why isn't the fake left press covering this?
https://thearabweekly.com/undeterred-clerics-intimidation-iraqi-women-press-protests
https://thearabweekly.com/undeterred-clerics-intimidation-iraqi-women-press-protests
Saturday, February 15, 2020
first liner note release for inri022
this is a collection of rejected tracks from the inri/inriched period. it's just chronologically sequenced. download only.
recorded over 1998. compiled and remastered in late 2013. released dec 27, 2013. corrected to normalize for stereo in september, 2014. expanded incrementally between dec, 2014 and dec, 2016. merged with inricycled b and then finalized and re-released on december 16, 2016. first liner note release added on feb 15, 2020, to include the initial 2013 release in 192 kbps mp3 only. as always, please use headphones.
this release will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1996-1999, 2013-2020). as of feb 15, 2020, the release includes a 23 page booklet in doc, pdf & html, with an html5 audio frontend, that includes journal entries from the remastering process over sept-dec, 2013, as well as the initial 2013 release in 192 kbps mp3 only.
credits
released January 27, 1999
j - guitars, effects, bass, bass synth, synthesizers, vocoders, octavers, drum programming, sequencers, noise generators, sound design, vocals, found sounds, cool edit synthesis, digital wave editing, loops, windows 95 sound recorder, sampling, production.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrijected
recorded over 1998. compiled and remastered in late 2013. released dec 27, 2013. corrected to normalize for stereo in september, 2014. expanded incrementally between dec, 2014 and dec, 2016. merged with inricycled b and then finalized and re-released on december 16, 2016. first liner note release added on feb 15, 2020, to include the initial 2013 release in 192 kbps mp3 only. as always, please use headphones.
this release will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1996-1999, 2013-2020). as of feb 15, 2020, the release includes a 23 page booklet in doc, pdf & html, with an html5 audio frontend, that includes journal entries from the remastering process over sept-dec, 2013, as well as the initial 2013 release in 192 kbps mp3 only.
credits
released January 27, 1999
j - guitars, effects, bass, bass synth, synthesizers, vocoders, octavers, drum programming, sequencers, noise generators, sound design, vocals, found sounds, cool edit synthesis, digital wave editing, loops, windows 95 sound recorder, sampling, production.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrijected
at
18:28
it turns out that poll in nevada was commissioned by an explicitly republican polling firm. that might explain a few things.
i need a better source than that.
at
18:27
i quit smoking years ago.
and, i shouldn't have to go to any great lengths to prove that statement - it should be taken on face value.
at
16:35
i have not been cold turkey for a while.
but, i functionally quit smoking in january, 2016, and anybody pushing back against that is just being dishonest in their argument.
at
16:34
i've had maybe ten cigarettes in the past ten weeks.
and, i haven't bought a pack of smokes for casual, habitual use since the end of 2017.
at
16:33
fwiw, i have not bought a pack of smokes since i got back from toronto in mid december. i've bummed maybe 10 smokes in that period, while i'm out grocery shopping.
it's actually a subconscious factor in staying in tonight - i know that i'll buy a pack if i got out for the night and i don't really want to. i can probably avoid that if i just go to the show tomorrow afternoon, instead. i might bum a couple...
so, the fact that these cops are smoking upstairs is exceedingly frustrating to me. but i just have to focus on winning these court cases and getting out of here.
it's actually a subconscious factor in staying in tonight - i know that i'll buy a pack if i got out for the night and i don't really want to. i can probably avoid that if i just go to the show tomorrow afternoon, instead. i might bum a couple...
so, the fact that these cops are smoking upstairs is exceedingly frustrating to me. but i just have to focus on winning these court cases and getting out of here.
at
16:30
that means that i should get inri022 up by the end of the night.
i
was badly distracted yesterday. we know that happens when i get cabin
fever. and, it actually means i need to get out. tomorrow.
at
15:43
yeah, the wind chill tonight is still pretty bad, coming off the deep
freeze yesterday morning. and, the change in the lineup at the psych
show means the combination of the night falls apart.
i'm going to wait and go tomorrow afternoon, instead.
i'm going to wait and go tomorrow afternoon, instead.
at
15:42
iran is an advanced society under the thumb of a brutal dictatorship.
they don't need the kinds of social programs that senegal needs. what they need is solidarity on the ground.
at
14:09
like, i don't even want to talk to the kind of conservative idiot that would try to frame complicated social problems in terms of morality. we diverge from first principles.
your morals are of absolutely no concern to me at all.
your morals are of absolutely no concern to me at all.
at
13:34
yes, you have to get to root causes before you can fix problems, but that's not an argument against the use of force, it's an explanation of when it's useful and when it isn't.
arguing for root causes as a means of pacifism is a co-option of socialism by religious groups. anybody that's actually read any kind of socialist literature at all will tell you of the importance of violent overthrow in the model.
it's a question of restricting the use of force to scenarios where doing so is productive and can lead to a substantive outcome. for that reason, blowing up senegal would be pointless, whereas very careful support for the revolutionary forces in iran could actually be decisive.
but, it's not some kind of moral issue. it's a tactical question.
but, it's not some kind of moral issue. it's a tactical question.
at
13:30
On Thursday, ahead of the protests, he (sadr) again slammed the protests as being rife with "nudity, promiscuity, drunkenness, immorality, debauchery ... and non-believers."
finally - a contemporary movement in the middle east i can stand in solidarity with!
debauchery forever! drunkenness for all!
solidar, solidarity!
no, seriously. this is a positive development in iraq as of late, and i hope it has a secularizing effect, and i hope that secularizing effect spills over.
and, if there's anything we can do to help....
at
05:03
also, the turks need to immediately cease all support for the rebels in idlib, and i fully support any actions by the syrians and their russian backers to restore syrian sovereignty to the area.
i would then hope that the russians recognize the need for regime change in syria once the country is properly stabilized, and assad himself sees the need to make way for a civilian government.
i would then hope that the russians recognize the need for regime change in syria once the country is properly stabilized, and assad himself sees the need to make way for a civilian government.
for right now, wiping out these islamofascist nazis needs to be the primary purpose, and the turks should be ashamed of the actors they're supporting in order to advance their narrow self-interest.
at
04:39
this is quite different from what bernie has done in the democratic primary, which is to very purposefully distance himself from queer activists so as to not upset his chances at winning black voters.
and, as punishment for his cynical failure of leadership on this point, he will probably lose both demographics, and rather badly.
at
03:59
i feel obligated to respond to this, although i'd actually rather not.
first, i'll reiterate that i'm not a supporter of justin trudeau or the liberal party. there happened to be a relatively good liberal candidate running in my riding, and i did vote for her because i thought she had a good chance of getting rid of the rather useless ndp back bencher that we've had here for far too long, but i spent months insisting i'd vote for the greens, and would have if it weren't for the strength of the local liberal candidate. i didn't vote for him, i voted for her - both technically and symbolically.
so, trudeau can't lose my support because he doesn't have it in the first place.
but, the issue of homosexual oppression in africa is extremely widespread and baked directly into the culture, there. there aren't even really substantive allies to connect with. i need to be able to present an alternative course of action before i can criticize somebody for doing something, and there really isn't much of one, here.
if the implication is that trudeau sold out queer rights for a security council seat, then that would be deplorable and worthy of condemnation in the starkest terms possible, and possibly even grounds to demand an immediate resignation. i would hope that other countries would look at something like that and vote for norway instead, as we clearly wouldn't be worthy of sitting on the security council if we were going to behave in such an undignified manner as that. as a canadian, that would leave me feeling ashamed and embarrassed. but, i don't think that's what actually happened.
what can canada do with these countries like senegal that just refuse to modernize around this issue, and so many others? well, pulling investment isn't going to help anybody. nor is boycotting them. as an anarchist, i completely reject the premise that market theory is a force for social change. this is a longstanding liberal position, though, that is challenged mostly by conservative zealots on the fake left that insist on upholding these purity tests in who they interact with - that's not a position i'd ever advance or advocate. so, for example, i'll follow chomsky on his criticism of bds, in arguing that it's likely to backfire. and, while a bds movement against africa on queer rights might feel good, it's not likely to materially aid any queer people in africa; i might support such a thing abstractly, but i'd never actually advocate it, as i'd expect the outcome to be terrible for the people i'd be trying to support.
nor is trudeau standing there and saying things going to mean anything to anybody. nobody cares.
we could slaughter the leadership in the hopes of an uprising, but that would never work in africa. i've been very careful to point to iran as a specific example where there is a lot of opposition to the state, and a powerful modernizing force on the ground, and i've tried to frame the issue around the likelihood of critical mass. i would never argue for a second that slaughtering the african leadership would lead to a modernizing uprising, so the justification for doing so wouldn't exist. i am cognizant of the fact that the self-righteous moral zealots will call me a hypocrite, but that's rooted in the fact that they're too stupid to understand the argument i'm presenting. if you read this post and conclude i'm a hypocrite, you're an imbecile - but you might, and i expect as much from a certain collection of people that think with their hearts instead of their heads.
the best thing we can do is try to provide support and hope it helps to change attitudes on the ground in the long run, and my understanding is that that's actually what we're doing. i may have other criticisms for the economic projects that exist beyond this, but i would reject the explicit argument that they should be pulled to help the queer movement get off the ground - i do not think that this is a well thought through argument.
likewise, i'm hardly going to have a melt down about the prime minister attending a meeting with the iranian foreign minister. i've been clear that i'd support a very tactical strike to remove the religious leadership, explicitly, in the hopes that it would lead to a secularist uprising, if the likelihood of such a thing could be established beforehand. zarif is actually a part of the civilian leadership, and not really representative of the theocracy. again: what can canada do in or with iran? and, if you believe that it should be seeking to prop up secularist voices and minimize religious ones then isolating or excluding the civilian leadership would not be consistent with any kind of progress, even if it makes you feel good about yourself for doing it. in context, there are clearly some discussions that need to be had between the countries, and i don't see any value in preventing that.
i would support a targeted strike against the ayatollah, though. that's the source of oppression here, the religion; the civilian government, if anything, is a buffer against that.
i hope i've clarified any confusion that might exist.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-defends-not-publicly-supporting-lgbtq-rights-in-senegal-photo-with-iranian-minister-1.4812426
first, i'll reiterate that i'm not a supporter of justin trudeau or the liberal party. there happened to be a relatively good liberal candidate running in my riding, and i did vote for her because i thought she had a good chance of getting rid of the rather useless ndp back bencher that we've had here for far too long, but i spent months insisting i'd vote for the greens, and would have if it weren't for the strength of the local liberal candidate. i didn't vote for him, i voted for her - both technically and symbolically.
so, trudeau can't lose my support because he doesn't have it in the first place.
but, the issue of homosexual oppression in africa is extremely widespread and baked directly into the culture, there. there aren't even really substantive allies to connect with. i need to be able to present an alternative course of action before i can criticize somebody for doing something, and there really isn't much of one, here.
if the implication is that trudeau sold out queer rights for a security council seat, then that would be deplorable and worthy of condemnation in the starkest terms possible, and possibly even grounds to demand an immediate resignation. i would hope that other countries would look at something like that and vote for norway instead, as we clearly wouldn't be worthy of sitting on the security council if we were going to behave in such an undignified manner as that. as a canadian, that would leave me feeling ashamed and embarrassed. but, i don't think that's what actually happened.
what can canada do with these countries like senegal that just refuse to modernize around this issue, and so many others? well, pulling investment isn't going to help anybody. nor is boycotting them. as an anarchist, i completely reject the premise that market theory is a force for social change. this is a longstanding liberal position, though, that is challenged mostly by conservative zealots on the fake left that insist on upholding these purity tests in who they interact with - that's not a position i'd ever advance or advocate. so, for example, i'll follow chomsky on his criticism of bds, in arguing that it's likely to backfire. and, while a bds movement against africa on queer rights might feel good, it's not likely to materially aid any queer people in africa; i might support such a thing abstractly, but i'd never actually advocate it, as i'd expect the outcome to be terrible for the people i'd be trying to support.
nor is trudeau standing there and saying things going to mean anything to anybody. nobody cares.
we could slaughter the leadership in the hopes of an uprising, but that would never work in africa. i've been very careful to point to iran as a specific example where there is a lot of opposition to the state, and a powerful modernizing force on the ground, and i've tried to frame the issue around the likelihood of critical mass. i would never argue for a second that slaughtering the african leadership would lead to a modernizing uprising, so the justification for doing so wouldn't exist. i am cognizant of the fact that the self-righteous moral zealots will call me a hypocrite, but that's rooted in the fact that they're too stupid to understand the argument i'm presenting. if you read this post and conclude i'm a hypocrite, you're an imbecile - but you might, and i expect as much from a certain collection of people that think with their hearts instead of their heads.
the best thing we can do is try to provide support and hope it helps to change attitudes on the ground in the long run, and my understanding is that that's actually what we're doing. i may have other criticisms for the economic projects that exist beyond this, but i would reject the explicit argument that they should be pulled to help the queer movement get off the ground - i do not think that this is a well thought through argument.
likewise, i'm hardly going to have a melt down about the prime minister attending a meeting with the iranian foreign minister. i've been clear that i'd support a very tactical strike to remove the religious leadership, explicitly, in the hopes that it would lead to a secularist uprising, if the likelihood of such a thing could be established beforehand. zarif is actually a part of the civilian leadership, and not really representative of the theocracy. again: what can canada do in or with iran? and, if you believe that it should be seeking to prop up secularist voices and minimize religious ones then isolating or excluding the civilian leadership would not be consistent with any kind of progress, even if it makes you feel good about yourself for doing it. in context, there are clearly some discussions that need to be had between the countries, and i don't see any value in preventing that.
i would support a targeted strike against the ayatollah, though. that's the source of oppression here, the religion; the civilian government, if anything, is a buffer against that.
i hope i've clarified any confusion that might exist.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-defends-not-publicly-supporting-lgbtq-rights-in-senegal-photo-with-iranian-minister-1.4812426
at
03:56
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)