To Spin Inside Dull Aberrations

ganzonomy
Hello.

I was listening to "I am the Walrus" while working on a Master's Thesis (strange basis), and in the sidebar was the song in the subject line.  I was floored.  I cannot describe exactly what it is, but the entire song has been nothing short of amazing.  (Admittedly, it has served as a good "backdrop" for working on my Thesis about cyberwarfare.)  What inspired this absolutely incredibly frenetic work?

jessica
that version of the recording was written in late '01 as a stadium rock track for an unrealized rock project, but not constructed in it's existing form until about a month ago. there's consequently a set of influences relative to 2001 (it's half industrial, half no-wave/grunge) and a set of influences relative to 2014 (i've been listening to a lot of melodic hardcore recently), as well as a lot of stuff i've come in and out of in between. i've dubbed my work "blender rock", which means that it tries to take in as diverse a set of influences as is possible.

i have writeups for most material up until about 2002 at my bandcamp site:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/to-spin-inside-dull-aberrations

i should also point out that this is a reworking of what i call my fourth symphony. there are roughly ten versions of this track, and i will be compiling them shortly, but for now all i have is this, which is the version with the symphony title:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/trepanation-nation

ganzonomy
It's some of the wildest, most interesting, stuff I have heard in a long, long, while.  I'll take a look at those links when I resume my work on my MA Thesis, but from what I heard, I am thoroughly impressed.

I've been listening to a lot of late 1960s / early 1970s Miles Davis (The "Electric Era"), and I see parallels in it, especially the extent of keyboard and guitar work and the emphasis of such instruments.  (If you have a chance, I highly recommend finding a copy of Dark Magus - Live at Carnegie Hall, for me, it seems to be his "peak" from that era).  I've very often just sat down with a good pair of headphones and tried to pick apart each individual instrument and where it's going (or trying to go) compared to the others.  (I like doing that with a lot of works, be it King Crimson, Frank Zappa, Miles, anything that has a lot of instrumentation that's intertwined, or just something that can be ridden like a "magic carpet"). 

Again, great work :-)

jessica
davis is an interesting parallel. i've certainly spent a lot of time listening to davis, but the times i've sat down with any kind of emulation purposes are pretty rare. i'd say i get my mclaughlin pull more out of the mahavishnu stuff. the prog is key for me: i was sort of reared on crimson, genesis, zappa and floyd and it formed the basis of my musical understanding before kurt cobain smashed a guitar over my head and made me take notice of punk rock, which i suppose was a fairly normal experience for people my age at that time. that prog rock childhood was very formative, though, and eventually defined my interests in post-rock in the late 90s and early 00s.

i'm glad you're enjoying it...

ganzonomy
Davis' work from 1972 to 1975 (post-McLaughlin, his primary guitarist by that point had become Pete Cosey), is less smooth and more a mixture of Hendrix-meets-Parliament.  I got reared on what would be considered "classic rock", but one of the things I enjoyed doing was finding out where "the limits" were.  I became a Disc Jockey at WHRW Binghamton from 2004 through 2008 (I was a student at Binghamton University, hated it... wound up going through the City University of New York (CUNY) Queens College from 2010 onwards to complete my Bachelor's... but I digress, back to Disc Jockeying.  I found that era of my life to be the most musically expanding.  I would play anything ranging from Django, to Antheil (Ballet Mecanique being a personal favorite), to Zappa (the show was named Frankly... Zappa for a time), to spike jones, etc.,  The premise was "if it's been recorded, it's playable, and if it hasn't, I'll figure out how to turn the random things in the station into musical instruments".

Alas, the master's thesis is on cyberwarfare - which due to the lack of political science stuff (but a TON of computer science stuff) is kicking my brains in.  Thanks for making the research process easier.  PS: I read some of your works from when you were in college for law, they're actually quite good.  If you find the spark to finish, go for it.

jessica
i started off in theoretical physics and, after bouncing around quite a bit, finished a math degree in 2006. i went back in '08 to do a computer science degree for purely economic reasons and got to a half credit from finishing it before realizing that it really wasn't what i wanted to be doing with my life, so i mentally switched into law and finished up to the end of second year in it. i ended up concluding that i was arguing with the basic premises of the english common law and that there wasn't any future in continuing on with it outside of existing in some kind of purely theoretical space that is populated solely by anarchists. i couldn't possibly apply my perspectives in any kind of a real world context. i have loose plans on going back to school, but i think i'd probably want to focus on a master's degree in mathematics.

for the time being, i'm focusing on "completing my discography", which ran from roughly 1996-2011 and has dozens of half complete ideas. the track in question (as mentioned, from 2001 but finished last month) is a part of that process of finishing incomplete ideas. i've worked my way up to 2002, meaning i still have about ten years of musical ideas to finish before i start thinking about restarting an academic career.

ganzonomy
The basic arguments of law are some of the  most absurd things i've seen, i'm not a lawyer (my area, were I to enter it after the MA, would be international law), but there are some arguments where i'm just like "REALLY.... what was being smoked when this was argued?!" (and that's even taking into account historical contexts in supreme court cases).  I started out in Mechanical Engineering myself (discovered I couldn't do calculus) before going into psychology and finally political science.  Insofar as anarchists, are we talking anti-government sorts, or are we talking about the IR idea of anarchy that is chaos?

The idea of having a vault of unfinished music, is something that has fascinated me.  I'm a photography fan, and to see works that I've done years after they were made, I find interesting; particularly in seeing the things now that I could have improved, conditions that I could have changed (lenses, film type, etc.,), and I find I have very few that I'm like "Yes, this was PERFECT!".  Admittedly though this travels to my writing, where I'm always - after the fact - going into analyzing every little grammatical mistake that was missed. 

Side Question?  What exactly did "death to koalas" come from?

jessica
one of the (many) assumptions i found myself having difficulty agreeing with was the idea that situations should be analyzed by an objective criteria. i'd ultimately take the perspective that this isn't even possible - which is essentially the critical legal studies view that law is functionally defined by actors using the rules to justify enforcing their opinion, rather than the other way around. where i'd break with the cls people is that i actually think this is preferable to an objective set of rules, so long as the class relations can be abolished or minimized in terms of decision making (and replacing incarceration with civil/tort law in all but the most extreme of situations would ease a lot of those concerns) and the decision making is take out of the hands of elitist judges and put more into the hands of the community.

even something as seemingly black and white as "thou shalt not murder" is not really acceptable to me. i can come up with endless justifications for murder that go beyond the immediate need for self-defense. so, i don't think that a system that produces these static, immutable rules and demands they never be broken is the right approach - i think a system that looks at the situation on a case by case basis and determines whether the behaviour is or is not beneficial to the community on that basis - completely independently of past decisions - is preferable. adopting this approach would throw the concept of stare decisis out the window and completely abolish the authority of the existing common law in favour of the authority of the actual, existing community.

the general position in opposition is going to be that a system of clearly delineated laws makes it clear what the boundaries are in terms of what behaviour is allowed and what behaviour is not. but i'd identify this "liberal" mindset as the basis of most of the problems we have in front of us, from financial speculation to environmental degradation. if we want to talking about improving our social conditions, we have to shift society so that people are thinking about actively making moral choices rather than behaving as badly as they can with the singular restriction of merely avoiding the law. if your only argument in favour of a behaviour is "it's not illegal", maybe you shouldn't be doing it.

but, in taking this position, i'm rejecting the very foundations of english society. it may be an interesting exercise in anarchist rhetoric, but it's not something i can explore in a courtroom or in a classroom. and, i ultimately don't feel i need those pieces of paper to write on the topic if i decide to in the future.

ganzonomy
The first two paragraphs are mind-blowing to me (not in a bad way, but in a way that I had never considered viewing things and will have to research further, since traditional law is built on absolutes and to a great extent ignores ethics for "if it's legal I can do it, if it's not deemed illegal, i can still do it!".  Not to get too political-sciencey, but you are touching on the issue that existed between President Theodore Roosevelt and President William Howard Taft during the early 20th century.  Whereas Roosevelt's mentality was primarily "if it's not stricken as explicitly illegal, I can get away with it", Taft's mentality was "it is only doable if the law explicitly states it is doable".  (However both were notable for their "trust-busts" during the early 20th century as well as their presences in Latin America during that time period as well.  As far as law goes - admittedly I'm not a law student in the US (right now, I'm finishing my Master's in CUNY Brooklyn, I may go for International Law after), I will agree that law is a construct that is built from the norms of the society of which it exists in, but the issue I have is that while not having "objective rules" may be preferable in either a small state / municipality, "objective rules" need to exist in some capacity for the purposes of providing a structure - however decrepit it may be - for judicial purposes.

I do agree with a case-by-case basis for things, because of mitigating circumstances.  I find the allowance of organizations such as the MPAA and RIAA to act egregiously simply because someone's grandmother plays happy birthday from an MP3 download, to be asinine.  (Actually, the fact happy birthday is copyrighted, and that the copyright law in the USA allows for it to be continually renewed, is mind-blowing.  The recent movie, the butler, underwent an MPAA issue because Warner Bros. has a movie called the butler from about 1914, that is not publicly available (so it is not hostile-defended in a public market), but WB won the right to have that movie's name changed for "disambiguation purposes".  Although I'm a liberal thinker in terms of economics (ie: I do believe some measure of patent law is necessary to protect original innovation, but the extent that such things are protected, and even what can be protected... is insane (video yoga, for instance recently was patented in the USA; DiMarzio has a registered trademark on its double-creme pickups for electric guitars, etc.,).  Conversely, I do think there is a cost-of-service that comes with the rarity of the position and the ensuing difficulty (ie: an anesthesiologist should make more than a burger-flipper due to the level of skill that is required, but at the same time I have more respect for the working individual, regardless of whether he / she is a lawyer or a burger-flipper, than the welfare case, simply because of the effort being made).  As someone who's put himself through undergraduate, and now graduate, school, I do appreciate the value of working - even though much of my work was physical, rather than intellectual, labor.

I think, if you could take what you are thinking, grind out law school for the LL.B or JD (depending on if you go in the USA or Canada or elsewhere), and then go for an LL.M or S.J.D., your views and the research you have for them, will be very fruitful.  The first two paragraphs you wrote though - perhaps because i'm not a law student - were difficult to understand.  So if I need some clarification, I apologize.  The last two paragraphs though, I 100% agree.

jessica
i just want to clarify that i wouldn't align with either taft or roosevelt on this point. my position would be "as a sovereign individual, *i* decide if it's right or wrong". now, i'd give the community a sort of right to review the decision, but i wouldn't force any kind of a constitutional order on the community in their process of doing so.

so how do people know if something is legal? they answer is they don't and can't know by merely looking it up in a reference text - they have to work out those details and decide for themselves if the behaviour ought to be condemned (technically, behaviour cannot be restricted in a free society, so it's not a question of what is allowed or not allowed it's a question of what is censured or not censured) or not. there may be disagreements, but i wouldn't argue that this is a bad thing. i think the level of uncertainty is already inherent in the existing system and dismantling the facade of an objective system is merely being honest about it.

there are some obvious things: it's obvious that somebody that kills his neighbour for walking on his lawn should be censured. there are less obvious things: i would argue that somebody that kills his neighbour for raping his daughter is justified in his reaction.

ganzonomy
I'm going to ponder your argument a bit.  I do like sharp conversation (A LOT!) and I thank you for that.  (I'm pondering it because you have given me an incredible amount of info and i have to digest it mentally.)

I did see on your feed "He used to cut the grass".  That album (Joe's Garage), has my favorite guitar solo (Watermelon in Easter Hay).  That guitar solo was the first Zappa song I figured out by ear. I have the first part, and the last part, but I need to figure out the middle part.  (But that solo... puts chills down my spine.)

deathtokoalas
that dog is thinking about what an easy lunch that is. it's licking it's lips. but it reflects on the general situation, computes the likely consequences of eating the baby and eventually concludes it's a better idea not to.

RedStinger103
Because dogs can contemplate, infer and conclude with their brains.

deathtokoalas
yup. they're not the best at innovating solutions to problems, but what i've described is well within the capability of the average dog. dog intelligence is more connected to individuality than breed, but, statistically, labs are also one of the smarter breeds.

RedStinger103
Yes, but you're way overestimating their intelligence.

deathtokoalas
i'm not. just about any dog understands the idea of action--->reaction. it knows if it shits on the rug it'll get in trouble. it knows if it bites it's cohabitors it's going to get in trouble.

i'd even go so far as to argue that dogs have the ability to form a defined mens rea and should consequently be held culpable for criminal behaviour. well, some behaviour, anyways. you could consider turkey theft, for example. the turkey stealing dog is entirely aware of the nature of the crime, forms an intent before the crime is carried out and may even take steps to hide the evidence. that's mens rea, if you ask me. other types of crimes? it may be less clear that a real intent is possible to establish.

so, i'm not overestimating anything. and i think i'm reading the dog's body language fairly accurately.

Jamie 
You talk sooooo much shit.

Sound City Network
You clearly never had a smart dog before. I had a White German Shepherd and she would hide things INTENTIONALLY. Dogs are smarter than you think. 

Gamingalkaline 
I don't think that's talking shit, it's talking logically.

jsteel89 
My dog has tried several times to take a mouth full or food from the garage and take it where he can hide and eat it.

catfoodtitans
Don't really think dogs have reasoning skills like that. Where would it have learned that would be wrong? Unless you're saying that dogs have morals.

deathtokoalas
well, i don't think humans really have "morals", either, but that's not what i said - i said it was able to foresee the consequences.

Shaul Rosenzweig
You are talking shit. If you knew anything about dog body language, this dog is gentle and submissive towards the child. He goes down below its level to lick it wagging its tail and then kisses the baby gently looking up towards it. Dogs are social animals, and body language is part of their instinct.

deathtokoalas
well, sure it is, after it decided not to eat it.

the tail wagging thing is more of a nervous reaction, and doesn't really indicate anything about how it's interpreting the baby. but, you'll notice there's a nice sniff before the lick. when dogs sniff like that, it's generally food related. now, chances are the dog is well fed. nor is it likely to really think the baby has a lead on where to find a dog treat. it's kind of a slip up that indicates it's thinking about food. and, sure it's thinking about food - it was just licking it's lips at the sight of the baby coming towards it.

but, it made the right choice, in the end. that face lick is indeed a friendly greeting. but what i'm getting across is that it had to think about it...

now, does that mean you shouldn't leave your baby with your dog? well, if your dog is well fed and well treated it's predictably going to make the same choice that this dog did. see, it might not be safe to leave your baby with your in-laws, either, if they're really hungry and don't have any other choice. it's not hard to find news reports about dogs eating babies, but you're almost always going to be dealing with hunger and abuse. so, is it safe? as safe as it is with any predator.

personally, i'd be a bit more cautious than what you're seeing in this video.

Blake
You understand that humans and dogs don't have a predator/prey relationship right? It's not ingrained in the mind of a dog to eat a child because their ancestry, evolutionary history, instincts don't provide them with that sort of impulse. If the parents have ANY dominance over the dog the dog will see itself as second in command, and the baby as kin that needs to be protected. Humans have socialized dogs for centuries that notion of a domesticated one even trying to naw on a baby is laughable. PLEASE do some research before you try to ruin everyone's fun.

The mind of a full grown dog is equivalent to that of a 2 year old. You're over thinking this.

deathtokoalas 
canids are what you call "opportunistic feeders". they will eat whatever they can, including members of their own species. i would suggest you do some research, yourself.

and, while dogs demonstrate large amounts of variability based on both individual and breed, the estimated mental age of the smarter breeds (like labs) is more like 3-5.

SpicyHam 
ahh the facts, ahhhh

Blake Prescott 
I honestly don't think you've ever seen a dog in your entire life. A canid is the family a dog belongs to. A canine is the dog itself.

deathtokoalas 
wolves and dogs are actually technically in the same species, and the ability for wolves and coyotes (and coyotes and dogs) to interbreed is relatively large, depending on the range of the species. hence the new species of "coywolves" that have appeared in algonquin park as a hybridization of wolves and coyotes, which perhaps should have never been considered as different species in the first place.

there are a few obscure canids scattered around the world that have diverged a bit further. but, broadly speaking, canids are really largely all the same thing, and the visible differences that we see between them are merely skin-deep phenotypes and local variation.

careful statements...

i don't need to be careful: it's a proxy war between turkey and saudi arabia, both of which are interested in reconstructing their respective empires in the region (the turks due to increasing economic isolation, the saudis due to a kind of ethnic and religious nationalism). it's a conflict that's playing out all over the region: egypt, libya, syria, iraq. america wants to maintain a precarious balance where nobody gets the upper hand in this multi-sided conflict. if isis takes control of the region, it puts the saudis on the path to becoming too much of a local hegemon, so steps are being taken to cut them down a notch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhAS8wLbLLg

yeah, that's assault. i think she should sue for emotional damages on the order of her retirement package.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_kzy4VdCvA

there's a valid point here, but i really wish they'd have approached it with rational sociological arguments rather than hippie jesus freak bullshit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMNoeDovFg

the rational sociological arguments might actually convince somebody.

hippie jesus freak bullshit is a feel good viral song sung to the choir.

well, we've got to come to a choice with this - either we accept this is ok (and perhaps the boundaries could be blurred a little...), or we need to stop putting introverted women that came into themselves in their 20s in these kinds of situations.

24/15 is pushing it. you'll see 24/17 at any random trip to the mall. it's really not a strange thing. it's never been a strange thing.

one thing you could do is increase the educational requirements to get a teaching job. maybe teachers should have masters degrees.

but i don't see how you can expect anything different when you put 23 or 24 year old teachers in a senior high school classroom. that's like putting dogs in a room and locking the door.

the entire discourse is delusional.

the question is: what do the israelis plan on doing with the palestinians once they've finally taken all of their land? there's not going to be two states - there's going to be one state and one displaced people. so, what's the plan, guys? i fear the answer to this question is too ghastly to truly contemplate...

72Yonatan
Deport them back to their countries of origin in the Middle East is probably the best answer to that question. I know that this just fills you with such dread, of all those fake non-people who are really just Arabs, being sent back to Egypt, to Syria, to Jordan, to Iraq, and to Lebanon. What a horror that must be to you, when they have to leave their good jobs and beautiful mansions here in Israel - the thought of that must make you cringe. Meanwhile they are laughing at people like you behind your back, while taking in the foreign donations; laughing all the way to the bank. Most Arab taxis here are Mercedes.

deathtokoalas 
well, if you ignore the obvious truths that palestine is where these people have recent roots and you'd need to go back thousands of years before records existed to figure out where some of them came from (while we're at it, maybe we should deport the jews to iran and give the region to the lebanese, who are the actual indigenous people of the region), that most of them are actually descended from converted jews and that it's very difficult to genetically distinguish between a jew and an arab in the first place....

...the reality is that the countries around them don't want them. israel has tried that repeatedly. it's not an answer. so, you need to think up something else.

skiscore
how about sending jews back to their countries. poland, russia, czech rep. afterall palestinians were there first.

deathtokoalas
palestinians and jews are the same thing, they just have (very) slightly different religious views and speak (very) slightly different languages.

the question "who was there first?" is not formed properly. the bulk of the palestinian population is composed of hebrews that converted to islam. if you wish to argue that the jews were there first (and in some sense, this is true), then the logical conclusion is that the space belongs to the palestinians - because they are the true descendants of the jews that were there first. these other diasphora jews that left and came back don't have any argument in their favour that isn't in their religious texts, which are immediately invalidated by their source.

so we don't have an "arab or jew?" question, here. we have a "converted jew or diaspora jew?" question. this is what we've learned from studying the population - that the palestinians are, in fact, hebrews. and the takeaway from it is that it exposes the real level of racist and nationalist absurdity underlying the policies of the state of israel - they're attacking their own people in the name of their own supremacism.

that's not my point. the israelis need to send more clear messaging on what they plan to do with the palestinians, because the clear deduction right now is that they basically plan on "eliminating" them and are just waiting for the right moment to do it.

skiscore
its way past clear messaging. when they message its lies anyways. what they need is messaging via actions. this will never happen. the "charter" or "purpose" of jews will not allow for it nor tolerate it.  either the usa does it, or other arabs will. the mistake was made when usa and britain gave someone elses land to people hurt by a german!! thats the root cause. 

(deleted post)

deathtokoalas
the idea that large amounts of palestinians came from egypt or iraq doesn't even make historical sense, as these were areas that were colonized by arabs at the same time as israel was.

the genetics are clear on the point - the palestinians are not arabs, not any more than the iranians or the lebanese are. they are hebrews that were converted to islam in the middle ages.

they're jews.

(deleted post)

deathtokoalas
well, yeah. we live in 2014, which allows us to use fancy science to tell us where people came from.

and that fancy science tells us that the palestinians are predominantly hebrew in ethnic background.

there's been some arab admixture, but it's no larger than arab admixture in iran or afghanistan.

they're jews.

i scrolled through dozens of threads here and it didn't cross anybody's mind to start a third party.

people talk about things being better in canada. some things are, for sure. it's a very simple reason - we have three major parties. now, the third party has never been elected, but the mere act of having three parties puts pressure on our "democrats". they're constantly forced to listen to a voice that is further to their left and adopt those policies. in fact, our "socialist" party (which isn't really a socialist party) is actually the opposition right now and our "democrats" are in third place. the reason that happened is that they thought they could get away with cutting services.

there have been periods in the past where america had a strong left movement. the reforms that roosevelt put through would not have been possible without a strong union movement, and the gains made in the 60s would not have been possible were it not for the groundwork that that union movement laid. there were big errors made in merging the left with the democrats. that has to be undone.

the situation is different: they shipped all the jobs off. so, there aren't any unions anymore.

but the only way out of this is to build a people's party that puts pressure on obama from the left. right now, the democrats take you for granted. you need to prove they can't do that if they want to win - make them lose and then make them listen. you have to tie electoral success to your demands being met.

deathtokoalas
the bible is pretty gruesome, but it's an iron age text - no less gruesome than the illiad, and really just as well written. it's really an elaborate justification for the jewish state, nothing more or less. "why do we have kings? why don't we kill them?". here, read this, kid...

....and the part about cutting the concubine up into 12 pieces (each representing a tribe of israel) is meant to describe the period of violence and anarchy that occurred before there was a centralized state, tying into the text's central purpose as a justification for that state. it's a hobbesian fairy tale. in fact, the village responsible for the crime was then burnt down by the israelites - which is a problematic reaction and everything but indicates it was taken seriously. in fact, the burning of the village is also presented critically.

so, it's one thing to point out there's a lot of gore in there. it's another to understand why it's in there.

ghenulo
It's impossible to understand why people live their life by this barbaric ancient fairy tale.

deathtokoalas
well, it's a little confusing why people still hold to it, sure. but it's really not hard to understand why the stories were written as they were written. there are entire departments at universities for this, and they present compelling arguments.

i'll admit the idea of the jewish scriptures as a justification for the jewish state is partially an original idea - the idea is danced around frequently, but i'm being far more explicit than anything i've read. it's also blatantly obvious if you sit down and actually read the damned thing.

ghenulo
If people took it as ancient literature, these satires wouldn't be necessary.  But alas, we live in a crazy world in which horrible things are done in the name of these writings.  Perhaps you heard about the man in Iran who got beheaded for doubting the story of Jonah.  You don't see satires of the Iliad because everyone knows that it's historical fiction.

deathtokoalas
well, not everybody interprets it as fiction, but the people that don't tend not to seek power.

what i'm getting across is that disarming it means rationalizing it.

Damian Freeman (TheExceeder)
I really do think things like the Bible should probably be put in the Adults-only section. Knowing half the content of it makes me feel disturbed when I see those fluffy "Children's Bibles".

Also, am I the only one who finds it rather off that they never sell the individual books separately? They always force you to buy the damned compilation. I'm pretty sure if the books were all separated and presented individually we'd be able to find, on average, which ones that Christians actually endorse.

that's some of that wonderful private sector self-regulation at work, right there. it may be two billion dollars up in smoke - but don't worry, it's a better managed system. through cutting various corners, it will save the taxpayers money in the long run.

Sviaveldi
In my opinion the worst part about this thing is the one idiot who thinks he has the right to punch another person just because he doesn't like what he has to say. That's 'afk-SJW's' right there. Scum of the earth.

deathtokoalas
fuck that. what we saw there was a proactive response to keep racism out of the community. it was great to see somebody take the situation that seriously. warmed my heart. you know what they say about nazis - only good one's a dead one. you gotta fight the fasc wherever it appears...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9rFprD_Qf4

Sviaveldi
I hope you're spared a situation where people would throw punches at you for your beliefs.

Frankly that you defend violence and even death of other people, however you might personally justify it is disgraceful to yourself.

deathtokoalas
as has been pointed out repeatedly, it's not a speech issue, and the fact that you're not acknowledging that indicates that you're not grasping the situation properly. you can repeat the same false statements as many times as you like, but it doesn't provide them with a greater level of truth.

beyond that, the kind of bullshit liberal rhetoric you're espousing has only ever led to the further production of greater and greater violence. you can't just sit around and appease community fascists, you have to stand up and get in their way. if you don't knock them out, it just emboldens them. when you're dealing with violence, you have to respond with violence.

nor am i interested in getting fucking cops involved. as was demonstrated here, the community can take care of itself - it doesn't need the government to send armed thugs in to sort it out.

this was dealt with properly in the way that it must be dealt with in a truly free society and the people that took these steps should be applauded for their reaction.

Sviaveldi
I'll conclude my interaction with you by stating I think you're insane, and I hope you get better soon.

deathtokoalas
right. well, i hope the light in your ivory tower is not as dim as your arguments have been. i take it you're reading up on neville chamberlain. maybe it's better that you stay sheltered, for your own benefit.

if you're unable to argue with me, so be it.

Orangeman5100
Ummm? Would somebody please enlighten me on the reforms these people demanded that didn't happen?

Future U-kraine
that didn't happen? and what happen they should go home?

Orangeman5100
What?

Thomas
The country at the start had a highly dysfunctional govt so a revolt happened and right sector came to power, Russia invades Crimea so then more territories divide to pro-Russian separatists like Donetsk. Interim Government of Ukraine is referred to be fascist, in the meantime allows justification of separatist territories.

Angela3083
Wrong the USA decided who went into power in Ukraine regardless. Russia never invaded Crimea the Crimean's choose to be part of Russia without 1 person being killed. It all about gas pipes & Nato wanting a base in Ukraine. The Eastern Ukraine know the score and are defending their corner.

Blake Smith
that's wrong the Russians said they were the ones that went into crimea after the fact, and a Ukrainian solider was killed during a confrontation with the russians

jakatom
Does it matter what they want?...if it did, they wouldn't protest for a whole year. It matters what the USA and their EU lackeys want.

Blake
im pretty sure this video is about the protestors

nightlightabcd
Apparently, you want what the pro-Russian "lackeys" want!

James Murrey
The current "government" was about to pass laws banning the use of Russian language. Since 90% of Eastern Ukraine speak Russian (you know.... the native language of the land), they are now trying to split from Ukraine to not be killed by the neo-nazi(s) in power. Do you own research, even this vice dispatch hasn't been 100% truthful. Avoid Reddit, it's purely 'murrican shills spreading false propaganda (like Russian invaded Krim [Russia never sent a single military unit there; instead they hired a PMC to go in and secure the region]).

Culturebreach
Explain to people how neo-nazis are the majority in the Ukrainian protests? There is a presence of neo-nazis in Russia whilst the 3rd largest party in Russia is considered a fascist party.

BlackCousins4life
These aren't the same people who demanded reform. The people who protested against Yanukovych wanted the country to move away from Russia and closer to the European Union, for economic reasons, lessening of corruption and whatnot. When Yanukovych fled the country, they basically got their wish. The newly elected president is committed to Ukraine becoming part of the EU. These protesters have now either gone home or are fighting against separatists and Russian green men is eastern Ukraine. The people now on Maidan are not the same people, so it's hard to see them having any demands. I think they're just homeless and have settled nicely there, so they don't want to leave.

ConcordDown
you got it all figured out, you should join FOX news and make a story :) lot's of people would buy it!

Mat
has the free trade agreement gone into place yet? outside of that, they got the EU association agreement, new president, and new parliament is set. the major euromaidan demands have been met.

there's still the implementation of those reforms, though.

The88Cheat
Change takes time and all these protesters are doing is taking up valuable resources that could be used to better the country. I doubt the new government wants to waste time fighting its own people (especially when they look completely idiotic and uneducated).

Haloreach2323
No one in America said Russia invaded Ukraine. They would be stupid to say so because we all know Ukraine would be at war with Russia. Russia didn't invade, they did something worse, took the land "for the people" like bitches.

Mat 
they didn't vote, there was no actual vote you maroon. Who cares if 60% are Russian by ethnicity? That's some Anschluss thinking right there.

Haloreach2323
Doesn't matter. They still did it without the consent of Ukraine. Why not buy Crimea? Who knows? Putler probably forced the people to vote his way.

Jordan
Putin congratulated the Russian soldiers on a job well done in Crimea after it was annexed.

Was ABOUT to pass a law BANNING Russian? Are you high? First of all they tried to repeal a law that allowed Russian to be an official language. Not having Russian as official language is NOT the same as being forbidden to use Russian, you dipshit. Secondly, There are laws proposed in Russia that would ban women wearing high heels. Does it mean that anything that gets thrown up into the air becomes law? NO so you don't act on it UNLESS it becomes law. And enough with the nazi bullshit. The svoboda and right sector (parties who I assume you call nazi) ran against Poroshenko, and never got more than 1% of the Ukrainian vote. I'm willing to bet there are more xenophobic racist neo nazi skinheads in Russia than all of Europe combined. Fucking idiot.

Mat
Statistically, there are far more skinheads / neo-nazis in Russia per capita than in Ukraine by a wide margin

Look at Russia's parliament, Zhirinovsky is a racist bigot and he has the 4th largest party. The third largest, A Just Russia, supports the Russian Orthodox Army terrorist group. The second? The damn Communists!

Jordan
I find it infuriating that they have the nerve to open their mouth and call Ukrainians "neo-nazis" when they have nationalist marches in Moscow numbering THOUSANDS, with people making nazi salutes, chanting "AGAINST BLACKS" along with occasional skinhead gangs running around with bats, murdering people they don't like. Absolutely grotesque.

Jarcnus
US and EU involvement in the destabilization of the country, promotion of violence, arms and riots along with putting in puppet leadership is pretty much a fact. Whatever the FUCK Russia is doing, good or bad is reactionary. The US and west European establishment and their bankster friends wants global trade dominance. FOLLOW THE FUCK GOD DAMNED MONEY FOR ONCE. IMF nonsense abroad, austerity for the poor, international trade deal attempts and bs TPP, TTIP, TAFTA along with other nonsense. It's all to fuck over the masses in a globally run pyramid scheme. Most the wealth in the world created is fake, just so the rich can spend lavishly while the poor suffer and foot the bill.

U.S. Senators Make A Spectacle Of Themselves In Ukraine

Mat
You're so misinformed it's kind of sad.

Jarcnus
Your one sentence telling me "you're wrong" really defeated my argument, oh my.

What I learnt today
When the new president turned out to be "A strong leader for harsh times" or however the press (and people on the street) put it, i.e. the classic "fascist lie" we see in every hollywood movie.... The writing on the wall became pretty stark.

Jordan
I really wish a Russian would support his grotesque label of "fascist" even once with an actual argument. How is anyone in power in Ukraine a "fascist"? Im really curious.

Mat
It's interesting seeing as everyone calls Obama a Communist

deathtokoalas
see, it's hilarious to read these comments going back and forth. you've got multiple false narratives competing with each other, all of them promoting interests by various powerful parties. none of them have anything to do with the protests.

i had my first "aha" moment back in the late 90s, when i was still a teenager. the tv told me people were protesting against apec because of concerns over human rights abuses in china. but, that wasn't the protester's narrative - it was the narrative the state wanted, and so they replaced it. the protesters were actually concerned with the trade agreement, itself. i was a skeptical kid, i understood things were generally spun, but i never thought i'd be blatantly lied to.

the thing about the eu is not the protester's narrative, it's the state department's narrative. the reason it's the state department's narrative is that it reflects the state department's interest. so, what the tv does is show you the images of the people protesting and then tell you they're protesting for what the state department wants.

the maidan protests were/are about corruption. it was something roughly similar to the occupy movement in north america, except it got badly co-opted by a ukrainian equivalent of the tea party. the shuffle of power that happened didn't address a single one of their concerns. i guarantee you the new guy already has a slush fund and is just carrying on where the last guy left off, and the guy before him left off, and the guy before him left off....

What I learnt today
All true, except the girl before him was imprisoned for not being corruptible enough.

deathtokoalas
she was prime minister, not president, and it's not that she wasn't corruptible enough - more that she was so corrupt nobody in the sitting government could trust her.

What I learnt today
Trusting corrupt people is easy. They are predictable, just buy her. Now trusting an honest person, that is a mistake.

deathtokoalas
not really. when they're really corrupt, they're always for sale. so, you can never trust your purchase. yulia bounced around to the highest bidder, and in the end she crossed one person too many. that's why she ended up in jail.

Technology Fool
Those guys look hammered! Leave us alone more vodka

Willy
Ukraine will never be part of EU .I live in EU and nobody wants them to be part of EU.We got enough of our own problems without confronting Russian interests.Germany is the main power of EU and they have good economical relationships with Russia and depends on Russian gas. So despite the political talk Germans and rest of the EU know they cant mess with Russia.

Mat
Can't mess with Russia? Russia is nothing. It doesn't even have an economy.

What I learnt today
Russia has never needed an economy, they have resources. Not caring about all this stuff got them through WWII and will get them through again. They just don't care about anything outside Russia.

Mat
Everybody needs an economy. Oil prices drop and they're screwed. Iran or the US start exporting gas and they're sunk.

That's why you can't just be some resource sultanate.

What I learnt today
That's fine. However not how Russia thinks about it. They have a bumper crop and soon will have the pipeline to EU done. If they can beat US in Syria then the oil will flow. Until then, they laugh.

Mat
what pipeline to the EU? South Stream? That's cancelled.

What I learnt today
The overarching strategic to beat US to EU markets via Syria (or whereever US doesn't block them)  is cancelled? heh righto... Guess that's why there is CIA in Syria and Russians in Ukraine. Everything you are seeing here is directly related to those markets, US fear of price differential between Syria/EU and Kuwait/US, and Russian desire to capture the EU market. This hasn't gone away, you are watching it play out.

deathtokoalas
well, it's more directly about controlling shipping lanes through strategic military placement, but controlling shipping lanes has a lot to do with opening up (or shutting down) markets.

you need to take a bit of a step back from the idea of the americans controlling markets, though, as it's a bit of an outdated thing. the united states doesn't create anything any more, except weapons. they don't have a product to sell. i see a lot of this - people trying to understand current events through the lenses of the nineteenth century...

there's some remnants of this, and russia is certainly still under state capitalism, but to take the position that america is defending markets leads to the question of what they're selling, and the answer is nothing at all.

but, the strategic military posturing has more than a little to do with it, nonetheless. they're certainly trying to control the trade routes, as a hegemon would have to do. that definitely means frustrating russian trade...

...but it's not really about competition, it's about dominance. the nineteenth century mercentalist states may have seemed like empires, but they weren't really - they were trading conglomerates that used any means necessary to get ahead.

the united states is legitimately an empire. it has tributary states, which it "protects". and those states are closer to the traditional 19th century state capitalist idea.

which goes back to the weapons, which are the product.

there's this sort of old argument floating around between trying to understand things in terms of empires dominating the world or in terms of commercial interest competing with each other. the americans have found a sort of synthesis in this, as they dominate the world by selling weapons systems.

there has to be conflict for that to happen. the commercial transactions in weapons systems consequently drive the lust for imperial domination. it's conflict for the sake of conflict, because that's the only way that america gets paid.

put a little more succinctly...

the british "empire" created conflict to open up markets.

the american empire creates markets by ensuring endless conflict. 

What I learnt today
Just to add something "step back from the idea of the americans controlling markets".... It's not about selling stuff to markets. It's about making sure the EU can't/doesn't get oil 3¢ cheaper than the US.

deathtokoalas
there's certainly been some tension over the last few decades over some financial issues. you know who i think was behind 9/11? germany. yeah, the old german boogeyman, trying to start wwIII right? well, i think it was about the euro, primarily. it was a ploy to sink the dollar. every few months, you hear some news report talking about the "strained relationship", and it's quickly patched up in the media to counteract the optics. both sides are deeply interested in making things seem rosy, and the germans certainly remain in a vastly inferior position both economically and militarily - that is, they remain a client state. but i think the truth is that the germans and americans continue to see each other as their primary competitors in the world and relations are really downright hostile under the surface. if i was an american military strategist, i would not look at germany (or the eu in general, outside of the uk) as a reliable ally. when you've bullied somebody into doing what you want for 70 years, don't be surprised when they take the first opportunity they can to knock you out.

controlling the oil supply is a part of being a hegemonic power, but i can't see what you're suggesting as being an important aspect of american policy. what the americans seek is less to explicitly dominate everything around them and more to control the rules. so, they let british contractors into iraq, and refused french contractors - because they rejected the war. that's the reason france has fallen in line, since. the price of commodities is variable, and speculators make a lot of money from that. so, do the americans care about that kind of price fluctuation? no. why would they, so long as they get to write the rules of who sells what to who?

what does concern them is a russia that wants to ignore those rules, demand the rules be written collaboratively or even write their own rules. russia is a bigger country than iraq, but putin is being punished for the same reason that saddam was - he's not doing what he's told.

when genghis khan would approach a new city, he would send messengers to the city's government, offering them a choice. they could willingly submit, and be spared. or they could resist and be annihilated. a lot of cities were annihilated. a lot of cities were spared...

Willy
hmmm i wouldn't go that far to say Germany was behind it. I think  that would be pretty hardcore conspiracy but  hey, what do i know .At least you can think out of the box which is only good i suppose .But there sure are various reports that Germany secretly considering and negotiating with BRICS to join .Who knows maybe we will see comeback of German  mark one day lol. USA sterility to provide Germany with their gold (which they don't have since USA do not own any gold resources) and empty promises to deliver their gold in near future only assure Germany to look for alternatives to ensure their economical stability.

deathtokoalas
brics is not an alliance, it's just something cnn made up. and gold is as worthless as paper. what's valuable is guns.

Orangeman5100
And oil.

deathtokoalas
commodities, in general, sure. but it's going to fluctuate with demand. if the trends towards computerization and renewable energy both continue, it won't be long before copper (also a finite resource) is more valuable than diamonds.

this is why it's so important to understand the dominance in terms of hegemony, power and control rather than any specific, narrow aim - although, that being said, the primary purpose of anglo-american foreign policy has not wavered from containing and controlling the russians at any point since 1989, or 1789, for that matter.

Orangeman5100
Sadly yes, but it'd be a lot harder for their neighbors if we didn't control them... For example, Ukraine would probably be entirely part of Russia...

deathtokoalas
well, you've got to keep in mind that a lot of the people in ukraine want to be a part of russia...

poland is a better test case, but is poland really better off in the eu? i'm not sure there's much of an argument for it, other than enforced western bias. i'm not saying they'd be better off in russia, i'm just not sure it really makes much of a difference to the average pole, in terms of living conditions.

fucking spain would be a part of russia right now, if it weren't for american intervention in wwII. but would they be worse off?

What I learnt today
OT but everytime I hear that I think of "Fast Show - Johnny Depp": "I remember during the war you yanks were in like a shot!  I don't mean the actual fighting, you were a couple of years too late for that Sir." ;-)

deathtokoalas
yeah. the history books will eventually catch up, but they're kind of missing the point right now. there's all kinds of diplomatic cables from american ambassadors to the region in the 30s explaining that american policy was to covertly fund hitler with the hopes that he'd eliminate stalin. that is, it's the same old russian containment policy that traces back to the napoleonic period. when they did intervene, it wasn't to stop fascism or save the jews or help the british or anything of the sort, it was take over as much of europe as they could before the russians got there.

if the normandy invasion had not happened, stalin would have waltzed right through germany and france and parked itself outside franco's doorstep. how does the soviet socialist republic of france sound.....

Orangeman5100
Honestly, not very good...

the thing about the ukip and the national front is that the ukip is a lot more moderate than it's base is.

it's one thing to point out "the ukip is not the bnp" - and be absolutely correct. it's another thing to point out that there's a large overlap in the voting base. these kinds of arrangements never work out for "moderates", if that's what you want to call the libertarian wing of the ukip. the base always wins in the end. what you're stuck with, then, is this unstable coalition of nationalists and libertarians that's set to fracture the moment farage aligns himself against national front policies that are popular with his own base. it produces the inevitability of mutinies in caucus. farage can yell and scream all he wants, but his party is on a set trajectory and it's an alarming one.

the best case scenario is that the whole thing falls apart before the next election, but i think relying on that really underestimates the strength of the far right in britain. talk of tories picking up the positions is really long overdue. if winston churchill were alive today, he'd be more likely to be aligned with one of these fringe parties. there's a strong aspect of british culture intertwined within them.

so, yes, it's prudent to be careful with what labels you put on farage's head - but it's equally important to be aware of the views of the voters he's representing, which are considerably more extreme than his are.

this is the key point right now.

and, yeah, it's a threat for massive instability. but the realpolitik people don't seem to clue in: it has no end point but collapse.

http://ramenir.com/2014/09/27/the-middle-east-proxy-war-you-didnt-know-about/

In August, The United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt carried out a series of secret airstrikes within Libya with the purpose of slowing down the advance of Islamist militias in Tripoli, specifically...

this article seems to get a few points backwards, though, especially in syria. my understanding is isis is primarily saudi-backed and the fsa was a turkish front group. the part about egypt is correct, though.

photo from voice of america. yeah. well, it's getting the right idea across, anyways.

egypt is often touted as "the most important arab country". what that means is it has the most people, and the largest standing army. but the historical empires in the region this side of the roman empire have been centered in mecca and istanbul. turkey has been trying for a while to reassert a level of hegemony over the last few years, partly because it's been rejected from europe. i've been over this before...

the world is uniting in trade blocs. russia is going through the same spasms, and god forbid a turko-russian union (which would be a historic shift of a nature unseen since the entente cordiale). russia and turkey have been fighting for centuries. turkey is in nato _because_ of the threat of russia. that would dismantle the world as we know it.

but, what does turkey do? it can't get into europe. the arabs don't like them any more than the european do, as there's still that level of animosity. well, 1000 years of colonialism doesn't disappear in a century. there's cultural logic in a central asia union of turkey, iran and the former ssrs, but this is infeasible in a geo-strategic standpoint, as iran remains isolated and those ssrs aren't getting out of a sino-russian entente any time soon.

turkey faces extreme isolation. this is providing it with a set of incentives to try and resurrect the ottoman empire.

so, when you look at turkish influence in syria and egypt and libya and palestine, there's a historical context that unites with a current economic one.

the saudis don't like that, for obvious reasons. they were promised control over the region during world war one, and probably would have got it if it wasn't for zionism.

so, there's a serious conflict building here between a turkey that is desperate for economic integration and an arab league that wants them the fuck out of their sphere.

the back and forth in egypt was a back and forth between turkish and saudi front groups - and the saudis won. the infighting in syria between rebel groups was a proxy war between turkey and the saudis - and the saudis won.

so, now the yankees need to step in and fix it before it explodes...

yes, the qataris are a wild card, but that's a struggle for hegemony in the arab league. the qatari-turkey alliance is one of convenience. should the qataris overtake the saudis as the controlling interest in the gulf, one would expect them to take on the same interests as the saudis.

it's fundamentally a turkish-arab conflict.

and, as i've stated, that possible russo-turko-iranian alliance is a real game changer.

"we" might "lose" turkey. it's been a real possibility now for several years.

high school records are apparently shredded, but junior high school records apparently aren't? i think one of them is wrong. they always told me the file was permanent. hrmmn. i've got stuff being forwarded, will see how that plays out before i start calling to find out...

this is going to go in your PERMANENT RECORD.

well, listen, i'm not really one for the surveillance state and shit, but when you're dealing with information that suggests a pathological condition, i think it really should be permanent. if it's shredded, that doesn't help me - and if it was worse than it is (mild vandal-type pranks, mostly), it wouldn't be in the interests of society, either.

i mean, i was always very careful and very cognizant of the well being of people around me. there were circumstances where i stood in between things happening in order to prevent harm, but nothing where i ever put anybody's safety at risk. the overriding driving force was mostly that i found the vandalism comical. what the behaviour demonstrates is more a conscious desire to flaunt rules - and some political activism, actually.

i enjoyed defacing student council propaganda, for example.

unfortunately, the really nasty pranks were mostly never uncovered. the master prank was probably the time i blew up the school mascot (with military grade dynamite) and placed it back where it was, and nobody ever caught me for that. they installed cameras in the school afterwards, but they never busted me for the best of them.

i think probably the worst situation i got caught for was the time i took the screws out of the exercise equipment in the gym, so that when buddy six-pack football dude got on the exercise bike it fell apart underneath him. that's the kind of thing that characterizes the file, if i can find it. was it funny? that's up to interpretation. the dude that sat on the bike thought it was funny. it's certainly anti-social.

the reality is that it got to the point that the school stopped providing evidence. it didn't feel the need to require it. when a prank happened, it was understood i was responsible. nobody else would have done these things. i suppose i could have been badly framed, but never was.

so, it's less that i "got caught" and more that i was obviously responsible...

....kind of a "j strikes again" type of thing...

it's a huge file, if it's out there, probably with all kinds of things i've completely forgotten about.

and, in my defence, i often caught the principal suppressing laughter. most of it legitimately WAS comical.

it's actually the same school dan aykroyd went to, and that was brought up to me more than once.

apologies to huey lewis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1-NvLJFDsw

rap news 29

eek.

i'm pretty sure i don't have ebola.

just the pizza.

phew. for a minute, there....

access to student records

jessica
hi.

i attended frank ryan from 1993-1995 under the name jason parent. i go by the name jessica, now - but anybody there that would remember me would remember me as jason.

i had some disciplinary problems when i was a student at frank ryan, which included being removed from my eighth grade class and placed in a different classroom. you could broadly classify me as a "prankster", although some of the behaviour was a little more intense than that. i was also a fairly quiet and sometimes bullied individual and a relatively good student, and these two things together got me through the process with less consequences than i may have otherwise had to deal with. it was generally understood that i was a "bright" kid and i'd "grow out of it".

however, as i've aged, it's become clear that the cause of my anti-social outbursts (which continued even after high school) is an undiagnosed personality disorder. in hindsight, i feel that this disorder should have been diagnosed while or even before i was a student at frank ryan. as it is, i'm now nearly 34 years old, remain undiagnosed and continue to demonstrate substantial symptoms. i'm currently living on odsp and trying to compile evidence of this undiagnosed personality disorder for the purposes of having that renewed.

now, the same mild mannered nature that got me off the hook in grade school is acting against me in terms of convincing physicians that there's actually a problem. there's a very big disconnect between how i come across in an interview setting (which is very respectful and "normal") and the actual record of my past behaviour (which has at times been just off the wall). i don't have a criminal record. so, the best evidence i can provide would be my behavioural records through grade school, high school and approximately ten years of university.

i would greatly appreciate it if you could send me these documents. i currently live in windsor, ontario.

now, i understand that this is a random email address that even displays an entirely different name - you have no way to know that i am who i say i am. i simply don't know what the proper process is in proving who i am. so, if you could guide me through that, that would be great. the closest i can get to coming down there in person is sending my mom...

the ottawa catholic school board
Hello Jessica,

I work in the records and archives at the Ottawa Catholic School Board.  I was sent your request by the Vice Principal at Frank Ryan

A few questions to complete your request;

Date of Birth
What schools did you attend after Frank Ryan (in Ontario or outside of Ontario)
What grade and year was your last year at school?
Did you receive your diploma?

Please let us know and we would be happy to help you with your request

Thanks

jessica
legal name: jason parent
dob: jan 13, 1981

i'd actually be looking for records for the following schools, all in ottawa:

- st bernard's (k4 - grade two)
- uplands catholic (grade three - grade six)
- frank ryan (grades seven-eight)
- st pius x (grades 9 - oac)

i finished my oac year in the spring of 2000.

the diploma question is a little shady. i completed all of the requirements except for the oac religion component, which was a part of the catholic school requirements. i took eight oacs but skipped the community service becaue i simply didn't have time for it between studying for "real courses" and working. i'm really starkly opposed to the idea of labour without compensation and refused to do the community service in an act of protest. this is a big discussion about class that i'll spare you. i'm consequently not entirely certain if a diploma actually exists. i don't think i've ever seen one. i didn't attend the graduation ceremonies (i didn't attend my university graduation ceremony, either). i did attend university and was admitted on the basis of my oac marks.

the ottawa catholic school board
Hello,

Thank you for the information.  I will be able to provide you with copies of all records we have in our archives.  We will need to order them from our off-site storage which may take a few days.  We will contact you when they are ready

jessica
i greatly appreciate that. thank you.

access to student records

jessica
hi.

i attended st. pius X from 1995-2000 (when there were five years in high school) under the name jason parent. i go by the name jessica, now - but anybody there that would remember me would remember me as jason.

i had some disciplinary problems when i was a student at st. pius - multiple suspensions, and a few points of near expulsion. you could broadly classify me as a "prankster", although some of the behaviour was a little more intense than that. i was also a fairly quiet and sometimes bullied individual and a relatively good student, and these two things together got me through the process with less consequences than i may have otherwise had to deal with. it was generally understood that i was a "bright" kid and i'd "grow out of it".

however, as i've aged, it's become clear that the cause of my anti-social outbursts (which continued after high school) is an undiagnosed personality disorder. in hindsight, i feel that this disorder should have been diagnosed before i even got to st. pius. as it is, i'm now nearly 34 years old, remain undiagnosed and continue to demonstrate substantial symptoms. i'm currently living on odsp and trying to compile evidence of this undiagnosed personality disorder for the purposes of having that renewed.

now, the same mild mannered behaviour that got me off the hook in high school is acting against me in terms of convincing physicians that there's actually a problem. there's a very big disconnect between how i come across in an interview setting (which is very respectful and "normal") and the actual record of my past behaviour (which has at times been just off the wall). i don't have a criminal record. so, the best evidence i can provide would be my behavioural records through grade school, high school and approximately ten years of university (if anybody is curious, i finished degrees in mathematics and computer science, as well as minors in law and physics - and was written up repeatedly for angry, anti-social outbursts directed at profs and students).

i would greatly appreciate it if you could send me these documents. i currently live in windsor, ontario.

now, i understand that this is a random email address that even displays an entirely different name - you have no way to know that i am who i say i am. i simply don't know what the proper process is in proving who i am. so, if you could guide me through that, that would be great. the closest i can get to coming down there in person is sending my mom... 

mr. warren
Good Morning Jessica,

I received your email and I remember you as a good student.

I now work in the Student Services Department.

After students leave high school, all documentation is destroyed after five years, except for transcripts. So all we have on file now is your transcript showing good marks and credits earned. There is nothing here regarding any issues or behaviour.

jessica
hi mr warren.

yeah, i was in your enriched math class and also your chemistry class. i think you also knew my stepmother.

frank ryan has told me that the school board keeps archived information. do you think i'd be able to find information there? if you so, do you have a contact address?

there were in fact multiple suspensions and a threat of possible expulsion that never materialized. if there's a file somewhere, it's really quite thick.

mr. warren
Hello Jessica,

Sorry, other than the OSR that was here, I am not aware of any archived files. Once students leave high school, all of the suspensions and related files are shredded after 5 years, and only the transcript is retained. You could certainly call the board office and ask if you wish.

hi....

jessica
it's jason parent.

it's been a few years, but i'm sure you remember me...

i don't think i have access to a carleton account anymore, but i can double check if you can't accept correspondence from this email. i think if you check, though, you'll see i corresponded from this address repeatedly.

i've been on odsp for two years, now. it's brought me to windsor, ontario where the cost of living is much lower. i was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder at the mission in ottawa, which was an exaggeration of symptoms i was experiencing out of concern for my homelessness at the time. i'm now up for renewal, and i'm not likely to get renewed on that basis.

however, after reflecting on my life history, i feel there's an undiagnosed personality disorder going back many years that i'd benefit from having diagnosed properly. now, you might recall that you were always impressed by how i came off in an interview context - that is that there was a large disconnect between how i presented myself to you face-to-face and the outbursts that caused you to summon me to you. that same disconnect is acting to my disadvantage. that is, i come off very normal and stable. the truth is i AM very stable in the situation that i'm in and don't really want things to change. i'm also fully cognizant that it's difficult to extrapolate my symptoms from interviewing me. i'm going to have to present an argument that's based on a long history of antisocial behaviour going back to my early childhood - and that is well documented through behavioural reports in grade school, high school and university.

so, i'm hoping you can send me the reports that you filled out about me so that i can take them to a psychiatric evaluation as evidence of this long, long undiagnosed underlying issue. even if it doesn't get me to odsp, i need it properly diagnosed and understood.

in hindsight, i actually feel i should have been diagnosed before the age of 15, at least. the argument was always that i was very "bright" and that a diagnosis would negatively impact my future. but as time has played out, it's become clear that the underlying concerns need to be dealt with and that the fact that they never were has really been far more negative than positive. i don't know what diagnosis is forthcoming - i think it's going to depend a lot on how the evidence is interpreted - but i couldn't imagine somebody sorting through the suspensions and near expulsions i experienced through a 20 year academic career without pulling something debilitating out of it.

so, i'd appreciate that tremendously. again, let me know if i need to send this from a different address. i don't know if i even still know the passwords, though...

director of student affairs, carleton university
Hi Jessica,

I remember you.   Good to hear from you.  Sounds like things are going ok.  I did my undergrad at Windsor.  Lots of memories.  I know in recent years the town hasn't been doing so hot.  Hopefully things are getting better, particularly in the downtown core.

It shouldn't be a problem for me to pull up some of my emails and then send them to you again, but I will need you to send me an email from your CU account.  I'll send the emails there and you'll have them for your records to support your appeal.  I'm suspect the process of getting back into your Carleton account is pretty straightforward.  Once you get access, let me know and I'll send you the information.

Let me know if that sounds like an acceptable course of action.

ok, i've freaked out enough today, and my creative aids are slow to arrive, so i guess it's time to get to work.

well, i've sent emails out to the four schools i've been to since grade three. i don't remember before grade three. i'm not quite sure why. anyways, we'll find out if anybody reads these things or if they're dead addresses....

give it a few days before i start calling.

i'm quite certain i'll get a response from ryan at carleton, and it may be all i need.

it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.
it's just the pizza, you don't have ebola.

except that i think i have a mild fever...

did they get a vaccine done, yet?

they're testing one...

http://windsorstar.com/health/windsor-paramedics-don-protective-gear-to-treat-patient-showing-ebola-symptoms
http://woodtv.com/2014/10/29/report-8-monitored-in-mi-for-ebola-virus/

the doctor i've been dealing with in the local clinic is actually from nigeria. i have no idea if she's been back and forth recently.

(i only know she's from nigeria because she speaks yoruba, and i happen to know (i'm a geek) that this is a local nigerian language group)

the only situations i can conceive of possibly being at risk are:

(1) when i took my temperature under my tongue at the hospital, but they swore it was safe.
(2) when i stole a toke on the 18th from some hippie strangers. gee, wouldn't that be awkward.

i wasn't in close enough contact with the doctor for it to even be a paranoia issue.

and i'm not sure if my "fever" is legit or the result of the temperature in here.

i have a tendency for mild paranoia. but, dammit, i could be rationalizing myself into something nasty, here.

pizza runs don't last more than 24 hours. i'll wait until tomorrow and make a decision. but i don't see any obvious path of exposure. meaning that if i'm infected, there's a pretty serious problem here in windsor.

i'm not coughing or anything. mild stomach irritation, but that's normal, given that i'm constantly drinking coffee.

let's see how my body reacts to some antacids...

see, this happens all the time, though - i get freaked out over something quasi-rational, then i carefully (even somewhat neurotically) work through it. meaning i'm able to rationalize through whatever pathology is freaking me out. but that level of control is a mask. here's the thing: i don't know what my success rate really is. let's say it's 99% - probably higher than it truly is. what that means is i'm a ticking time bomb, and you want to keep me out of stressful environments.

but, you can't diagnose it until it's too late.

i can't think of any reason why a sane person would walk into a doctor's office and try to convince them otherwise. if i really wanted to fraud the system, i'd break my back or literally shoot myself in the foot or something. accepting and pushing for a mental diagnosis is pretty strong evidence in itself that something's not right there. you know, and you try and be responsible and get help and they don't listen...

i'm needing to sit myself down and convince myself i don't have ebola. i think i'm succeeding. but it's symptomatic of a general difficulty in interpreting reality.

and if that leads to some crazy behaviour, nobody can say i didn't try and get help for it.

i don't need drugs that are going to turn me into a zombie. i just need to avoid stress.

and i want to be clear what my diagnosis is: the reagan revolution has pushed backwards conservative ideologies about social services into the system itself, and those backwards views are blocking me from gaining access to the help that i require.

i don't feel i'm dealing with a systems breakdown, a lack of funding or a broken medical infrastructure. i feel i'm dealing with doctors that are putting their political views ahead of their medical practice.

they're not doing what's best for the patient, they're reacting to a feeling of being overtaxed and seeking to behave in a way that they feel will reduce their tax burden - whether that harms the patient in front of them or not.

if you understand reality in terms of class conflict, it puts just about any doctor in a conflict of interest when it comes to approving just about any kind of disability.

if you take that to it's logical conclusion, it's an argument for a guaranteed income (because you can't cut doctor's salaries next door to a giant, unregulated market). that would probably be sufficient in my case, and sufficient in the case of many other people in this difficult to clearly diagnose grey area.

it's abundantly clear i can't work.

it's not so clear what the reason for it is.

hopefully somebody can see through this properly.

i mean, the average salary is over 300K, but they're paying 40-50% taxes on it. on top of that, they're paying property taxes - and, of course, almost all of them actually are. they have an interest in finding ways to reduce their tax burden, which will present itself in keeping costs down. so, they're not in any way an unbiased arbiter of who ought to be receiving social services. they're just not....

in order to jump through those hoops, mentally, you have to romanticize the hippocrates oath into a noble pledge and elevate them into noble warriors for justice. a moment's reflection with anybody that's dealt with a doctor knows that's fucking bunk.

you'll find a few that are something like the tv characters, putting their own health on the line for their patients.

but, my understanding is that the psychological profile of the average doctor is actually bordering on psychopathy - and has to be, because there's much less than a 100% success rate. the only way you can do a job where you fail 30-40% of the time is if you keep a certain emotional distance.

what it means is dr. house is probably the better representative, overall.

whatever diagnosis comes out of this - schizophrenia, high level autism, bpd, manic depression - is going to require a lot of discussion to uncover, and that needs a physician that's willing to invest the time in it - and quite frankly against their own financial interests.

at the most basic crude level, you'd have to think that if somebody does crazy things over and over again, or feels crazy urges over and over again, then they must be crazy. the fact that the person has been able to mostly keep out of trouble and/or gain access to a support system that's kept them out of trouble doesn't negate all the crazy things and crazy thoughts. it does, however, mean that if you remove that support system then the up-to-now not experienced consequences will produce themselves. i guess i'm just having a really hard time grasping the need to actually flip out before i'm taken seriously, partly, i guess, because it wasn't really necessary in the past.

i guess i had a very strong support system with my father that only failed around the time he wasn't able to make his own decisions due to diagnosis of cancer (and i've long suspected he was aware of the diagnosis considerably before i found out, that the events that occurred in late 2011 were a consequence of his already understood diagnosis and that the only reason i really found out at all was because of the situation. i even suspect that the reason he pushed so hard to have me move home was because he knew he was terminal, and the reason she refused so violently is also that she knew he was terminal. that fucked my situation up profoundly because it left me homeless, but there were complex reasons underlying it.). i went pretty cleanly from that support system to the state as a support system. this is really the first time i'm facing the possibility of lacking that system of support. the reality is that i haven't been able to survive without it, and i'm not going to be able to survive without it. i just simply didn't need a diagnosis or state aid because i had a family that was taking care of me, which i don't have any more.

in hindsight, i probably should have gone through all of this ten-fifteen years ago.

all of the symptoms were there. it just wasn't necessary to do.

i mean, what happened was:

(1) i can't pay my rent
(2) he convinces me to move home
(3) i give my two months
(4) i'm told i can't move home
(5) i've already given my two months, so, i'm now homeless
(6) i flip out on him
(7) i find out he has cancer
(8) the conflict just doesn't get talked through

but i think what actually happened was:

(1) he learns he has cancer
(2) i can't pay my rent
(3) he convinces me to come home - *because* he has cancer and he wants me there. he doesn't tell her...
(4) i give my two months
(5) she refuses to let me move home - *because* she knows he's terminal, and doesn't want me there after the fact, which is why he didn't tell her.
(6) i've already given my two months, so, now i'm homeless.
(7) i flip out on him.
(8) i find out he has cancer
(9) the conflict just doesn't get talked through

in all honesty? if he had told me he had cancer, i would have never given my two months....

i mean, the idea of me sharing a house with jackie after my father's death is unthinkable - for both of us.

the point is i'm not just unable to support myself all of a sudden. i was hopeless the whole time. i just had a support system.

i mean, i don't have down syndrome, but suppose i did. that person could survive just fine through their family. but if their family all of sudden ceases to be, they now require outside assistance. i'm just exaggerating the condition to make the point.

it's the same fundamental circumstance - the difference is i never got diagnosed with what i should have been diagnosed with years and years ago.

and now it seems like there was nothing wrong, when, in truth, there was something wrong the whole time.

i mean, it goes back to my earlier argument - who wants that kind of diagnosis if they don't need it? i'm pretty high functioning in the sense that i don't need help carrying out tasks, so it's easy to delude yourself into thinking you'll be ok if you can find the right path. an autism diagnosis is kind of a dead end in a lot of ways. it's not something you want to jump at. but if i can get my school records...

actually, i wonder if i *can* get my school records. that's a huge argument in my favour right now.

i really should have been diagnosed with something in grade school.

just as a corollary of my behaviour.

the argument was always that i had really high marks, and any kind of diagnosis would just hurt my future.

in fact, i think the lack of diagnosis has hurt me much more.

i went through multiple suspensions in high school, i was nearly expelled, and before that my eighth grade teacher actually removed me from her classroom (i had to switch classes halfway through the year). if i had to guess, i'd say i probably spent more time in the hallway in grade 8 than i did in the classroom.

i just spent the time in the hallway doing homework or reading; my grades were like 90-95%, so nobody wanted to "disrupt my future". it's that POTENTIAL thing again....

when i was in my early 20s, i started writing all over my walls.

graphs.

charts.

i was looking for the center of power.

i've been (i think unfairly) accused of stalking two people. trolling, definitely. not stalking.....never been charges laid, never been any justification to lay any.....but it's certainly been anti-social behaviour.

i've been fired for bad punctuality repeatedly.

around 2006, i decided that the problem of existence can be reduced to chasing immortality. the only justification to exist is to attempt to find immortality. if you fail, you've lost nothing - if you succeed, you've justified your existence. any other type of existence is a waste of time.

i still believe this, i just don't think it's feasible before quantum computing becomes a reality, and i don't think that's feasible in my lifetime. all this talk of singularities is based on this exponential growth curve that i don't think is sustainable. there's a point where moore's law is going to flatten out and we're going to find ourselves up against a brick wall. there's a solution in quantum computing, but i think it's a ways beyond us.

consider fusion. 50 years ago, it was the future. we're still waiting.

we're going to be waiting quite a while for those quantum machines to be able to do anything useful, as well.

i mean, to begin with, we've got to understand da fuck is even happening. we're fumbling around in the dark looking for a light-switch with this - over-reaching the theoretical possibilities and assuming things beyond what is actually realistic.

you will fit on a usb key one day. for now, getting you there is well beyond our computing capabilities, and it's going to be that way for a long time.

so, i've resigned myself to the meaninglessness of my existence.

as rational as this all is, it's pretty nuts.

i really think getting those school records is the right way to start. i can excise my narcissism through providing my life story. and, anybody convinced i'm sane by the end....isn't.

there you go jess, that's using that noggin...

it turns out the evaluation he wanted to send me to was to a couple of social workers with no medical credentials. the secretary and i agreed that this was essentially a waste of time, until i could state a goal to overcome - which in my case is not in a form that they can treat. if i tell them i have no motivation to live, they can try to help me work through the lack of motivation, but they can't diagnose me with anything or fill out my papers. their purpose is to help me overcome the existential dread, rather than put me on a path where i can live with it, which is not going to happen in my circumstance - because it's the consequence of a logical process.

in a statement, my position is too subtle for the workers to be able to treat. if they ask me "are you feeling suicidal?", the answer is yes. if they ask me "are you an imminent threat to harm yourself?", the answer is no - it depends on circumstances. they can't parse that because it's a logical statement, and they're trained to respond to irrational behaviour.

so, i need to speak with somebody with actual medical credentials first, to try and get a real diagnosis. if that doesn't work, i become an imminent threat to myself, and the doctor will have to determine if it's the result of a pathology that justifies disability or if i just need some "help" to "work through it".

i just hope the doctor they send me to can think in these shades of grey and put themselves into the space where they can deduce the proper conclusions from first principles. hand-waving this off to a social worker is giving me a death sentence.

stated another way, my "goal" is to have the disability papers processed - but they need a "goal" in a form that would negate the need for disability, which, in my case, does not exist.

the secretary agreed that this *sounded* pathological to her, but the social work process cannot deal with me if i have that "goal" in mind, i need a doctor.

so, i'll wait a few days and see what i hear back before i call odsp and tell them i can't see a doctor until the 12th.

for now, i need to get a drum part done...

deathtokoalas
there's a subtext to this that attaches it to a specific urban setting; i just feel the need to point out that it would be misleading to attach the behaviour to that urban setting. just yesterday, i was walking down the street in suburban areas of windsor, ontario and got hollered at twice by elderly white men from their porches, 20 feet away from the sidewalk. as a transgendered person, i'm exceedingly aware of the differences regarding walking down the street with lipstick on v. walking down the street without lipstick on - it really is staggeringly different in terms of experiences. if you're denying that, you're just not living in this reality...

Ethan Ward
You're disgusting. Tranny turd. Why did you do that to yourself you fucking faggot?

deathtokoalas
i normally delete insulting comments, but i'm going to let the ones on this post sit for a little while.

Ethan Ward
Homosexuals are still fucking faggots so I don't know what you're on about. They will always be fucking faggot and they'll always be insulted and demeaned for their disgusting acts of homosexuality.

deathtokoalas
i wouldn't identify as a homosexual, but i'm otherwise not intervening on this specific post.

Ethan Ward
So you're a straight tranny.....

Doesn't that mean that lesbians don't want you because you're a guy and straight girls don't want you because they're straight......

Pathetic...

deathtokoalas
i'm kind of pansexual in theory, but primarily asexual in practice. you're kind of cluing in on something, but you're missing the point - gay men aren't generally attracted to women. this is a complex topic, but gay men aren't generally attracted to women, right? i said that twice, but, like get it. otherwise, they wouldn't be gay, would they? so a male that would be attracted to me would be either straight or bisexual. in the context of a relationship with a male, then, that's functionally a heterosexual relationship, where i'm fulfilling the female role and the dude is fulfilling the male role.

in the context of a relationship with a women, it's more complicated. the best way to box me in in this context is to understand me as transgendered - and the female in the relationship as bisexual. the relationships i've been in with women have been multi-faceted in this context, in that they take on heterosexual and homosexual tendencies. but it's hard for me to call myself a lesbian, in that sense because i'm really filling both gender roles. it's just too narrow - and i'm kind of appropriating something.

Ethan Ward
Sounds like some perverted, sick, twisted shit. I will pray for you.

deathtokoalas
in the end, i think you're entitled to your opinion - so long as you respect my right to not particularly care what you think about me and refrain from interfering with how i choose to live my life.

i mean, i don't really think there's much to fear about your ideas of "hellfire".