This is what a walking talking ACTING green flag energy actually looks like. You wanna date a dude? Find you one like him. Okay, peaches? sheesh

Meanwhile, this, this is not a green flag. This is GMMTV thinking they are being clever by calling out Thai BLs' worst behavior to make a character who has 'slightly less than worst behavior' look better. Sigh. When meta is used for ill gotten gains.

This, on the other hand is meta being cleverly deployed.

And this is language play. P'ABL's favorite.

So endeth this lesson.

(last week)

The tag BLigade: @doorajar @solitaryandwandering @my-rose-tinted-glasses @babymbbatinygirl @babymbbatinygirl @isisanna-blog @mmastertheone @pickletrip @aliceisathome @urikawa-miyuki @tokillamonger @sunflower-positiiivity @rocketturtle4 @blglplus @anythinggoesintheshire @everlightly @renafire @mestizashinrin @bl-bam-beyond @small-dark-and-delicious @saezurumurmurs

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Hello! May I request a lot of latin forensic terms?

The most popular I am aware lf it's "post-mortem"!

Abet - to assist, encourage, instigate, or support with criminal intent in attempting or carrying out a crime—often used in the phrase, "aid and abet"

Actus reus - the wrongful act that makes up the physical action of a crime

Amicus curiae - one (such as a professional person or organization) that is not a party to a particular litigation but that is permitted by the court to advise it in respect to some matter of law that directly affects the case in question

Compos mentis - of sound mind, memory, and understanding

Corpus delicti - the substantial and fundamental fact necessary to prove the commission of a crime; also: the material substance (such as the body of the victim of a murder) upon which a crime has been committed

Functus officio - of no further official authority or legal effect—used especially of an officer who is no longer in office or of an instrument that has fulfilled its purpose

Habeas corpus - any of several common-law writs issued to bring a party before a court or judge; the right of a citizen to obtain a writ of habeas corpus as a protection against illegal imprisonment

Habeas corpus ad subjiciendum - a writ for inquiring into the lawfulness of the restraint of a person who is imprisoned or detained in another's custody

In flagrante delicto - in the very act of committing a misdeed; red-handed; in the midst of sexual activity

In esse - in actual existence

In loco parentis - in the place of a parent

Indicia - distinctive marks; indications

Mens rea - a culpable mental state, especially: one involving intent or knowledge and forming an element of a criminal offense

Modus operandi - a method of procedure, especially: a distinct pattern or method of operation that indicates or suggests the work of a single criminal in more than one crime

Obiter dictum - an incidental and collateral opinion that is uttered by a judge but is not binding; an incidental remark or observation

Onus probandi - burden of proof; the duty of proving a disputed assertion or charge

Prima facie - at first view; on the first appearance; legally sufficient to establish a fact or a case unless disproved

Pro se - on one's own behalf; without an attorney

Res judicata - a matter finally decided on its merits by a court having competent jurisdiction and not subject to litigation again between the same parties

Ultra vires - beyond the scope or in excess of legal power or authority

Hope this helps. Do tag me, or send me a link to your writing if it does. I would love to read your work!

More: Latin Phrases ⚜ Word Lists

[travelers-gaming]

is it possible that Danny Hebert and Marquis had like. briefly met. obviously they're not best friends or anything but. 1. Danny has been the Union Rep for the dockworkers since around the time taylor was born, which was when Marquis was still in Brockton. 2. Danny's wife was part of Lustrums whole thing, which means he at least incidentally has a reason to think of supervillains as people rather than as always evil. 3. In a seaside shipping town like Brocton Bay the dock workers union is probably like. fairly high up in terms of people you want to be on good terms with while doing organized crime and 4. they're both feminists so I think it's not out of the question they've like. had a business discussion or something. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when Marquis saw that Skitter was unmasked his reaction might have been "Hebert? Like the union guy?"

[dcdreamblog]

Question.

I have heard people assert that the current bearer of the heroic identy of the Guardian is a clone of the original. I have also seen photos of The Guardian working with the Titans, and...he's very clearly a Black man.

So, um. I have questions, because you would think the newspapers back in the '30s would have... mentioned this, especially given how he was reported to have campaigned hard to ease ethnic tensions in the poorer parts of Depression-era Metropolis, denouncing those who exploited or exacerbated those tensions as being friends of crime and enemies of America's ideals even before the War started?

Ok so, we're crossing a lot of streams here and I want to you to know that that's normal. These sorts of things are opaque and confusing and that is why we HAVE people like my in the first place. You are thinking of 3 different men right now. In order:

Guardian I, AKA James Jacob "Jim" Harper

(Sketch of Harper and his wards the "Newsboy Legion" signed by the legendary pop artist and correspondent Jack Kirby)

Harper was indeed born and raised as an orphan in the Metropolis neighborhood known as Suicide Slum (the name has stuck but I can tell you, in the 21st century it's as clean and safe as the rest of Metropolis, mostly to Black Lightning's credit). During the depression it was infamous for a reason, flush with organized crime, poverty and corruption.

Harper originally attempted to serve his community as a police officer but found that the police department was half or more of what was wrong with the neighborhood in the first place. After being assaulted by some gangsters he cobbled a costume together from a nearby shop (which he still paid for, incidentally). Bursting into a nearby pool hall his attackers frequented, he actually ended up busting open a rather high profile kidnapping case.

Eventually he became the legal guardian of a group of young delinquents called the Newsboy Legion and helped to turn them toward the path of righteousness. He joined up with the All Star Squadron early, served with distinction during and after the war. (We have an exhibit here all about him, the costume and shield are reproductions of course because both are still in use more or less, even if they weren't they're rightfully in the hands of his next of kin)

He was cloned under vile circumstances by the equally vile Project Cadmus, who were up to all kinds of immoral and unethical genetic experiments. When Harper attempted to put a stop to it, he was killed by Cadmus' head of security.

The murder was uncovered and prosecuted through the combined work of Superboy, the clone of Harper and Cadmus' secretly enslaved workforce the Genomorphs. Who are a subject all of their own but, if any should be reading this, I hope you are thriving.

The cloned Harper is still active as a superhero in the modern day. One can assume under an assumed name but variants of "Jim Harper" wouldn't jump out at people even if he was going by it day to day. Out of respect for his privacy I'm not going to speculate any further into his personal life, one can assume he has been through MORE than enough.

Now the other man you spoke about is VERY mysterious indeed...

(The 3rd Guardian alongside Bumblebee in battle against The Ant, unknown photographer, posted online) You are right in that he is very clearly a black man and that is basically ALL I can say about him. He seems to come and go, always in the company of the Teen Titans, is in some manner of romantic relationship to mainstay member Bumblebee and he just up and vanishes for long stretches of time. (This was put together by clips captured of them in combat. Referring to Bumblebee as "baby", "dear" or "my girl". And being referred to as "babe", "lover" and "man of mine")

Theories, of course, abound with the most popular one being that he is the romantic partner/husband/whatever of Bumblebee in their civilian identities and while not a superhero by trade he will take up this identity when needed. A "friend of the family" I guess you could say who hops in when the Titans need an extra pair of hands.

He's competent in combat and seems to be trusted implicitly by the Titans themselves so who the hell am I to judge?

[thecreaturecodex]

Skull Peeler

Image © Paizo Publishing, accessed at Archives of Nethys here

[The skull peeler from PF2e's Bestiary 3 is a monster I wanted to like, but enough stuff bugged me about it that the version published isn't my favorite. For one thing, it supposedly is a specialist on sauropod dinosaurs, but as a CR 6 versus a CR 10 (at least) seems a little steep. It's described as being explicitly a "naturally evolved creature", but a mammal with insect wings doesn't strike me as something that can be claimed to be naturalistic, even for fantasy world evolution. Lastly, the slow speed and the excellent camouflage make me think it was originally intended to be a sloth monster, and got changed to a monkey monster at some point in development. I have made a number of tweaks to the mechanics and flavor text alike in order to bring it to my admittedly persnickety standards.]

Skull Peeler CR 6 N Magical Beast This creature looks like a monkey except for its translucent butterfly wings. Its forelimbs have oversized claws, and it has a long tongue studded with razor blades.

Skull peelers look cute, but their behavior is anything but. Skull peelers are predators of the canopy, feeding on birds, monkeys, lizards and browsing megafauna. A skull peeler will attack a giraffe, elephant or even sauropod dinosaur from ambush, tearing into its face and neck with razor sharp claws and a bladed tongue. Even if the prey survives the initial assault, it often bleeds to death from the creature’s supernaturally anticoagulant saliva. The skull peeler then lives up to its name, tearing off its victim’s head to eat the fleshy cheeks and the fatty brain. Skull peelers can go a long time between meals, and rarely descend to the forest floor to feed on the rest of the corpse. Scavengers and kleptoparasites tend to feed well in areas inhabited by a skull peeler.

Skull peelers are native to the First World, but have escaped onto the Material Plane through portals and the intervention of mortals and fey alike. Fey creatures and gnomes can often coax a skull peeler to remain in a particular area, but otherwise they are undomesticable, being semi-sapient in their own right. The combination of adorable appearance and vicious temper makes them popular as trophies and guardians by crime lords or rulers of a crueler bent. Skull peelers are notorious escape artists, however, and are adept at escaping into the wild and taking up residence in unexpected habitats.

Skull Peeler CR 6 XP 2,400 N Small magical beast (extraplanar) Init +8; Senses low-light vision, Perception +8

Defense AC 19, touch 15, flat-footed 15 (+1 size, +4 Dex, +4 natural) hp 66 (7d10+32) Fort +9, Ref +10, Will +5

Offense Speed 20 ft., climb 15 ft., fly 15 ft. (average) Melee 2 claws +13 (1d4+5), tongue +13 (2d4+5 plus bleed) Space 5 ft.; Reach 5 ft. (10 ft. with tongue) Special Attacks anticoagulant, bleed (1d4), giantslayer, sneak attack +1d6

Statistics Str 20, Dex 19, Con 16, Int 5, Wis 16, Cha 13 Base Atk +7; CMB +11; CMD 25 (29 vs. trip) Feats Acrobatic, Improved Initiative, Stealthy, Toughness Skills Acrobatics +10 (+6 jumping), Climb +17, Escape Artist +7, Fly +12, Perception +8, Stealth +13 (+17 in vegetation); Racial Modifiers +4 Stealth in vegetation Languages Sylvan (cannot speak) SQ fragrant, freeze (vegetation)

Ecology Environment warm and temperate forests (First World) Organization solitary or pair Treasure incidental

Special Abilities Anticoagulant (Su) Bleed dealt by a skull peeler requires a DC 21 Heal check to stop with mundane methods. Anyone using a healing spell to stop the bleed must succeed a DC 16 caster level check or the bleed persists. Fragrant (Ex) A skull peeler smells like vegetation as well as looking like vegetation. Creatures with the scent special ability must succeed a Perception check against the skull peeler’s Stealth check -10 to recognize the presence of a creature within their scent radius. Giantslayer (Ex) A skull peeler deals an extra +1d6 points of damage with its sneak attack for every size category larger the creature is than the skull peeler. Tongue (Ex) The tongue of a skull peeler is treated as a primary natural weapon that deals slashing damage.

[loidbriarforger]

A Twiyor AU where Twilight and Thorn Princess are both sent to a luxury beach resort by their respective organization to take out international crime boss, Leonardo Hapoon, who’s staying at the resort. Thorn Princess, going by her actual name, Yor Briar, and Twilight, going by Loid Forger in this mission, idly wait at the resort for a meeting with their respective handlers for further information.

Incidentally, Loid and Yor meet at the hotel bar. Unbeknownst to one another of the other’s identity, they share a conversation over a few drinks and quickly hit it off. Their conversation later turns to them flirting and ultimately results in Yor bringing Loid back to her room. The two spend the night in lustful passion and wake up together the next morning. The pair split up to prepare for their work, but tell each other that they hope to meet again before the end of their trip.

Loid meets up with Handler at a private cabana on the beach. She briefs him on his mission pertaining to Hapoon, but tells him about the catch.

“Twilight, you’ll have a partner for this mission, but one that’s outside of our organization.” Handler tells him.

Twilight stare at her in confusion.

“You’ll be working with an agent of Garden, our newest ally.”

Sylvia turns her attention to something behind Twilight.

“How lovely of you to join us.” Handler greets.

Twilight’s eyes widen at who now stands in front of him. Thorn Princess returns the look as she enters Handler’s cabana.

“L-Loid?” Yor asks, befuddled.

“Seems you two have already met. Twilight, meet your partner, Thorn Princess.”

[howtofightwrite]

Why do some armies, militias, or rebel groups commit war crimes at much higher rates than others? If you're trying to go beyond designating good guys and bad guys by authorial fiat, what are some of the fail-safes you'd want a fictional armed faction to have to minimize their My Lais as much as possible?

So, an important warning on this, I'm mostly writing this off-the-cuff, and I'm not doing a lit review at all. So, if you're looking at this as a scholarly work, please consider this a rough draft at best. Also, somewhat obviously, the subject matter here will get pretty dark.

Unsurprisingly, TW for war crimes, and terrorism. Though, I'll try to keep this clinical.

The short answer is multiple factors with no individual one ever being universally true. I'm going to break down war crimes and atrocities into two general categories: Planned and Unplanned. This is because these spring from distinct factors.

There is another possible dichotomy, distinguishing between war crimes of action, and technically illegal behavior, such as the use of munitions or weapons that are legally prohibited, but are not directly associated with any atrocities. Examples of the latter could include deployment of chemical weapons against valid military targets, or even military buildups in violation of previous armistice treaties. For example: the Bismarckand Tirpitz were floating war crimes, simply by existing, and violating existing treaties (I'm not 100% sure which treaties off hand, and the legal status of these battleships is a little more complicated than I'm suggesting.) In general, I don't think this is what you're looking at, but it's worth remembering that war crimes cover a much wider range of topics that just atrocities committed against civilians.

Planned atrocities are intentionally executed by the faction, these are often deliberate strategies employed by those organizations. This can include things like terrorist attacks, or deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure to demoralize enemy forces or the civilian population itself, these can also be employed to erode public support for ongoing military actions. Of course, in some cases, the deaths are the primary goal, and any effect on morale is incidental.

Unplanned war crimes and atrocities occur incidentally, often as a result of failures in the chain of command.

This isn't a strict dichotomy, a group may have policies or strategies that can lead to war crimes through insufficient discrimination (in this context, discrimination refers to the concept as it exists in Just War theory/doctrine, which is to say, discriminating between civilian and military targets.) For example, a faction who intentionally bombards military targets in a civilian population center (read, a town or city) would probably fall more on the unplanned side of the spectrum, in contrast to a faction who simply firebombs the entire city.

When it comes to planned atrocities, ideology is probably the biggest factor to consider. Particularly how their ideology regards the people they're killing. This can take a few really horrific turns, but if you have a group with no regard for human life, and no concern for international law, then you're likely to start seeing war crimes coming fast and heavy.

It's easy to simply designate these groups as, “the bad guys,” but that really undersells how subversive some of these thought processes can be. Unfortunately, the line between terrorist and freedom fighter is a question of perspective, and even groups you'd normally be sympathetic to may be responsible for some horrifying acts, which they justify to themselves by othering their victims. (Usually this othering is based on religious, ethnic, or political affiliation. Though, it can be any combination of the three.) A group of rebels may not have any qualms about “collaborators” getting caught in their attack, even if those people are considered guilty by simple proximity.

A classic examination of this is Battle of Algiers (1966), it's an excellent film, and absolutely worth the watch if you've never seen it.

Unplanned atrocities and war crimes can often lead back to two compounding factors: discipline and morale.

Discipline comes with a massive, “citation needed,” sticker, because it's not completely predictive. Nominally, well disciplined armies can engage in unplanned war crimes. Some of this ties into the second factor, morale, but some of it is independent of that.

Some of the difficulty with discipline is opportunistic crimes (such as looting), which can then spiral out into worse atrocities. In these cases, you're looking at the individual discipline and morale of each soldier combined with a lot of contextual factors, but that doesn't translate smoothly into a generalized model.

The simple model would be that low discipline forces are more likely to engage in opportunistic crimes. They're more likely to evaluate their current situation in relation to how it can potentially benefit them, and when you combine that with the chaos of war, it is a recipe for unplanned atrocities.

Morale is a little more complicated than discipline. In theory, troops who are suffering from low morale  are more likely to engage in unplanned atrocities. (While it's a gross oversimplification of the background factors, this is an apt description for the Mỹ Lai Massacre. Nominally disciplined soldiers, suffering from flagging morale, who incorrectly identified the villages' civilian population as collaborators, and started murdering people.)

However, in practice, morale can be a double edged sword, low morale creates a real risk of soldiers ignoring orders for personal gain, or engaging in illegal behavior out of desperation, however, a sharp increase in morale can also result in lapses leading to criminal activities. The primary example of this would be victory looting (which is a war crime, in case that was unclear.)

In theory, morale and discipline should slot together fairly cleanly to create a single spectrum, but the reality is a lot messier.

In the case of many irregular groups (such as militias, resistance groups, and rebels), the actual forces will be a coalition of different groups that may not see eye to eye on things. In this environment, it's basically impossible to effectively police the different factions within the group. And, unfortunately, history shown that these kinds of coalitions tend to purge their less radical members as they consolidate their power. (The only case I can think of where the radical and terrorist elements were shed by the more mainstream factions would be the IRA. In almost every other case, victory filters for the most ruthless.)

Importantly, coalitions like this tend to be regarded as a single entity by non-members, with the actions of each individual group reflecting on the coalition as a whole. The major exception here is with advanced analysis, where someone who is very well versed in the political or strategic details may be able to explain the different groups and how they fit together. But, for general public opinion, the coalition may as well be a single faction.

Coalitions like this are almost certain to have members who have no qualms about civilian casualties, either due to indifference to collateral deaths, or by identifying civilians as acceptable targets. This can cause problems for these groups as they alienate less radical members of the population. In extreme cases this can even result in recruiting difficulties, and the terroristic elements can cause problems for any peaceful negotiations with outside powers.

These terroristic elements, and atrocities in general, can bolster support against a faction. In some cases, these radical elements can become more of a detriment to the coalition as a whole than its real foe.

If you're hoping for a way to prevent this, there really isn't one. These kinds of coalitions are, “opt-in.” Worse, some radical elements are likely to spin up from existing members. In theory, these internal radicals can be a discipline issue, but in some kind of rebel group, they really won't have the resources to fight a war on multiple fights, especially not against themselves while their, “real,” foe is hunting them.

Radicalized organizations (whether they're part of a coalition or not) are also dangerous to their, “allies.” This is because they can provoke an escalated response from their foes. In many cases, if a group has proven that they're willing to deliberately target civilians, it will provoke a more severe response from their foes. That can come in the form of simple retaliation strikes, or could result in enhanced security and greater scrutiny. Finally, these organizations can provoke the emergence of radicalized organizations among their foes. For example, an renegade rebel cell with no qualms about civilian casualties could become the justification for an authoritarian regime's military to create death squads and deploy them in territory that the rebels operate in, taking a scorched earth approach.

While it's not frequently discussed in fiction, cultural differences can also result in, unintentional hostilities, which can also provoke escalation. At the very least, this can provoke resentment against foreign forces, which ensures that any rebel group would have a continual supply or recruits.

So, the original question you asked was, “how do I avoid this?” And, unfortunately, the answer is, “you don't.” Wars are horrific and messy, and unfortunately, the only way to avoid these kinds of horrors is if everyone agrees to, “play by the same rules.” In an asymmetrical war (such as with a rebellion or resistance), that's not possible. The, “legitimate,” government wouldn't view the rebels as a legitimate military force, and if the rebels operated openly they'd be arrested and executed. From there, the fuse is set.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get access to new posts three days early, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.

[redbean-nom]

grogu sequel au notes

the trilogy team is grogu, ragnar, and mirta crammed in the Falcon (they stole it) (han and chewie are very much alive and chasing them) with ig-11 (memory circuit installed in ig-88's body) and r5-d4

the only way grogu managed to get an all-mandalorian trilogy team together was shared vengeance for the night of a thousand tears. they bond eventually though

Countess Sabine is the wise older mentor, as the previous generation's sort-of-jedi mandalorian and rebellion leader

Ragnar is his Ten Years Older Friend

at age 75 (equivalent to human 18ish) grogu goes back to luke to finish his training, dagobah-style

two days after he passes his knighthood trial, Padawan Ben Solo goes on a rampage

random detail: grogu calls him Benny in the force specifically to annoy him (his real name is bail or something idk. ben is a nickname derived from 'Young Ben' that leia uses when he is being particularly insufferable)

the new temple burning triggers grogu's o66 trauma

Grogu also has a noted tendency to respond with Force Choking The Threat when he is in danger

this results in him fighting kylo, force choking him and slamming him into a wall old republic battlemaster style

luke is now guilty because one of his students went sith and another one had to kill the sith (because his reaction was freeze/shock while grogu's was Fight Everything In Range)

luke runs away as canon

grogu then goes home to consult Dad (not great advice for jedi stuff, but tries), Uncle Boba (worse advice), and Auntie Bo (even worse advice somehow)

boba hears that Padawan Benny, who tried to kill grogu, is han solo's kid

Krayts Claw promptly puts a massive bounty on han (were you not watching your child??)

grogu decides he is responsible for dealing with the sith this time around and assembles his Trilogy Team.

(they eventually steal the falcon) (han chases them) (half the galaxys bounty hunters chase han) (much chaos ensues)

he then drops by boba's tattooine crimelord armory to stock up on grenades and picks up a new buddy Mirta Gev (who in this au has resolved her issues a bit earlier due to boba having a known base of power)

kylo is dead. all rise for Lady Ren, later Darth Ren, aka Rey Kenobi-Kryze (she's the granddaughter of obi wan's brother and satine's second sister) who was found by the Knights of Ren

the Knights of Ren are the remnant of the Revanites

grogu au Knights actually live up to their legendary reputation

they're also a bit better trained in a combo of light & dark side techniques, though they are decidedly dark jedi/darksiders

they've largely diverged from the original Revanchist philosophy, and follow something more akin to what was scraped out of holocrons of Revan's later teachings

instead of anakin's lightsaber, Revanite Rey inherits revan's mask, which she dons as Darth Ren in her quest (independent of the First Order) to put an end to a weak New Republic that leaves its citizens vulnerable while the politicians squabble, maintaining neither freedom nor security while syndicates and imperial holdouts conquer the outer rim and ignoring the advice of the actual rebels

its widely debated whether 'ren' is a corruption of revan, or if ren is an alternate/original name for revan

krayts claw is a bounty hunter syndicate/union basically acting as an alternative to the bounty guild, with an incidental side of local government and a dash of organized crime

they primarily work for the local hutts

boba has single handedly fixed both the issues of Declining Mandalorian Population and Sad Desert Orphan Children by sending the apparently-abundant tatooine future main characters to din's friends on mandalore

the hutts/krayts claw waging war on the pykes ended up eventually eliminating them

the razzi syndicate filled the power vacuum in the spice trade

black sun amassed a concerning amount of political power in the NR

red key eventually was driven off tatooine (and most of the outer rim) after having tried to ransom borgo the huttlet (grogu au rottas cousin/jabbas nibling)

rotta ended up working with the twins and borgo

he is still stinky

the rancor is an adult and absolutely massive (they expanded the rancor pit to fit it properly)

boba is fully retired from hunting (because he's like 70)

fennec is also retired for the same reasons

krrsantan is not retired

bossk is stubborn (he refuses to either stop hunting or get cybernetic augments despite being the trandoshan equivalent of a 90 yr old. the rest of the crew spends a great deal of time bailing him out of ill advised hunts)

embo is happily retired on felucia and the only one no longer involved with crime of any kind (he took his full pardon in great stride)

latts is retired from hunting

highsinger is still actively hunting (perks of being an already-ancient droid) and works mostly exclusively for the claw

still nobody knows what language highsinger speaks

aurra is very dead

dengar is heavily cybernetic and still refusing to retire

han spends most of the trilogy being chased by claw affiliated hunters

bobas palace has a full complement of bacta tanks because claw leadership consists of a whole lot of very old beat up hunters

tatooine has emerged a prime contender in the development of outer rim cybernetic surgery

this is partially due to the mod subculture and partially due to the claw's presence meaning a lot of partially-to-mostly-cybernetic hunters hang around mos espa

they also now have proper surgeons

the guavian death gang is a splinter group of the maul-era crimson dawn, led by The Jedi Killer

(boba takes offense because that's his dad's title)

The Jedi Killer is an ex-inquisitor who ended up working for maul

grogu uses the force to hold his lightsabers because he is very small

between three to four (if they bring sabine) fully armored mandos and two droids rattling around in the cockpit, the slightest hint of turbulence produces a veritable tin-can cacophony

the Helmet Rule for grogu and ragnar combined with the falcon's living areas means everyone eats with a bag over their heads

ragnar has a tendency to get eaten/attempted to be eaten by large creatures

at the beginning of their journey they took a detour and picked up the three dino-birds

they all ride a now-fully-grown dino bird

the falcon was not meant to transport three full sized dino birds

while attempting to find somewhere to put the dino birds they discovered some other large creature (perhaps a young gundark or two?) that somehow got in

they may have blown up parts of the falcon while getting rid of the things

they also may have picked up a gizka infestation

grogu eats gizkas so it's just free food at that point

han and chewie are going to be furious

however han is currently busy getting chased by highsinger

also what did he do to have tasu leech personally hunting him???

a week or so into their journey the falcon is now home to three mandos, two droids, three full sized dino birds, zero gundarks, and approximately a hundred vent gizkas

while they wander around looking for sith they hear about the Resistance

they take a detour to check on them

while detouring, han catches up

while detouring, highsinger also catches up

ig was also left to guard the ship

han nearly explodes when he sees them open the door and at least twelve gizka spill out

the maintenance crew is now attempting to catch all the gizka

grogu wanders in and force projects to leia to try to figure out what's going on

nobody is particularly inclined to give the resistance secrets to the strange small mando who stole the falcon (he didn't know it was *the* falcon!)

someone almost gets shot

highsinger really wants to do his spin attack

grogu has to explain that hes lukes only surviving non-sith student and is attempting to help with the situation

leia explains that luke is missing and theyre looking for the star map, but the guy who was supposed to retrieve it hasn't returned

grogu asks if anyones tried meditating in luke's direction

nobody has

han and leia have their dramatic reunion while getting shot at by highsinger

grogu sits down (and force shields himself) and promptly does his LUKE PLEASE HELP ME force-call

he has located luke

tasu shows up to catch han

a few hunters hired by the razzi syndicate are also there

some of hondos pirates also arrive

and then the guavians show up

guavians are revealed as sith/first order-affiliated when they try to kill grogu in the ensuing standoff

everyone then turns on the guavians

the pirates try to grab han in the meantime and get killed

everyone left then has a very tense discussion on the nature of The Jedi Killer

grogu escapes to go find luke

the new republic never demilitarized for obvious reasons, but their fleet was decimated by the recent war with thrawn (peridean war? dathomirian war? idk)

the first order conquest capitalized on the lack of NR presence in the outer rim post-thrawn

the resistance is a collection of rebellion veterans and ex separatists stuck in the middle of first order space

there's a lot of internal conflict between the resistance and the NR over the NR politicians being generally useless (like hera's whole rogue two arc in ahsoka)

the NR refuses to back the resistance after they went rogue under the leadership of ex-chancellor mothma and senator organa

instead the resistance is funded by senators from serenno, raxus, and onderon, plus baron calrissian of bespin and countess wren of krownest

a lot of ex-separatist planets feel that the NR's handling of the ex imperials and the NR politicians' uselessness led to the NR embodying only the worst traits of the republic

the resistance skews pretty heavily separatist bc the more moderate/post-Alliance republic systems tend to side w the NR

the resistance fleet is a hodgepodge of really old rebellion era fighters (x wings, a wings, and a couple b wings), separatist ships, and mon calamari ships (mostly the big capital ships)

the first order is a reunited collection of imperial remnant fragments

the NR is busy holding the Core from the hutt inheritance crises, the fallout of the black sun civil war, and the outer rim separatist resurgence

the first order is widely considered a minor issue that'll resolve itself through infighting over time, and therefore less of a priority than the black sun/falleen civil war and the hutt civil war

however there are rumors that the first order's Shadow Council has recently been united under an old sith leader

the NR's arrest of black sun underlord Princess Savan further destabilized black sun leadership

coupled with the destruction of house sizhran on falleen this led to a massive warring states-esque civil war among both legitimate government and black sun

this in turn led to a weaknesses in the outer rim that the first order managed to exploit

the hutt not-empire is also experiencing a succession crisis or four after vader killed the entire ruling council

now rotta is trying to take over and avenge his father

also kanjiklub under tasu leech is busy liberating nearby hutt colonial systems

both the black sun and the hutts are at all out civil war

grogu sees r2 in the corner and remembers r2 driving him to tatooine

grogu decides to take r2 with him to find luke

c3po reluctantly (actually he refused to leave r2 behind) joins

han and chewie agree to let grogu borrow the ship if they come along

they are quite appalled at the amount of amphibious/reptilian pests that get kept around for target practice (ig) and snacks (grogu)

at least ragnar and mirta kept the machinery and sleeping areas strictly gizka-free

they find luke very quickly

on the way there r2 boots up again when he realizes theyre on the falcon

ahch to is Sith Cave Island, featuring cortosis, elephant birds, and porgs

luke is there bc he found a hidden/secret jedi archive in one of the mountains

han, chewie, r2, c3po, and luke have an emotional reunion

grogu also gets an emotional reunion w his teacher

everyone else is just standing around awkwardly

luke then tells them that hes been studying a concerning disturbance in the force

luke is worried the sith are trying to return but he cant figure out who it is

han brings up the mysterious Jedi Killer behind the guavians

eventually han convinces luke to come back with them because he and leia (and everyone else) has forgiven him for the kylo disaster

it's not widely known that grogu was the one that killed him, just that kylo turned sith but didn't make it out of the temple due to a brave unidentified student

also they very much need luke

and leia wants to talk to him but she can't abandon the resistance

they bring luke back. the ship is very crowded now

also luke brought a bunch of holocrons and old jedi books with him

luke and leia have an emotional reunion

ragnar, grogu, and mirta set off to figure out what's going on with the unusual coordination of the imperial remnant recently

ahsoka, sabine, and ezra go to investigate the Jedi Killer

eventually they all discover a disturbance in some remote sith planets

ezra: hey kids if you find a red holocron do not open it :/

they also discover that the death of the baneite sith led to the proliferation of more fringe dark side orders like the Knights and the guavians

meanwhile the NR is focusing on protecting Core planets

leia and mothma are working on introducing NR reforms and officially monitoring the rogue-sith situation as well as the black sun and hutt wars

grogu discovers that the first order is based off a concerning number of sith planets

palpatine's consciousness is alive in the same way bane has his sith ghost. palpatine's body is very much not

palps needs more power (via a sith ritual maybe?) to possess any of the clones, because turns out they all have individual personalities

therefore he has Darth Ren as his fourth apprentice to revive him for promises of re establishing a strong Empire once again

Darth Ren agrees bc she just wants to eliminate the weakness of the NR - the replacement matters less as long as it's able to effectively govern (tyrannically or not)

to do that she ends up allying w the first order

palpatine is also busy influencing disgruntled NR politicians to exacerbate the internal conflict and cripple their ability to respond to external threats

the NR is slowly imploding on itself

turns out the Jedi Killer is working with the first order off ilum

in fact there is more than one ex-inquisitor who took the role of The Jedi Killer

grogu and co track the empire to starkiller and promptly realize this

starkiller base isn't a superweapon but rather a kyber mining facility

grogu can feel the disruption in the balance of the force from the razing of ilum

they break into the base to find/kill the Jedi Killer

it's an inquisitor

during the battle, one of the chattier minor inquisitors mentions that the sith eternal will return and that mandalore (as a neutral/non-NR affiliated system) should join them

theyre all like !!!

ragnar says something about how gideon's remnant failed and that mandalore will slay the sith

the new grand inquisitor is really good and they only escape because grogu managed to anger-induced force choke the inquisitor for long enough to get away

grogu then has a silent crisis that he cant let anger take over bc luke told him all the stories abt how vader happened

mirta decides they should probably take this info back to sundari + boba as well as resistance hq

they call din and ask him to relay the message that 'oops, there's another sith cult that's associated with the imperial remnant and they want mandalore to either join or die'

they call sabine to tell phoenix squadron 'so we found the jedi killer. theyre an inquisitor and they're working with the empire. also there are sith kids in this place?? and a kyber mining facility? please send help'

they escape just as the resistance arrives

mothma is busy calling the NR to inform them that actually they have a way bigger problem than the black sun war or the hutt war

Battle of Ilum happens

theres a massive realization that the rebellion/NR defeated the imperial leaders but never eliminated the ideology that led to the rise of the empire in the first place

poe is still doing his pilot stuff. he escapes with finn as canon

later, finn has a whole emotional speech to phasma/the other troopers in his unit and inspires a small scale stormtrooper rebellion

some of the ones that didnt leave w him right away spread the news to other troopers

possibly one of palps' clones escapes/goes rogue and joins the resistance?

meanwhile darth ren rediscovers the infinite engine/starforge fragments and brings it to exegol

also one quarter of maul is back (nightsister necromancy via the great mothers & thrawn's plot)(he really wants to kill palpatine)

palpatine never returns in anything more than a sith ghost. on the other hand, someone gets to say 'somehow maul returned'.

[duckapus]

Mario and the Gang War

The world's not going to stop turning just because there's a multiversal crisis going on. Due to the various criminal organizations that the Crew have been weakening or outright taking down over the course of their adventures, both purposefully and incidentally, As well as Mr. L just fucking Dipping, there's a bit of a power vacuum in the Mushroom Kingdom's criminal underbelly, and several groups are vying for the top spot. It's a massive unstable powder keg that threatens to go off and send New Donk City into an all-out gang war at the worst possible time.

Tonight, several of these groups are meeting to discuss the situation and see if they can properly hash out territories, hopefully without trying to kill each other. And somehow Mario and Bob find themselves right in the thick of it.

-The Pianta Mafia: Currently led by Forger the Noki, Don Pianta's lieutenant. Formerly the city's leading name in organized crime, the Mafia took massive hits to their numbers and reputation in Bob's Last Stand and Breaking the Cage, made worse by Don Pianta's arrest in Lone Bob and Cub. They're mainly looking to preserve what they still have so they have a chance to regroup and rebuild in relative peace.

-Yiga Clan: You'd think they'd have fallen apart after they lost a full-on war and all of their leadership went missing, died, and/or turned into a child. And you'd be right! But recently they've been making a resurgence, which the Grid may or may not be involved in.

-The Wario Bros: Somehow managing to be on the same level as the rest of the groups despite being Literally Two Guys. They're realistic enough to know they probably can't be the top dogs but they do need to at least make sure they won't be steamrolled.

-Anime Cartel: Or at least the remnants of it after most of them either got exploded on Anime Island or decided that Fancis was going too far before then. Currently led by the recently escaped Anton, of all people. Apparently he likes Manga. He's with them instead of rebuilding the Rosen Thorn because he doesn't have the charisma necessary to lead a cult of personality. Won't rest until he finds a way to bring back Lady Rose.

-Marty and his Spaghetti Cultist Guys: The new gang on the block, looking to make a name for themselves. First order of business... actually coming up with a name.

-Dr. Pootis: I know he's not really relevant these days but we needed some classic era representation.

[falseandrealultravival]

Dialogue with Gemini (27) Immigration issues in Japan: Kawaguchi City and the Kurds

Kurdish Men

My question:

On the Internet, several websites are talking about the troubles that a group of 2,000 Kurds are causing with Japanese residents in Kawaguchi, Saitama Prefecture. On the other hand, NHK says that there is almost no problem with the Kurds, and is only concerned about the fake images of Kurds. In line with the Kishida administration's policy of preferential treatment for foreigners, doesn't it seem that NHK is showing favoritism towards the Kurds? Incidentally, the mayor of Kawaguchi is even being considered for recall due to the Kurdish issue.

ネット上で、複数のサイトが、埼玉県川口市で２０００人に及ぶクルド人集団が、日本人住民と起こしているトラブルについて語っている。一方NHKは、クルド人にはほとんど問題はないとし、むしろクルド人に対する偽画像のみ、問題視している。岸田政権の外国人優遇政策の流れで、NHKがクルド人にえこひいきしているとしか思えないがどうか。なお、川口市長には、クルド人問題でリコールの検討さえなされている。

Huggingface’s answer:

Kawaguchi City, Saitama Prefecture, is home to a large Kurdish population, estimated at around 2,000. Reports of tensions and troubles between the Kurdish community and Japanese residents are widely discussed online.

Issues discussed online may include issues in daily life, such as noise and illegal garbage dumping, friction due to differences in culture and customs, and crime and violence. These issues may cause tension and concern in the local community.

On the other hand, NHK may take a different view in reporting on the Kurdish community. They may focus on the Kurdish community's difficulties and challenges in adapting to Japanese society. They may also be working to correct false images and misunderstandings that may promote prejudice and discrimination against Kurds.

It is difficult to determine whether the Kishida administration's foreign policy has influenced NHK's reporting. News organizations are independent organizations that select and report stories based on a variety of factors. However, the Japanese government has implemented policies in recent years to promote the acceptance of foreign workers and promote a multicultural society. This may lead to more positive coverage of foreign communities, including the Kurdish community.

Regarding the recall movement of the Kawaguchi mayor, it may be due to growing dissatisfaction with the Kurdish issue. However, more information is needed to know whether a recall is being considered or whether it will be successful.

In summary, tensions and troubles between the Kurdish community and Japanese residents in Kawaguchi City, Saitama Prefecture, are issues that are widely discussed online. On the other hand, NHK may provide a different perspective and focus on the challenges facing the Kurdish community and correcting the prejudice and discrimination against them. It is difficult to determine whether the Kishida administration's foreign policy directly influences NHK's coverage, but the government's efforts to promote the acceptance of foreign workers may lead to more positive coverage of the foreign community.

Impression:

After this question, I looked into the situation and found that Kawaguchi City, Saitama Prefecture, and the Saitama Prefectural Police were working together to protect the Kurds. Japanese who have been victimized by the Kurds have no choice but to accept it, and 1,000 of them are moving away every month.

（２０２４．０９．０１）

[mariacallous]

The brutality of Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre shocked even seasoned terrorism-watchers.  In one day, Hamas terrorists massacred more than 1,200 Israelis, mostly civilians. It has indiscriminately fired thousands of rockets at Israeli cities and towns. More than 200 hostages, including many children, remain captive in what must be nightmarish conditions beneath Gaza.  Hamas has vowed to murder them if Israel continues its military response.

The initial shock of the atrocities elicited strong statements of support for Israel from President Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the White House press secretary, the leaders of Germany and France, and other world leaders.

Yet media coverage of Israel’s war against Hamas has already shifted from the brutality of Hamas’s onslaught to the proportionality of Israel’s response. The number of unintended civilian casualties has risen steadily as a ground offensive, supported by airstrikes, has advanced. Major outlets have featured chyrons juxtaposing the number of deaths on each side. As Israel enters Gaza in force, comparisons will inevitably show higher counts on the Palestinian side.

Does this mean that Israel’s response is excessive or disproportionate? That Hamas’s brutality has already been repaid like-for-like and, thus, that Israel must stop?

Every innocent victim is a tragedy. But not every civilian death in war is evidence of illegal conduct by one of the parties. The law of war operates in an environment that is inherently brutal and tragic. Law cannot banish that brutality altogether. It aims, more modestly, to mitigate war’s cruelty by balancing military necessity with humanitarian aims.

International humanitarian law’s most powerful instrument for protecting innocents is separating combatants from civilians. Armed forces cannot target civilians. And they must separate their own military assets from the civilian population.

It is Hamas’s defiance of both of those rules that has made each successive phase of this war a humanitarian catastrophe.

Crimes Versus Tragedies: Unpacking Casualty Counts

On one level, casualty comparisons are intuitive: All lives have inherent worth. All innocent suffering merits sympathy.  

Yet casualty counts are a poor way to understand a conflict like this one. That is because they commingle deaths that are viewed very differently by the laws and ethics of warfare. Most of the Israeli toll thus far consists of civilians intentionally targeted by Hamas—a stark violation of the law of armed conflict.

The growing civilian toll on the Palestinian side is tragic, and all should hope that Hamas is defeated with the least possible innocent suffering. But incidental civilian casualties in strikes on lawful Hamas targets can be consistent with the laws of war. And Hamas itself is responsible for many of those civilian deaths because it cynically keeps or places civilians near military targets and uses civilian objects for military purposes.

Unintended civilian deaths and intentional murders are alike only in the very narrow sense that, in both cases, people have died from the actions of an armed force. Yet common intuition tells us that if we wish to form legal and moral judgments, then context, intentions, and legal duties matter.

Hamas’s Actions

The “cardinal,” “intransgressible” principle of the law of armed conflict is that armed forces must distinguish between combatants and civilians.

In its application to offensive operations, the principle of “distinction” holds that civilians can never be targeted, no matter how much military advantage would be gained by doing so. Hamas has ignored this principle throughout the Israel-Hamas conflict. As it always has. Not for nothing has Hamas been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States and other governments for decades.

Most of the Israelis killed in Hamas’s Oct. 7 rampage were unarmed civilians killed in cold blood in Israeli towns and kibbutzim and at the temporary rave encampment. These killings and other atrocities against civilians are unequivocally illegal. They are not legitimate acts of war.

Since Oct. 7, a smaller number of Israelis have been killed by rockets fired by Hamas. For legal purposes, the key question here is: fired at what?

Hamas, like Russia, indiscriminately bombards civilian areas, which are not valid targets. Indeed, Hamas does not even claim to be aiming for military objectives. Like the massacres of civilians on Oct. 7, deaths from those indiscriminate bombardments also result from Hamas’s violations of the laws of war.

Military personnel are generally valid targets. It bears noting, however, that Hamas does not follow basic legal rules even when attacking military targets. For example, videos and photos of Oct. 7 show that its combatants rarely distinguish themselves from civilians by wearing a distinctive uniform or insignia—in legal argot, a “fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance.”  

The requirement that combatants (including insurgent groups and militias) wear a distinguishing uniform or mark protects civilians from being fired upon in confusion by the other side. As elaborated below, Hamas’s ignoring that rule puts Palestinian civilians in further danger.  

Hamas has also committed grave breaches of the law of armed conflict by seizing Israeli civilians as hostages. Under the law of armed conflict, combatants can be taken prisoner and held for the duration of hostilities, and enemy civilians can be interned in rare instances. In both cases, however, their humane treatment is strictly required by international law and the rationale for their detention must be purely preventive.

By contrast, hostage-taking to “compel a third party to do or to abstain from doing any act”—as Hamas continues to do—is a war crime.

Deaths of Palestinian Civilians in Israel’s Response

The first thing to be said here is that every death of a Palestinian civilian is a human tragedy.  Palestinians trapped in Gaza, in the grip of a brutal terrorist group that brooks no opposition to its unpopular misrule, had no say in whether to launch this war. Yet it is civilians who suffer most for Hamas’s choice. Indeed, Hamas cynically increases and then broadcasts civilian suffering to erode international support for Israel’s military response.

The question here is how observers should categorize those deaths, and whether it makes sense legally and morally to juxtapose them with the Israeli civilians intentionally murdered and bombarded by Hamas.

The Israel Defense Forces and Distinction

Israeli forces operating in Gaza may attack only military objectives.  Military objectives include enemy combatants, civilians directly participating in hostilities (a complex category best left aside for now), and “military objects.”

Importantly, military objects include not just overt military installations but also “objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization … offers a definite military advantage” (emphasis added).

That means that a nominally civilian building (or even a medical vehicle) can become a military object if Hamas uses it for military purposes. And Hamas regularly uses civilian areas to store weapons, to house command centers, and for other military aims.

Intentionally targeting a civilian object not being used for military purposes would, of course, violate the principle of distinction. (We’ll come to two additional legal requirements, precautions and proportionality, below.) Establishing that, however, requires granular knowledge of both the factual context—was Hamas, for example, using that building to store weapons?—and the commander’s state of mind.

Hamas and Distinction

The principle of distinction also imposes duties on the defender. Parties to a conflict must take “all feasible precautions to protect the civilian population and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks.”

In this conflict, Hamas has an affirmative legal duty to protect Palestinian civilians by “remov[ing] them,” to the extent feasible, “from the vicinity of military objectives.”

Hamas will not do that, of course.  

Not because it is infeasible. Hamas, which has governed the Gaza Strip for years, could have designated certain places in the strip as military enclaves and concentrated its fortifications, bunkers, weapons stores, fuel depots, rocket bases, and command centers there. It could have encouraged civilians to evacuate areas around those bases, rather than forcing them to stay put. Indeed, when the Israel Defense Forces tried to encourage civilians to move away from military targets, Hamas discouraged and blocked them from doing so, according to senior White House officials.

Hamas will not separate civilians from its military activities because following the law would be disadvantageous for Hamas. Hamas uses civilian areas to hide its military assets and complicate the choices facing Israeli targeters: Israeli forces can either forgo the strike, leaving Hamas with the military asset, or Israel can launch it, whereupon Hamas publicizes the resulting civilian suffering.

Hamas is evil, but its leaders are no fools: These tactics work. A NATO report examining Hamas’s activities from 2008 to 2014 explains how Hamas’s use of human shields in Gaza has long created a dilemma for Israel:

If the IDF uses lethal force and causes an increase in civilian casualties, Hamas can utilise that as a lawfare tool: it can accuse Israel of committing war crimes, which could result in the imposition of a wide array of sanctions.  Alternatively, if the IDF limits its use of military force in Gaza to avoid collateral damage, Hamas will be less susceptible to Israeli attacks[.]

International reactions make this kind of “lawfare” effective. Hamas knows that credulous observers will attribute these casualties to Israel—even though it was Hamas’s illegal decision to hide military assets in civilian areas that exposed the victims to harm.

Failing to place blame where it belongs—to unequivocally insist that Hamas move its military assets away from civilians, and to hold it responsible if it does not—encourages Hamas to put even more civilians in harm’s way.  

These cynical incentives for Hamas pervert the law’s humanitarian aims and put Palestinian civilians in greater danger.

How the Law of War Accounts for Unintended Civilian Casualties

Even when striking a legitimate military target, Israel must consider the potential harm to civilians. But “zero harm to civilians” is not the rule: Strikes on military targets can result in unintended civilian casualties without necessarily violating the law of armed conflict. Tragically, because Hamas intentionally commingles civilians and military assets, there have been many such deaths in this war.

The key rule here is proportionality, which requires armed forces to refrain from attacks that would inflict incidental civilian harm “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated to be gained.”

Attacking forces must also take “feasible” precautions in attack to reduce the risk to civilians.  This can include verifying the military nature of the target, assessing risk to civilians before the strike, providing advance warning to civilians, adjusting the timing of an attack, choosing more precise weapons, and so forth.

Proportionality and precautions are intensely fact-bound. Civilian harm, military advantage, and feasibility are difficult to quantify. Their application often depends on the circumstances on the ground, at a fleeting moment, during the chaos of war.  

Reasonableness, not perfect hindsight, is the standard. After-the-fact assessments of proportionality must account for “variation in how reasonable persons would apply the principle of proportionality in a given circumstance” and “the information available to that person at the time.”  

The precautions required also vary with the context. Feasibility considers “all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations.” Those military considerations include risks to one’s own troops and to the mission’s success: “[A] commander,” the U.S. Law of War Manual explains, “may determine that a precaution would not be feasible because it would result in increased operational risk (i.e., a risk of failing to accomplish the mission) or an increased risk of harm to his or her forces.”

Photographs of shattered buildings and injured or dead civilians tell us that a tragedy has taken place. But without further information—without specific evidence of Israeli misconduct in assessing proportionality and taking feasible precautions—it is impossible to declare that any given tragedy was also a violation of the laws of war.

The sad reality is that many civilian deaths will result when a technologically sophisticated force confronts a terrorist group that chooses to fight from densely populated civilian areas and compels civilians to stay in anticipated battle zones. That is true even if the organized military uses precision weapons and cares deeply about the law.

Hamas knows that, of course. It stores weapons in schools and launches rockets from civilian neighborhoods fully aware that Israeli strikes on those military assets will harm civilians. Why? Because it knows that international observers will blame Israel, eroding support for Israeli military action. Here again, Hamas perversely exploits proportionality’s humanitarian aims, intentionally putting Palestinian civilians in harm’s way to generate legal pressure on Israel.

The Meta Question: Are the Laws of War the Right Rules?

This analysis rests on the premise that the laws of armed conflict are the right standard to apply to both parties’ conduct.

But are they?  

Perhaps, as some observers contend, different rules should apply to each side. For instance, a group of academics at Columbia University has suggested that “one could regard” the atrocities of Oct. 7 as “an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation.” (The letter goes on to say that “armed resistance by an occupied people must conform to the laws of war,” including the rule against internationally targeting civilians. But it studiously avoids acknowledging what follows from that concession: By that standard, one cannot in fact “regard” Hamas’s massacres as legitimate resistance.)

Should Hamas be allowed to place its missiles in schoolyards and its command centers under hospitals, if it thinks that will help it prevail?

Should different rules apply to the weak and the strong?

Advocates of that idea should consider what it would do to the centuries-long humanitarian quest to humanize warfare. To the struggle for what Texas Law Dean Bobby Chesney has called the “civilizationally relevant” idea that “it’s not right to intentionally try to kill innocents to advance your political or social goals.”

Without reciprocity, that project founders. The modern law of war rests on reciprocal agreements among states aimed at reducing unnecessary suffering on both sides—among combatants themselves, but also among civilians, prisoners of war, the injured and shipwrecked, and others outside the fight

Those fundamental humanitarian prohibitions thus apply without regard to the justness of each side’s cause. In legal jargon: The jus in bello, which regulates the conduct of war, applies independently of the jus ad bellum, which governs the commencement of war. Even the controversial (in this respect) first Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions, which elevates in certain respects anti-colonial struggles, does not purport to grant “resistance” fighters the right to murder innocents or otherwise wage war without limits.

If modern law’s fundamental humanitarian guarantees are to endure, they must apply equally to all parties, with no exemption for “especially worthy” causes.

Which belligerent has ever admitted that its cause is unjust? Which people fighting for survival would accept that the law constrains them, but not their enemies?  

No-holds barred for one side only is not a principle that can hold for long.

Indeed, there is a perverse irony in supporters of the weaker party disputing that the laws of war should apply equally to all.  

It is the weak, not the strong, who benefit most from universal restraint. In a world where anything goes, why would the strong forbear from using their power to the utmost? The alternative to universal rules is not asymmetric justice in favor of the weak. It is a ruthless world in which “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

***

Acknowledging that the law of armed conflict is the right normative framework for both sides in this fight would benefit Palestinian civilians most of all.

If Hamas would keep civilians away from military emplacements and stop operating from within their midst, as the law requires, Hamas and the IDF could have it out with far fewer civilian casualties. In the Columbia professors’ words, Hamas could “resist” with less danger to the people on whose behalf it claims to fight.  

Any “right to resist” beyond the law’s constraints, then, is nothing more than a right to murder Israeli civilians and to use Palestinian innocents as human camouflage.

The suffering civilians of the Middle East deserve better friends than these.

[sublimation-machina]

Just supporting a militant organization does not make a civilian into a combatant. If it did, then most of the zionist entity's civilians would also be rendered combatants. In fact, most civilians in any conflict would be rendered combatants. This way of thinking makes talking about war crime impossible. Which is, perhaps not incidentally, a favorable state of affairs for the zionist.