August 26, 2026

NOT THE ONION:

The Elvis Impersonator, the Karate Instructor, a Fridge Full of Severed Heads, and the Plot 2 Kill the President: Remember that crazy story about the dude in Mississippi who mailed ricin to Obama and then tried to frame some other dude in Mississippi for the crime? Well, as Wells Tower discovered when he traveled to Tupelo and started poking around, the story is a thousand times crazier than you thought (Wells Tower, September 29, 2013, GQ)


Spend a week or two in Tupelo, Mississippi, and you begin to wonder if the air down here perhaps contains an element that causes dreams to ignite and burn hotter and stranger than elsewhere in the world. What are the dreams that catch fire in this town? They are dreams of rock ‘n’ roll; of valor, metamorphosis, and ruination; sex and betrayal; of the government and shadowy forces; of the grand dream, American. The ether here is surely spiked with something. How else do we explain the dream of the poor hillbilly born in a shotgun shack in east Tupelo, who invented rock ‘n’ roll and changed the world and died on the toilet at the age of 42? How else to understand a man like Kevin Curtis, one of northeastern Mississippi’s preeminent Elvis impersonators, whose life was nearly ruined by the sight of a severed head on a refrigerator shelf? How else to make sense of the story you are about to hear, the tale of Mr. Curtis and Everett Dutschke, two men who might have shared a lovely friendship but instead had a weird feud that ended in the attempted poisoning of the president of the United States?

Theirs is a story of human dismemberment and righteous causes, of martial arts and murder intrigues, sexual perversity, political conviction, and resentments dearly held. What lies behind Mr. Curtis and Mr. Dutschke’s spectacular collision? A lot of odd and complicated things. But in the simplest sense, perhaps it’s that these gentlemen simply had too many dreams in common, and in their particular America, there are only so many dreams to go around.

LIBERTY RESTRICTS FREEDOM:

Liberty for Whom? David M. Kennedy on Patrick Henry: The Revolution’s master orator saw freedom in states’ sovereignty, not federal control. (David M. Kennedy, August 25, 2026, Freedom Frequency)

But what about that word “liberty”? My callow and rambunctious adolescent brain understood it to mean personal freedom, the kind of autonomy that latter-day libertarians assert as an unalienable individual right.

I’ve come to believe that my youthful understanding was not entirely wrong, but it was seriously incomplete, arguably even mistaken in its fundamentals. Properly understood, Henry’s concept of liberty indeed embraced at least a qualified sense of individual prerogatives, of the sort that Thomas Jefferson enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. But for him the essential, foundational concept of liberty was a collective attribute, the sacred right of organic communities—or, more precisely, majorities in such communities—to govern themselves without outside interference, and sometimes even to subordinate individual welfare to the will of the larger community.

RUSE OF WAR:

Was the Trojan Horse a War Crime?: The modern heart of the filmed Odyssey is a transgression and its consequences. But how did the ancients see the epic ruse? (Barry Strauss, August 25, 2026, Freedom Frequency)

What would we say if the Trojan Horse took place today? Does it violate international humanitarian law, which is also known as the Law of Armed Conflict? The law permits “ruses of war” if they don’t otherwise violate international law and if they don’t constitute “perfidy.” The law defines a ruse of war as anything aimed at misleading the enemy if it doesn’t trick him into thinking that he is protected under the law of war. The latter is perfidy. For example, attacking the enemy after either pretending to surrender or faking a wound is considered perfidy. But feigned retreat, such as the Greeks engaged in at Troy, is not perfidious, and is permitted by international humanitarian law.

The Trojan Horse was an ambush by means of camouflage, and both ambushes and camouflage are permitted ruses. Still, the horse was a religious symbol and an unofficial emblem of Troy, a country known for horse breeding and horse trading. The law of armed conflict prohibits the use of a religious symbol in an ambush, but only if it invokes legal protection. Pretending to be a chaplain or hiding soldiers in a religious shrine would violate the law, but offering a false gift to a nation’s god probably would not. International law would probably judge the horse to be a legitimate ruse of war.

It might not give Sinon’s behavior a pass. On the one hand, lies and deception are no violation of the law of war. On the other hand, Sinon claimed to be hors de combat (not to be confused with horse de combat) and a refugee when, in fact, he remained an enemy soldier. The Roman poet Virgil condemned Sinon’s behavior as perjury. Lawyers will disagree, but Sinon might well be judged today to have violated the law of armed conflict.