Mortars, Guns, Machettes….egh, the insurgents just find them all too boring of tools for killing invasive American Geologists.  Poison beer, now that’s fun!  That’s right, apparently the Wikileak documents purport that the ISI (Afghan spy agency) and insurgents actually intended on using the method with regularity.  Americans do love them some beer, after all.  And one American Geologists claims to have been a victim:

James Yeager, an American geologist who advised Afghanistan’s Ministry of Mines, tells the Monitor he returned to his residence in Kabul to find it had been burgled. The intruder took money from a drawer and left behind a bottle of Corona beer.

The Corona bottle sat on his counter for the next two weeks Yeager says, because Corona is one of his least favorite beers. He finally opened it during a going away party as the other drinks began to run low.

“I pulled it out and when I popped it there was no fizz and the cap was loose,” says Yeager. “Because this one didn’t have fizz you wonder if it went rancid or not, and I just kind of sniffed it and I went ‘Oh, that doesn’t smell like beer.’ ”

Yeager, a geochemist familiar with acids, realized it smelled like sulfuric acid – otherwise known as battery acid. He called a friend over who had the same reaction to the smell. Yeager poured the “beer” into the toilet and it foamed and fizzed, leaving “no question” in his mind it was sulfuric acid.

Interestingly, the plan seems to have fouled up a bit at the beer choice.  Had it not been a disgusting Corona and perhaps a nice IPA, Yeager would have quaffed the beer without hesitating. Silly insurgents.  They didn’t even leave a lime?  Lucky for Yeager, his discriminating taste buds saved him from an esophagus full of Sulphuric Acid.

This puts a whole new spin on the term, “Alcohol Poisoning.”

In case anybody wonders, I will not be visiting Afghanistan any time soon.

Spread the Word:

Reading the article made my blood boil a bit.  Why?

I too, was set up by Christian County, MO police in a similar raid some years ago.  First allow me to tell  my story, and then set up the illogical nature of these raids.

I was working as bar tender at a Ruby Tuesday on a VERY busy night.  I had no time to converse with my customers and was slinging drinks at a furious pace.  This is great for the patrons…in a rush I tend to over-pour.  In walked a young, attractive girl who orders something retarded like a Midouri Sour.  She ordered the drink in a flirtatious manner.  Even though I’m busy, I say, “No problem…let me see your ID.” She rummages through her purse and then states, “I must have left it at home.” I reply, “Sorry, I cant serve you ten.” She says, “Pleaaaase!”  “Sorry, I can’t,” I reply.

After she leaves a dude with a mustache comes up to the bar and asks for my manager.  I run and grab my manager.  They talk in a corner, and then holler for me to come over.  The with the mustache explains that He was an undercover cop and had just set me up.  He said, “Congratulations, you passed the test.  Had you not, you’d be in cuffs right now.”

Even though I “Passed the test” I wasn’t happy.  Here I am a college student, father of two, slinging drinks to provide for my family, and this guy set me up with the intent that if I failed I go to jail?  What if I’d failed?  Even though I’m a law abiding citizen, it would be EASY to forget to ask for an ID form someone that looked of age when your getting slammed on a Saturday night.  The more I thought about it, the more I got wrong.  Here’s why.

The whole scenario of a “set up” seems to fit into the logical fallacy of Tu Quoque: Two Wrongs Make a Right.  The problem is that the law officials are CREATING a crime to be solved.  In my five years of bar-tending, that was the ONLY time that I ever had to decline a drink for lack of authentic age identification.  The problem did not exist until an underage girl (isn’t a crime on the behalf of the the underage purchaser as well?) was sent in by cop–whose job it is to stop crime–to create a crime in a place where there was no history of delinquency in the area of serving in minors, in order to hopefully arrest me, the innocent bartender.

Two wrongs make a right fallacy (or even the ends justify the means):  1) Serving an Alcohol to a minor is WRONG.  2) The crime DID NOT exist until created by the police.  They created evil to fill a non existent void.  WRONG  3) Intended result?  Get a POTENTIAL lawbreaker off the streets before he messes up for real.  Do the ends justify the means?  Do two wrongs make a right?  Regardless of whether the logic stands, the ethical nature of the sting is questionable.

Shoot, with that logic we should just exterminate our race since we as humans all have a potential for evil.

For the record, a few months after my incident, a bartender in training who was getting his rear handed to him on an extremely busy night served beer to a minor who was a part of a sting, even after we (I) passed the first test.  I personally knew the guy.  He was prude.  He just was so busy he lost his head and barely made eye contact with the pawn asking for the beer.  He got fired that night, went to jail ,had to pay lawyers and fines, and ended up having to drop out of college.

Does it make sense to create a crime in order to solve it?

What are your thoughts on the subject?

Spread the Word:

About a month ago our family of seven hit up the polish fest.  The food was incredible.  The sour cabbage and butter noodle, the pirogi, and the kielbasa tasted like they came right out of Busha’s kitchen; in fact, I’m sure they did.  While the only polish beer available at the festival was  Okacim–just and average beer in my opinion–it worked great with the rich food.  Besides, the ambiance of the festival made it that much better.

Interestingly (but not surprisingly) nearly EVERYBODY at the polish festival had a brew in their hands.  And everybody was happy.

The great thing about these festivals, is that for a few hours you forget that you live in rust belt America.  You forget the abandoned factories, the foreclosed homes, the cell phone that was stolen out of your minivan in the middle of the night, and the ghetto bass booming out of your neighbor’s garage that disrupts nearly every thought, and you feel like your in a different country, eating different food, drinking different beer, and listening to different music (polka!).  And all for a few bucks.

The bottom line is, we as Americans are quick to forget our roots.  I’d say folks who like better beer may have a more well rounded sense of “culture”, having sampled beers from around the world on a regular basis.  Festivals such as my beloved Polish fest are an opportunity to embrace and revive the past, and also remind the festival goers that not all beer is bland and brewed in St. Louis, Missouri.

Spread the Word:

After defending BrewDog achievements of making a 32% and a 41% beer, I have to defend the creation of a  55% beer called The End of History, a reference to Democracy as the high human political achievement (the implication that the human political struggle reaches its terminus in democratic ideals). This is another notable achievement and landmark in the making of a massive beer.  Imagine, 55% ABV.  Wow!  Read about it here.  But the accomplishment of making a 55% beer is where I have to end my applause for BrewDog.  Here’s the deal:

We live in a time where all of us are more and more sensitive, more and more concerned about political correctness, and more and more readily offended at things like, say, a stuffed, dead animal with a beer running through its body.  I for one am not actually that discomfited with the idea, especially since these animals were already dead.  I’ve hunted for several years and am not at all uncomfortable with an animal hide.  Let me say, though, that I can see how someone might be bothered about it.

Sausage jokes don’t bother me either.  Rhetoric can be a fun and absolutely funny vehicle for making a point or, in this case, selling a beer.  All this to say that it’s not a matter of offending my sensibilities that is the cause of writing this small post against what BrewDog is doing.  Those of you who’ve read this site for any amount of time know that I’ve defended BrewDog against the evil Mr. Protz and have even joined in the fun of trying to make my own “world’s strongest beer.” (scroll down to get to the posts)  I get it, I really do.  Pushing boundaries is fun, making a huge beer is a challenge, and taking such care in making such a huge product can be a truly intense engagement.  For all that, I don’t fault James Watt or BrewDog in the least.

What I do find disturbingly problematic is the price.  Now I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve spent a pretty penny on a beer here or there.  In fact, I purchased Utopias in the past.  That beer set me back $160 for a 24-ounce re-sealable bottle. Perhaps this is a self-admission that my own thoughts are contradictory or even self-defeating from the outset…maybe. Honestly, I’ve even argued that a degree of aristocracy is a necessary evil if beer is to gain a reputation that has a chance of being on par with wine.  Yet somehow I doubt that drinking from a dead animal is going to accomplish that goal.

While I did acknowledge that a degree of aristocracy is necessary for the beer culture, I took the argument in the direction of rare beers and price appreciation rather than off the line price.  A small distinction, I admit.  There are 11 available bottles of Brewdog’s beer and one more still being worked on.  So, 12 bottles of this beer will exist.  The prices for the various bottles are currently $764.15 or $1069.81.  My guess is that the one hare bottle will be a hair more expensive than the others, so I’m assuming that beer will be around $1400.00.  By the way, your eyes are seeing this correctly.  The latter two prices do make this the most expensive modern beer (I’ve seen an 1800s vintage beer sell for $300,000), scraping by the former $1,000.00 mark.  This takes beer appreciation and aristocracy to a new level and doesn’t seem very democratic at all.  An alternative approach to history would suggest that the victors (write powerful and wealthy) write history.  Maybe a name like “spoils to the victor” would be a better name for the brew.

Sure, if the money one pays for the beer covers the cost of a flight to and stay in Scotland, the beer, and maybe a tour of the brewery, then it could be a comfort to buy the beer.  Alternatively, wouldn’t it have been cool for BrewDog just to ship the bottles to a few people just to give them the exclusive beer, thus building their reputation?  I personally think another approach was needed rather than just selling 12 bottles of beer to the public.

Let’s make clear which public we are speaking about. The public in view is not you and me.  Generally, two people are buying this beer.  Crazed beer fanatics who must try everything and spend every last dime they have on beer or people who don’t care a bit about spending $1,000 on a bottle of beer.  I’ve recovered from being of the former disposition and will likely never  be a member of the latter group.  So, generally speaking, people with a fair amount of expendable income will be buying the beer.  Let me be clear, I’m not a class warrior: but isn’t this the problem?

What I mean is, a beer like this undermines what BrewDog is trying to do.  By their own self-admission, they are attempting to undermine the ubiquitously bland lagers and ales from the market, or at least offer an alternative.  Great, at least you are doing it 12 bottles at a time, the average price for a bottle being roughly $920.  I know that this probably offers the average drinker in the UK a viable alternative.  ”We want to introduce as many people to the amazing world of craft beer as we can, to change people perceptions and challenge their understanding of what beer is.”  I don’t think you are going to accomplish it this way.  Perhaps their other slogan, ”We are selfish: we make the beers we want to drink,” is the more accurate depiction of their attitude.  I wish it could be both, but it certainly isn’t in this particular case.

Now, I realize there are some political aspects to the BrewDog reaction as well, so I don’t want to oversimplify the matter.  They’ve been fighting with temperance people, beer people, government people and people from other countries. And, let’s not forget, the tax structure for beer in the UK is ABV-based, not flat barrel price like in the U.S., so some of the cost from the tax structure really dictates the cost of the final product.  But, let’s be honest, they still decided to make and sell this product.  All this to say that I really want to offer BrewDog the benefit of the doubt where I can.  But I’ve become weary of defending them on this account.

Those who read this might make the argument that ultimately people don’t have to buy the beer if they don’t want to spend the money.  I fully grant this point, but I am thinking in terms of principles.  Should this beer cost this much regardless of who buys it?  That’s the sort of question I ask.  Or is it consistent with the philosophy that BrewDog has set out?  I would argue that it’s yes and no.  Yes, because they are pushing the limits, and no, because they are not doing what they’ve defined themselves as doing, that is, offering the normal consumer a viable alternative.  It sounds democratic and capitalist on the surface (I think capitalist implies democracy, which means “of the people,” so I don’t like separating them so readily). But, in practice, it seems mostly an elitist and aristocratic beer.

As far as taste goes, I doubt that I’d even have a chance to taste it.  Who knows exactly what the beer will taste like?  Will it be an alcohol bomb like the rest of BrewDog’s stuff or will it be sweeter and more balanced?  Will it resemble a triple at all?  Who knows.  What I can tell you about the beer without tasting it is that it’s a little salty for me.

Spread the Word:

That being said, what did I find when I ripped open the box from Reno, NV?

Heck if I knew.  Buckbean really embraced stark minimalism on this one.  Two, shiny silver cans with nary a jot of text glimmered from within.  Coors has got nothing on these silver bullets!  I emailed the brewery prior to drinking to inquire as to what exactly was contained in the cans.  Maibock.  Maibock can be a great brew this time of year, but I’ve had a few craft versions of this German style brew that were utterly disgusting.   The point:  It’s an easy style to screw up.

But in all objectivity (yes the beer was free, no I won’t pander to the brewers feelings) Buckbean nailed it.

I’d just finished cutting the grass.  Then I had to bathe the kids (virgin eyes beware).  It was hot (95 degrees).  I don’t have central AC.  A beer was in order.   Upon pulling the silver bullet out of the fridge and into the humidity, it instantly was covered in sweat.  Having just cut the grass, my sweaty odoriferous body was already bonding with the beer.  It pours a golden brownish bronze and is a bit hazy.  The odor is fairly hoppy, citrusy, and there is even a slight acidic sour fragrance.

I’ll be honest.  I probably guzzled the first five ounces, and man, was it good.  In fact, it was great.  I found myself liking this Maibock for a peculiar reason.

It tasted like homebrew–bottle conditioned–homebrew.  Now that’s a flavor that’s hard to quantify.  The beer reeks of raw fresh yeast goodness.  It tastes like the way a sack of fresh grains smell.  I don’t know if this was can conditioned or forced carbonated, but it tasted like the former.

For a Maibock, this beer really has a sour apple cider feel to it.  There are flavor profiles that remind me a bit of estery Belgian yeast strains (which is unusual, since Maibocks are lagers).  The beer has a nice hoppy kick to it that really balances it well.  I am not sure what the ABV, but I’d be willing to bet it’s at the upper end of the scale…maybe in the 7.2+ range.

Bottom line, is the beer is good, refreshing, and would be a “buy again” beer if Buckbean’s distribution made it this far.

Spread the Word:

I do care what’s in my beer.  I care that it’s a quality product made with malts, hops, water and good yeast.  In short, I care that the beer I’m drinking doesn’t have fillers and cheap production.  But for breweries to have to list ingredients like ginger, the reviled addition for Peter, is a discomfiting proposition to me.  The example I used on Peter’s post and the one I’m going to use here deals with Wit beer.

The exotic spices used in Wit beer are notoriously hard to pinpoint.  Some of the world’s best tasters may have a guess, albeit an uncertain one, as to which ingredients are actually used.  The mysterious appeal and subtle qualities of a Wit beer are essentially based on these “secret” ingredients.  Now suppose the ingredients of the Wit are required to be disclosed.  First off, the proprietary aspects of the beer would be revealed.  Obviously, the amounts are not disclosed but the basic structure of the beer is.  Is it fair to require the disclosure of ingredients based on what others might find distasteful?  I don’t think this is enough to dictate an ingredient list.

Known allergens are a different matter because of health risks.  In the event of those allergens, there should absolutely be a distinct and explicit reference to the said allergen.  In fact, I’m sure it’s a legal requirement.  Thus, I don’t think allergens are the real issue here.  The question is whether or not an ingredient list should be required.  For me, the answer is a resounding no.  To force this takes away proprietary uniqueness from the brewer (I noted this above).

We might think that because this is required of food that we have it on beer as well.  But even Ketchup leaves room for a unique product.  I can’t count the number of food labels that list several ingredients and then the word spices.  So, would listing two row malt, crystal malt, yeast, hops and various spices really solve the issue?  How much of a particular spice needs to be in the beer to make it a list worthy?  These are the sort of questions that we would have to ask.  Perhaps in the end we would have to have beer label that are even more specifically navigated than the Ketchup label.

Let’s be honest here, generally speaking, the drinker will only be out a beer or a six pack worth of cash.  I look at it like buying a salsa that you might not like.  Now you know you don’t like it through experience.  What’s more, we are in the internet age and while many of us beer reviewers avoid other reviews of the beer we are drinking, the information about most of these beers is out there.  The reason for avoiding the reviews is obvious.  One doesn’t want read reviews to influence how he or she thinks about the beer.  However, a beer with a disliked herb or spice that is pronounced enough to note is not really a secret in a beer review.  Therefore, the spice could be avoided.

The temptation is to think that because everyone can taste it, what’s the big deal about having to disclose it?  But I’m sure many of us know the philosophical concept of slippery slope argumentation; the problem with this type of logic is that stopping points are fluid and eventually the lowest common denominator is reached and required.

(As a side note: Matt [in the comments section] has stated that the ATF has a technical requirements for listing things like ginger but that just listing “spices” is the way that brewers get around it.  If so, I’m glad that brewers can get around it.  Furthermore, the requirement seems to extend not to labeling information but product; which of course means that it has to be somewhere but not necessarily on the label.)

Another point that Peter brings up is that he would like to see ingredients that are not common for the style listed.  This is exactly what I don’t want to see.  The reason I don’t is that what makes the beer not “common for the style” is the uncommon ingredient.  So, what makes the beer different and unique?  Uncommon, if you will, is that is has a specific ingredient.  I could personally see the listing of the unique ingredients as being detrimental to experimentation and exploration.  Instead of searching for one’s own unique path, there might be a temptation of act based on what other unique additions others have done.  The point it obvious.  The very thing that makes the beer unique for the style is the very thing that will be required to be listed…?  I’m not a fan.

However, these are all dwarfed by what I see as the biggest problem with the line of argumentation.  In the comments, Peter notes that he thinks ABV should be required on all beers.  However, the reason for the disparity of listing, listing over certain amounts, or listing at all is the fact that individual states are allowed to legislate.  The real problem of forcing the listing of ABV, unusual ingredients that pose no danger of allergy, or encouraging uniformity across the board is that there is only one entity that could make this happen.  I’m sure you know who I’m talking about.  I think that last thing we need is more government involvement.  This is the same government that put the three-tier system in place.  Yes, I’m arguing guilt by association.

Thomas makes a good implicit point (and Matt’s explicit point) in the comment section when he says breweries don’t have access to a lab.  The implicit point is higher cost of obtaining various points of information.  This is the other side that would come with government requirements or even voluntary involvement, more cost for the brewery which will be passed on to the consumer (this would be yet another competitive edge for the big boys as they already have labs, which are figured into their product cost).  So, this requirement would not simply be a “pain in the arse,” as Lee implies in the comments section; it’s about cost and uniqueness.  Thomas’s other point that the ATF doesn’t want to imply health benefits by listing various aspects to a brew is well taken.

I want to be fair to Peter.  He says that he is against regulation.  But the only way that what he is stating is going to happen is one of two ways: either the brewers agree to do it themselves or the government makes them.  I personally don’t think either would be good for business.  After all, what about those of use who don’t like a certain hop or malt that much…shouldn’t that be listed, too?

Spread the Word:

One night we were playing cards at the Reinhardt household, and I decided to crack some cellar beers.  A few beers stick out, but one in particular is at the front of my mind as I write this: a Kiwi lambic from Upland.  This beer was terrific.  I personally noted one slight off-tone to the brew, but it didn’t really detract from the beer as a whole.  But I’m not here to write a review or get you to buy that particular beer.  Actually, I want to share something that I found particularly surprising.

My brother has been pretty into beer for a couple of years now, and he is particularly fond of lambics.  He loved the Upland offering.  But that’s not really the surprise.  My sister is normally pretty game to try any beer that’s put in front of her.  She always approaches a beer with an open mind.  To my surprise and delight, she really enjoyed the beer and was talking about getting some sours when I came to town next.  She’s not a beer fanatic by any means, but she absolutely fell in love with this lambic.  Interestingly, the lambic is not of the sweet Lindeman’s variety.  No, this is a truly sour version of the style.

This set me to thinking about how approachable and refreshing lambic is as a style.  If the drinker doesn’t like sour or vinegar flavors from the start, it’s hard to make the case.  Otherwise, I’m relearning some lessons.  Different people have very different taste, so it’s not a forgone conclusion that you move them from Bud to Sam Adams Boston Lager or whatever else.  Sometimes, it’s gauging an open mind and going from a Bud to a sour lambic…now there’s an interesting thought.

Spread the Word:

So, I had an idea (not sure if it’s going to flop or fly) that involves making a simple statement and then asking our readers to finish the thought.  I think it will be fun and all of us will get to know each other better.  Without further ado, here is the first statement.

“I love hops in a beer because they…”

Spread the Word:

Folks, one of the great things about Erik’s fundraising is that he can exceed the amount given and add it to further his success. I’ve personally been out of for for 3 1/2 months (I do have a temp job and have an interview tomorrow), so I’ve not been able to give.  However, I plan on giving some money before his fundraising ends.  Please go to his fund page and do the same.  Let’s help him to more than succeed.  It’s no mystery that we can be a part of it.

Spread the Word:

Anyhow, enjoy this story of international intrigue and craft beer cock-eyed optimism that hails from the land that blesses the U.S. with awesome KIA vehicles.

Howdy Nate,

I had an adventure yesterday that I think you’d of gotten a kick out of.

Seems we’ve talked about how rotten the beer in Korea is. Nasty stuff. The ‘hamburgers” you can find out here (if you can find them at all) aren’t much better. Which is fine. I wouldn’t expect decent Korean food in KC, and it would be unreasonable to expect Korea to be teeming with tasty burgers and brews.

Still, as a good ole, corn-fed American boy I often hanker for American food – and none more-so than a hot, juicy burger and an ice cold beer.

So I did some research and dug up some info on a pub that specializes in burgers. This pub was located a good ways off the beaten path in one of the shadier neighborhoods in Seoul, and it took a lot of trial and error to finally track it down, but track it down we finally did.

When Jinah and I entered there was a single customer inside: a burly-looking U.S. serviceman. As soon as we walked in he looked up from his paper and asked “Hey, are you all here for the beer judging contest?” We werent, but as luck would have it, this guy (Bill was his name) was short a judge and asked if I’d like to participate.

Well, I just about couldn’t get “absolutely” out quick enough.

As we were waiting for the other judges to arrive, Bill told us a little about himself. Served a tour in Korea back 25 years ago, traveled all over after that both with the military and as a civilian, and then returned to Korea 4 years ago to settle down. His wife is also military. She was back in the states on leave and decided to surprise Bill with a shipment over 100 different bottles of craft beers.

So Bill reckoned he’d share some of this bounty by way of a beer tasting contest. Very cool guy. A beer conisseur but not a snob about it. Just passionate about beer history, culture and the drinking experience.

Some of the beers I tried yesterday were:

1) Sweetwater IPA (forget the name, but it was excellent)
2) Terrapin IPA “Monk’s Revenge”
3) Ranger IPA
4) Founder’s Stout

Bill also brews his own and I tried a Belgian style IPA – tasty stuff.

The whole experience was more than a little surreal. I mean, how often do you walk into a beer judging contest? Let alone one in South Korea? But, I’ll tell ya, that’s the kind of surreality I could handle on a regular basis.

p

Do you have a beer story you’d like to share? Hit us up at nate@thankheavenforbeer.com.

<!–adsensestart–>

<!–noadsense–>

Spread the Word: