Monday, October 7, 2024
"Violence never brings peace. History proves this, yet years and years of conflict seem to have taught us nothing." - the pope, recently, when speaking about the oct 7th terrorist attack on israel
what an utterly stupid statement. i would suggest burying the pope in the Neville Chamberlin Cemetery for Failed Statesman when he finally dies. he's going to finally die, right?
history demonstrates that violence is required to protect the world from barbarism and that, without violence, barbarism always wins. the primary recent example is the second world war, which the event he's talking about has some context within, and which the papacy has some responsibility for.
just another nazi pope?
don't listen to the fucking christians, please. they've cause enough fucking problems.
when i talk about decolonization, i'm talking about marx.
when you talk about decolonization, you seem to think it's a code word for "hate whitey".
i support actual decolonization in it's actual marxist meaning, which, in the levant, means kicking the muslims out. to be terse. the muslims are the invaders and the colonizers. the indigenous groups are all christians, pretty much everywhere in the fertile crescent, turkey and egypt (but not in arabia proper or iran).
support for islam in the region is support for imperialism, not some kind of fight against it.
this is a part of the reason that the "nationalist" groups (which were all fascist groups) the soviets used to support in the region were all secular groups. the soviets at least realized the hypocrisy of supporting muslim groups in the region and arguing it's "anti-colonial". the contemporary fake left has no interest in whether it makes any sense or not and doesn't care if it's a mess of incoherent contradictions. it has no real theory.
you have to get the muslims out before you can build a free society, and this is what the anti-imperial movement in the region needs to be about. the fake left has lost the plot.
i'm being obtuse about this to smack you up the head and get the fucking point across.
to be clear: people are talking about the displacement of muslims from southern lebanon as some kind of bad thing. but, that's the outcome i want to see because it's the easy way to decolonize the region. if a million people have really left, they are almost all shia, and that would be pushing to 20% of the population. there's only around five million people in lebanon, and only around two million shia. that would be half the shia population that has left. that's great news.
the mass removal of shia invaders and colonizers from lebanon, where they are not indigenous and do not belong, is what i'm defining as a just outcome. that's why i'm supporting this.
decolonization, in the context of the levant, means deislamicization. that's the proper meaning of the term. by targeting these colonizing invading shia, who are being protected by iran via hezbollah, israel can potentially tip the balance of power in lebanon back towards the indigenous inhabitants and decolonize the region of islamic imperialism. that goal is worth supporting, on it''s face.
to those muslims fleeing lebanon, i say to you: good riddance. don't come back. go back to where you came from.
Sunday, October 6, 2024
i am finishing up a legal document that is going to change the law around evictions in ontario and make it far easier for tenants to fight off aggressive landlords that buy their property trying to throw them out. i'm going to win this case. i'm right.
i'd actually like to make it against the law - as in you go to jail - to buy a property with the intent to evict a tenant. you've got mens rea. you've got actus reus. you can criminalize this if you have the political will.
right now, i can throw out a shitty definition and open a path for defense. others will have to follow the path to beat down the weeds and turn it into a route.
i'm going to take a different position on the bombing in lebanon.
the roman emperors then fiddled around with their provinces but the basic idea kept coming up in the levant that you had syria, phoenecia, palestine (the new name for judea, because the jews were cancelled by hadrian) and arabia. for example, this was the empire under septimus severus, who was an important ruler in terms of redefining the imperium:
a couple of decades later, they split the empire up in four regions and introduced the idea of a diocese. the diocese of the oriens contained the provinces of egypt, arabia and syria, each of which were cut into multiple provinces.
constantine reunited the empire and converted it to christianity but it split into a tetrachy again when he died and was permanently partitioned in 395.
you'll note that the diocese of egypt was split from the diocese of oriens (both in the prefecture of the east), meaning the oriens is now composed of syria and arabia (including palestine/judea and phoenecia).
the empire then began to reorganize into "patriarchates" run by church despots and a number of "heresies" began to develop. in europe, the primary heresy amongst germans was arianism, which insisted that jesus was a man and not a god. the extent to which these arians were christians at all or if this was just an excuse for roman history to gloss over the non-christianity of the german tribes is an open question, but the issue played a primary role in the conflict between latins and germans, which collapsed the roman empire and eventually resurrected into the reformation (it never really went away. the reformation was fundamentally a part of the long war between germany and italy). in the east, they had the opposite heresy, called monophysitism, which claimed jesus was not a man but was only a god. this was popular amongst semites and i'm pointing to it because it became a key factor in the inability of constantinople to hold the east in later centuries. in both cases, people have a problem with the contradiction - the double think - that jesus can be a a man and a god at the same time. it didn't fly in either direction, it seems. a lot of people died over this bullshit.
the above picture is from c. 450. so, you had patriarchates develop in the east around alexandria (egypt, and which became coptic christianity), jerusalem (judea/palestine, after the jews were cancelled, and which did not develop into it's own church) and antioch (syria, which today is mostly a catholic denomination but has historically been connected to the armenian church, which is an eastern orthodox church). you'll also note the existence of a persian church. you also had the better known greek orthodox church in constantinople and the roman catholic church in rome.
the romans lost the mediterranean coast, which was then conquered by the seljuks, who had since taken over persia. this is leading into the first crusade, which was intended to liberate the region on behalf of the romans, but the crusaders instead set up germanic warrior-king states that were initially well received by the indigenous christian groups but quickly wore out their welcome; while these crusader states in some cases survived for centuries, they were all eventually reconquered by reinvading muslims from the south or east, who in time began working together (indeed, a consequence of the crusades was that the muslims reunited to reconquer the region, while the christians couldn't help but foolishly fight each other, instead).
the reason the crusaders were successful in liberating and holding the area in the short run is that the region was actually majority christian. the crusades were a corrupt disaster run by barbarians, but the basic crux of their purpose - to liberate christian indigenous groups suffering under tyrannical imperial muslim rule - is basically true. if they hadn't been corrupt despots that the indigenous christians grew to despise for their own poor rule, the crusaders may have held the area permanently, as they did have majority support to begin with.
three things have happened since the 1970s.
you'll note the following maps:
it would follow relatively clearly that israel is targeting the shia regions, which makes sense because hezbollah and iran are both shia groups (hamas is sunni).
that is important in how i frame this.
i've stated something like this previously: i'm going to support israel's actions on the basis that it could lead to the liberation of lebanon. what am i talking about?
the left (or what i call the fake left) has recently become the stupid party, which is frustrating. it is very common amongst leftists on the street to talk about jewish or christian colonialism in the levant and support for hezbollah or hamas as resistance groups struggling against colonialism. comparisons to the crusades (which they don't understand at all and which most of them know of solely through monty python) are frequent. they often embarrass themselves.
i am not a conservative, i am a hard left socialist. i want to apply my engels correctly, here, and avoid making the mistakes that are endemic on the fake left. i would argue that if you do this correctly, you realize that hezbollah is a colonial movement that is colonizing lebanon with shia muslim settlers on the direction of iranian imperialism. it follows that if you want to have a true anti-colonial narrative, you support the jews pushing the shia back, and opening space back up for the christians and the druze, who are the indigenous groups.
lebanon is very old, but it has only been called lebanon (after the hebrew word for a mountain) recently. very far back in history, lebanon was the centre of the civilization that the greeks called phoenician and who called themselves canaanites. these people were not arabs and did not speak arabic, they were basically jews and basically spoke hebrew.
these three language groups at the bottom of the tree - hebrew, phoenecian and moabite - correspond to modern israelis (and many palestinians who were jews before they converted to islam), lebanese and jordanians.
it is not clear what religious views the ancient hebrews had, but they were probably similar to the phoenecians and these three groups would have, at the time, formed a cultural continuity called "canaan". the canaanite people and their north african colony in carthage were systematically erased from history by the roman senate at the conclusion of the punic wars; valuable practical information was converted to latin and the rest of it was erased, burned, destroyed and forgotten. our knowledge of this region's history is consequently more sparse than it should be.
the old testament is a work of fiction written in babylon by captured hebrew slaves, but the archaeology does uphold two key ideas: (1) that the assyrians burnt everything down c. 700 ce and took the survivors back to mesopotamia as slaves and that (2) when the persians conquered the babylonians (who had since overthrown the assyrians), they did so with a level of strong philphoenecianism and a desire to rebuild canaanite civilization. i have never seen it suggested that the sort of mysterious origins of the persian empire (the history we have records a personal conflict and is probably a legend written by greeks) have to do with the collapse of canaan cutting off trade networks into the iranian plateau, but it's a good theory in the framework of a marxist filter on history. that is, the iranians may have taken down the babylonians with the intent to rebuild the ports on the coast in the first place. secular and mythological history records a figure named cyrus who conquered most of the middle east, freed the jews and rebuilt the phoenecian port cities in lebanon with the motives of rebuilding the phoenecian trade networks and building a navy to conquer europe with.
the ancient persians are themselves more obscure than they ought to be because the muslims tended to prefer greek sources and systematically destroyed ancient iranian culture and written iranian history. iran, itself, is a victim of arab colonization, and they know it.
this is a map of persian administrative divisions before alexander and is where real history really starts.
the three provinces of yehud, samaria and phoenecia were hebrew or canaanite speaking, while eber nari spoke aramaic and became aramea. the people in the province of arabia were not what we call modern arabs (who at the time lived on the red sea coast and south towards yemen). the region is called edom in early sources and contained in the canaanite cultural sphere. the region, like other canaanite regions, eventually began speaking aramaic. there's some curious evidence that they worshiped zeus; the region may have been mostly greek, following the bronze age collapse (well before alexander).
these new jews that came into the region with cyrus were certainly monotheistic and were very heavily influenced by the persian religion of zoroastrianism. like the druze thousands of years later, post-captivity judaism is actually a syncretic religion with a very heavy indo-european influence. unlike islam as it developed centuries later, judaism is not at all similar to indigenous semitic religion and has almost no lingering semitic cultural references (like a moon based calendar) besides some myths recorded in the old testament, like the the story of isaac and abraham, which was clearly intended to teach the idiots to stop sacrificing their kids to baal. broadly speaking, judaism is an overwhelmingly iranian religion and these new jews that came into the region (after the assyrians burnt it to the ground) seem to have at least intermingled heavily with the persians while they were in slavery and may have been an entirely introduced ethnic group altogether.
aramaic became one of the four official languages of achaemenid persia, which was famously conquered by alexander the great and split up amongst his generals. the levant was where they all met, and the place they fought wars in. further, the indigenous armenians and iranians (under the parthian tribe rather than the persian tribe) eventually won independence and came in and out of the levant. when the dust of the collapse of the persian empire, and subsequent reforming under the parthians, settles and when the military influence of greek rule is replaced with the cultural hegemony of hellenism, there is actually a hellenized independent jewish state in the region that speaks greek and aramaic and does not include phoenecia, which remains a part of seleucid syria:
this gets absorbed into rome in a way that splits phoenecia off into syria more or less permanently.
it is still true under trajan, at rome's greatest extent.
however, in 135 ce, the emperor hadrian absorbed the province of judea into syria to create syria-palestina, thereby cancelling the jews and replacing them with the philistines and completing the dream of cato. the philistines were not arabs but were a greek group that had migrated into the region c. 1500 bce. well, that's what you get for pissing the romans off. that was, like, 300 years previously.
constantine reunited the empire and converted it to christianity but it split into a tetrachy again when he died and was permanently partitioned in 395.
you'll note that the diocese of egypt was split from the diocese of oriens (both in the prefecture of the east), meaning the oriens is now composed of syria and arabia (including palestine/judea and phoenecia).
this is a zoom in to the map at 395 showing the diocese of the oriens.
the empire then began to reorganize into "patriarchates" run by church despots and a number of "heresies" began to develop. in europe, the primary heresy amongst germans was arianism, which insisted that jesus was a man and not a god. the extent to which these arians were christians at all or if this was just an excuse for roman history to gloss over the non-christianity of the german tribes is an open question, but the issue played a primary role in the conflict between latins and germans, which collapsed the roman empire and eventually resurrected into the reformation (it never really went away. the reformation was fundamentally a part of the long war between germany and italy). in the east, they had the opposite heresy, called monophysitism, which claimed jesus was not a man but was only a god. this was popular amongst semites and i'm pointing to it because it became a key factor in the inability of constantinople to hold the east in later centuries. in both cases, people have a problem with the contradiction - the double think - that jesus can be a a man and a god at the same time. it didn't fly in either direction, it seems. a lot of people died over this bullshit.
the next thing that happens is that the arabs conquer the region in the 7th century, and islam very quickly became the dominant religion in the former persian empire but it took a very long time for that to happen in the former roman diocese of the oriens (syria, palestine/judea and egypt) and large christian populations also continued to exist in the battleground region of mesopotamia for many centuries after the initial violent arab onslaught. the romans held on to asia minor for quite a long time and periodically reconquered parts of the levant, including all of lebanon and a good percentage of israel, but they couldn't hold it permanently:
the romans lost the mediterranean coast, which was then conquered by the seljuks, who had since taken over persia. this is leading into the first crusade, which was intended to liberate the region on behalf of the romans, but the crusaders instead set up germanic warrior-king states that were initially well received by the indigenous christian groups but quickly wore out their welcome; while these crusader states in some cases survived for centuries, they were all eventually reconquered by reinvading muslims from the south or east, who in time began working together (indeed, a consequence of the crusades was that the muslims reunited to reconquer the region, while the christians couldn't help but foolishly fight each other, instead).
the reason the crusaders were successful in liberating and holding the area in the short run is that the region was actually majority christian. the crusades were a corrupt disaster run by barbarians, but the basic crux of their purpose - to liberate christian indigenous groups suffering under tyrannical imperial muslim rule - is basically true. if they hadn't been corrupt despots that the indigenous christians grew to despise for their own poor rule, the crusaders may have held the area permanently, as they did have majority support to begin with.
as it is, a result of the crusades is that the christians in the broader middle east began to be colonized. that hadn't been the case before the crusades, for the simple reason that the christians were the overwhelming majority and the muslims were the overwhelming minority. islamic history (which is mostly fictional narratives and silly stories. like the guy that swam across the mediterranean to start a dynasty in spain. right. lol.) glosses over this, but the reality is that the early muslim states in these regions were military dictatorships with a small number of muslims ruling over a christian supermajority. if the muslim ruling clique had gotten too pushy with the christians, the christians would have overthrown them, and they eventually did.
when did these areas in the old diocese of the orien convert to islam?
This combination of factors meant that the Middle East became predominantly Muslim far later than an older generation of scholars once assumed. Although we lack reliable demographic data from the pre-modern period with which we could make precise estimates (such as censuses or tax registers), historians surmise that Syria-Palestine crossed the threshold of a Muslim demographic majority in the 12th century, while Egypt may have passed this benchmark even later, possibly in the 14th. What we mean by the “Islamic world” thus takes on new meaning: Muslims were the undisputed rulers of the Middle East from the seventh century onward, but they presided over a mixed society in which they were often dramatically outnumbered by non-Muslims.
to this day, there's a large coptic christian minority in egypt that identifies itself as the indigenous group in egypt. the indigenous groups in syria and armenia are also christian, but they were almost entirely wiped out by a series of genocides by the turks in the 20th century.
what made lebanon different than anywhere else in the middle east until recently is that it remained a majority christian region all the way from the arab conquest in the 7th century until the 1970s, which is why it was turned into it's own country by the french mandate following the dissolution of the ottoman empire in 1918. otherwise, it would have remained a part of syria, as it always had been. lebanon has been called the principality of beirut (the city was probably built by the phoenicians, rebuilt by the persians, conquered by the greeks and romans, converted to christianity, conquered by the arabs, conquered by the turks, fought over in the crusades and then conquered by the french) and been a part of the province of syria since not long after the crusades, when the ottomons turks (in constantinople) conquered it from the mamluk turks (in alexandria):
three things have happened since the 1970s.
(1) a large influx of palestinian refugees, who are muslims, and are mostly converted jews, with some minor admixture from introduced arabs.
(2) christian lebanese migration out of lebanon, especially during the civil war. these are also descended from the canaanites/phonecians/hebrews, with less arab admixture (and more persian, greek and roman admixture).
(3) iranian shi'ite colonization, especially in the south.
the result has been an intentional attempt to ethnically cleanse the region of the indigenous christian population and replace it with introduced muslim groups, in a process of purposeful colonization. the colonizing muslims are increasing their population through migration and high population replacement and the indigenous christians are losing population share through low population growth and emigration, as they are being intentionally chased out, and they are voluntarily leaving for europe or north america (which they perceive as more like them than the arab middle east). hezbollah, specifically, has been a brutally vicious imperial occupying and colonizing force, and has for several decades been attempting to enforce it's religious laws on the indigenous people in an extra-legal manner, including via capital punishment and torture. there have been uprisings against hezbollah in recent years, but the indigenous christians are frustratingly passive. and they just keep leaving instead of fighting.
i've pointed out already in this space that the lebanese have to fight back if they want to win and they don't want to do that so they're not going to.
however, what i want to see happen is for israel to try to rectify some of the demographic changes that have been happening, to push hezbollah out and to give the indigenous lebanese a chance to defend themselves or even to voluntarily choose protection by israel. the jews should get this without explaining it to them. they might not take the chance and israel needs to adjust it's messaging but i think this can be a just war worth supporting if it leads to lebanese self-determination in the end.
for now, if israel keeps targeting the shia regions, and keeps pushing hezbollah out of the region, i'm tentatively in favour of it.
(note: like much of my writing in recent years, this has been vandalized by some muslim revisionists and needs to be redone to reintegrate specific sections that muslims find offensive, but are historically and factually true and important to understand in order to get a good grasp of the history, whether they are offended by this or not.)
Saturday, October 5, 2024
kamala harris needs to go to dearborn and stand on a soapbox (a very big one so she can see people and people can see her) and yell very loudly that if you support hezbollah or you support hamas then you are not an ally of the democratic party and you are not an ally of america and the democratic party is not your ally, either. she needs to take a principled stance.
she will lose if she doesn't.
the so-called liberal press, which has recently been brainwashed by right-wing islamic extremists and in the process become extremely anti-semitic, is having a meltdown at the elimination of the hezbollah leader.
these people are mostly very stupid, but they tend to think they're very smart, and they were sure that israel would lose.
....because they've been brainwashed by right-wing islamic extremists.
this is a process that needed to happen but it's going to be extremely difficult. there are mass protests happening in detroit right now in support of hezbollah, and the democrats are supposed to be concerned they're going to lose voters. that's absolutely frightening. these are extreme right-wing voters mobilizing in support of right-wing extremists. terrorists. literally.
hezbollah has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of american service people and people in detroit are mobilizing in support of them. this isn't dissent or critical thinking, it's treason, and it's a huge problem that needs to be addressed. these people are rallying for the success of the enemies of our culture.
immigration is supposed to be helpful and when it's done well it can be but we haven't done the kind of screening out of crazy people that we used to, and we've become too tolerant of the intolerance of religion. we have a reckoning before us that we need to face in order to reexamine some policies enacted after the year 2000, and it's going to be difficult and people are going to get hurt.
in the mean time, israel needs to keep going.
but americans, canadians and brits should stop to take note of the fact that the major liberal newspapers in all three countries are currently all running a headline story with variations along the lines of "us president unsure if israeli prime minister controls american elections". this is right out of the protocols. biden is in truth in control and he's made it clear that he is. this is not coming from a fringe of right-wing crazies, it's coming from the mainstream liberal media, as it's been infiltrated by the virus of islam.
this will correct itself. we are not on the brink of islamofascism. we just have a lot of work to do in fixing mistakes made by liberals over the last 40 years and we'll do it and we'll be stronger for it.
we need to start by seeing ourselves in the mirror, first, and understanding what we're becoming.
Friday, October 4, 2024
Wednesday, October 2, 2024
i think that regime change - real regime change. not a window dressing election. - in iran is feasible, but the 2003 invasion of iraq is not a model for it. specifically, the americans should not be involved and neither should the jews or arabs.
afghanistan is a better model, but they have to do it with their full asses. i think a joint action, that is approved by the united nations, and led by the turks or indians would be most helpful in permanently removing the iranian terrorist regime from tehran for good and that this is an idea that should be contemplated seriously by serious people in serious positions of power.
one way or another, the iranian regime of the ayatollah cannot be left in power to continue to launch terrorist attacks against it's neighbours. the time has come to remove them from power. the other option is going to be watching israel beat the fuck out of a hapless iran, and that's actually not very helpful for the region, or for israel, in general.
oh alexander, where art thou?
i'm not a jagmeet singh supporter (at all.) but i don't understand the intention of the conservative party attack ads i'm seeing on youtube.
am i supposed to think he doesn't deserve a pension? is that supposed to upset me? why?
i think everybody deserves a pension. doesn't everybody else?
i don't get it.
Tuesday, October 1, 2024
if you don't ensure that the elderly can pay their rent, the following things happen:
1) their young family members need to take care of them. increasing oas is in the benefit of young people for that reason - it means that granny is not their problem. if granny can't afford to live on her own, she becomes your problem, and that is the thing young people want the least.
young people want the government to take care of the elderly. they don't want to take care of their family members, themselves. this is progress in a socialist society, as taking care of your aging parents and grandparents is a costly waste of time.
2) a lot of them won't get support from their descendants at all and will end up on the street or in hospitals.
3) the result is that the healthcare system gets overburdened by old people, and the social safety net gets overrun by them, as they end up in shelters and taking away resources from the disabled. this is not a scary possibility; it's actually already true.
the logic employed by the liberals is something you'd expect from a far-right government run by somebody like mike harris. the liberals should reverse their position immediately and issue a public apology for being short-sighted and stupid.
if they can't afford to take care of people, it's because taxes are too low. they should raise income taxes on the wealthy to cover the costs.
i want the creators of south park to film cartman singing "jesus christ pose", just because i think the accent works.
imagine cartman's voice. do it.
"and you're staring at me,
with your jesus christ pose."
"but you're staring at me like i...
like i need to be
saved.
saved."
the jew kid:
"cartman, what the hell are you taking about."
Monday, September 30, 2024
trying to tie polievre to trump doesn't make any sense and is likely to backfire, as the only people likely to believe it are those that want it to be true. polievre was first elected in 2004, which was when george w. bush was president and paul martin was prime minister. this is before trump, before doug ford, before rob ford and before stephen harper, who i believe saw him as a loser and a lifetime backbencher because he was on the far right fringes of the party, and exactly the image that harper was trying to get out of the media.
it is likely a good idea to remind people that polievre would be more comfortable in the old reform party, but the actual reality is that almost everybody that is actually in play has little to no memory of the early 00s, let alone the distant 90s, when they were still little kids, or before they were born. i remember having that awkward discussion with kids in bars c. 2020ish, before the pandemic.
"oh. you were born in the 90s. hrmmn."
i look young, it's not my fault. the little ones come to me, not vice versa. they even buy me beer.
this is actually going to need to be an ideas election because it's an election that represents a generational overturn. the simple reality is that the demographics in 2025 are dramatically different than the demographics in 2015. we're going to need to look at some new ideas, and look at some old ideas, and have some new debates and some old debates because we have a lot of new voters.
that's healthy.
the left, whatever that means in canada right now, can't get lazy this cycle. this cycle is about cyclical demographic renewal, and if it wants to ignore that it's going to get pushed aside.
Sunday, September 29, 2024
Saturday, September 28, 2024
the reason the liberals jumped from third place in 2015 to win is that thomas mulcair very stupidly tried to run in the centre and it blew up in his face. singh is making the same mistake, and it reflects a shift in the party.
the ndp keeps making the mistake of running to the right of the liberals whenever they think they might win because they are actually to the right of the liberals.
the ndp has decided to oppose carbon rebates in canada. this is a devastating political error, and it might be dramatic enough to save the liberal government.
climate change is very much a ballot issue for a very large percentage of left-leaning canadians and, by opposing carbon rebates, the ndp are taking themselves out of the competition for the very large pool of voters in canada that swings around on the left of the spectrum. ndp opposition to carbon rebates leaves the liberals as the only choice left on the ballot by default.
the fact that the conservatives are trying to frame this as a ballot issue is going to make this particularly difficult for the ndp and especially in liberal-ndp urban ridings. i am in one of those ridings, and i might project a high likelihood of a liberal win in windsor-west due to the ndp opposing carbon rebates, as i now essentially have no choice but to vote liberal or not at all if i don't want to lose my carbon rebate. as this is a very poor riding, that $1000 a year makes a real difference in people's lives. they will mobilize to prevent losing the rebate.
conversely, it will not make the ndp any more competitive in rural ridings, where the carbon rebate is seen as a "tax" instead of as a rebate.
this is not exactly good news for the liberals, as the outcome might be an unworkable parliament. however, it is very bad news for the ndp, who are seeing their poll numbers cave as a result of a tone deaf shift to the extreme right in an attempt to appease wealthy upper class donors that don't like carbon rebates because they redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. the ndp's voting base is correctly aghast at this bizarre policy shift in the wrong direction to appeal to the wrong people.
due to this major strategic mistake, along with a few others, like sympathizing with far right palestinian terrorists, i think it is the ndp that is going to be virtually wiped out in the next election as they are no longer identifiable as a left-wing political party due to the aforementioned shifts to the hard right, and the liberals will probably hang on by a thread, in an outcome that might be similar to 1979.
Friday, September 27, 2024
the next president is going to need to spend almost all of their time in office undoing the foreign policy mess left by the last two presidents, especially by biden who has been far worse than trump, and i'm going to make a focus on pointing out specific actions that will be required to reverse the mess left by these two idiots.
the first thing that needs to be prioritized is ensuring that the united states aggressively enforces it's ongoing occupation of germany, the frightening unravelling of which has singularly resulted in the ongoing instability in eastern europe. we are actually experiencing german rearmament, which is a singular threat to global peace that is unlike anything else seen in the post-war era. the prevention and suppression of german rearmament through continuing uk-usa military occupation should be the united states's single greatest military and tactical priority, as there is nothing else on the planet that poses the united states a greater threat than the potential of german rearmament.
let us remind ourselves that germany is a conquered enemy of the uk-usa alliance that has been under occupation since 1945, after being defeated twice in two major wars in the 20th century. germany was partitioned in the 1940s and reunited in the 1990s because it was the focal point of a world war that resulted in the death of almost 100 million people and it needed to be placed under massive control in order to prevent it from rising again. germany is not an ally of the united states that is a part of the american alliance by choice, it is a conquered and vanquished foe under massive american occupation. germany is only america's "friend" because it has been conquered by force and subjugated via occupation. the removal of american troops would allow for german sovereignty, which would instantly result in them reverting to being the uk's primary global foe and a major headache for the united states. that must be prevented at all costs.
the germans have not spend much on "defence" since 1945. let us remember that this is because a condition of the treaty that ended the war, and also a condition of the treaty that ended the previous war, was that germany not have a military that could threaten it's neighbours. the american (and french and british and previously soviet) occupation of germany has been a central part of the post-war security arrangement.
trump has no apparent understanding of any of this. instead, trump is upset that the germans don't buy enough weapons. he appears to have no understanding of why it is a good idea that the germans not be buying weapons, but instead has been agitating them to increase their military purchases. this isn't some sick hitler fetish, it's just a lack of understanding of the existing american security priorities, and a deficit of basic knowledge about recent history. unfortunately, trump's ignorance as to the purpose of the american occupation of europe led to a series of poor decisions that led to the destabilization of eastern europe, resulting in the ongoing war, which nato is clearly already involved in.
i will repeat a third time that the longstanding post-war american occupation of germany is due to the fact that the germans are a vanquished enemy of the anglosphere that needs to be pacified via massive occupation and not it's friend or ally and that removing the boot from germany's neck will lead to a return to it's previous policies, and perhaps even a policy of german revenge against the west for decades of occupation and control.
yet, in one of the most stridently frighteningly ignorant decisions ever made by a commander in chief in american history, trump actually ordered a troop movement from occupied germany into former warsaw pact and slavic-speaking poland because the poles purchased more american military hardware than the germans, and in order to create an incentive for the germans to purchase more military hardware so that they could continue to be "protected" by the united states, as though the russians started world war two by invading germany rather than vice versa, and as though the germans want the americans there to protect them, ignoring the fact that the americans are occupying the region by force in order to pacify and subjugate it and have been for 80 years. even the germans were left confused and baffled by this apparently dramatic and entirely irrational shift in american military doctrine. a more startling use of doublespeak outside of 1984 could not be found if searched for, but this has largely evaded the analysis of anybody, including russian apologists, who are focusing on literal nato expansion.
underlying the problems of nato expansion is the severe threat of german rearmament, which threatens both the russians and the west and should be prevented at all costs by the united states and by the uk, not just by the russians.
transferring these troops back into germany from poland should be the first step taken by the next president to ensure that the occupation of germany continues and to prevent it's developing rearmament, which directly threatens american security. the germans should be explicitly told not to rearm directly by the next president. the russians will understand this as a de-escalation tactic and should react appropriately.
this will not end the war in ukraine, but it's a necessary pre-requisite and it is in the west interest's. german rearmament is a far greater threat to american security than the russians have ever been or ever will be. this needs to be the focus, not containing the russians. biden's delusional quixotic adventures as the world's last cold warrior need to be done away with with intent and force, lest we find ourselves in a third world war against a rearmed germany, and with a weakened russia that cannot save us for a third time.
if it were actually true that china had reached overcapacity, it would be a cause for great celebration. this is capitalist newspeak for the marxist term "superproduction", which is a prerequisite for actual communism.
alas, we're not actually there yet.
i think the idea she's actually trying to get across is dumping, which is a valid grounds for tariffs, but i don't think it's actually true. the problem isn't that china is making too much stuff, it's that it makes everything so much cheaper because it doesn't pay it's workers.
i have been calling for years for organized labour in the west to make the difficult and dangerous decision to try to organize chinese factory workers. that's what needs to be done.
i just want to...
is it the government's role to keep people safe? this is so hobbesian. it's not the function i want to assign to government, and i want to avoid this whole debate over whether the israeli government failed in some foundational purpose on oct 7th. if you want to think like that, you should at least be thinking like an actuary and recognize the idea of an act of god, poor language in context notwithstanding.
i just want to suggest that the reason the israeli secret service didn't see this coming is that it was in truth so idiotically stupid, as the response so clearly demonstrates.
this is an issue that came up in the cold war in a different manner. it didn't take long for the russians and americans to get themselves into a stalemate by playing game theory by the book. as scary as the consequences might have been, there was no real threat of actual nuclear war, except if somebody made a literal mistake, and pushed the wrong button, or got fucked up and drunk and just did something dumb. the reason is that everything was so predictable and in truth so incredibly boring. drills were run. exercises were carried out. everybody knew what everybody was doing, everything was predictable and everything was calculated and safe.
what happened to break this routine in the 80s was that the americans elected this cowboy named ronald reagan that shot military spending through the roof and began acting in ways that the russians couldn't predict. in the language of game theory, reagan was irrational; the russians could not make sense of this, and became absolutely mortified of the fact that they couldn't predict his behaviour. this was irresponsible; it was insane.
it worked.
the russians stood down. the cold war ended.
what else could they do? reagan was irrational. there was no other rational choice when faced with irrationality. they try to tell you that reagan won the cold war, but when you look into it, this is what it actually means, that he broke russian game theory strategy by refusing to behave rationally and they got so scared that they just gave up.
the reality is that the smartest minds you can assemble will never be able to combat the dumbest people you can find because the great weakness of intellect is that it cannot defeat the abjectly idiotic.
i will reiterate that i don't want to engage in this hobbesian discourse. this is not my vision of the purpose of the state. but there is no defense against such stupidity; there was no way to predict it, and no way to mobilize against it and no way to react to it but to punish it.
i think i'm safe until april and maybe even until next november. hopefully i can get out of here by then, regardless.
there's a few hurdles still, but the judge helped me out a lot by setting very generous timelines without being prompted. i was worried that this was going to be a short circuit approach to this issue. instead, the case conference set a series of motions in motions court and put in place a process that could take a year or longer to work itself out.
In early September, the group promoted another demonstration scheduled for Oct. 5, the Saturday before the anniversary of October 7, boasting that Palestinian martyrs “have shown the world that resistance is the only path to victory against Zionism.”
what?
have you seen any pictures of gaza lately?
i don't think they're winning.
the very few restrictions we have on free speech in canada almost all have precedents in literal nazi marches or the literal spread of nazi literature.
this proposed march outside the israeli consulate on oct 7th is the very rare example of free association that is so disgusting and so dangerous and so harmful that it must be shut down by the police, and the precedent in canada should uphold that, if argued correctly.
this is the very rare real life example of a justified use of state power to prevent free association.
Thursday, September 26, 2024
lebanon is not a province of turkey.
erdogan needs to sit down and shut the fuck up and fuck the fuck off.
lebanon is ethnically jewish and historically and culturally descended from byzantine rome, which makes it culturally greek. that gives the greeks and the russians, as the successors of the eastern roman state, some leverage.
lebanon is not french and is not turkish and is not arab and these meddling colonizing powers need to get the fuck out of it.
this is a really bizarre issue.
frankly, i think that even most ten years old can process the clear reality that these protesters are idiots and the best way to show these kids how stupid the pro-hamas protest movement is is to bring them to a protest like this. it was hopefully an educational experience for most of them as to why they should avoid pro-muslin protests and muslims in general. i knew what a nazi was when i was ten and i knew they weren't good people and i should avoid them.
i'm old fashioned about speech nowadays it seems, but i still believe that the best way for idiots to discredit themselves is to let them speak and prove they're idiots.
that doesn't mean it's appropriate and it's hard to process what the intent was. everybody should be concerned about this, in trying to figure out why this happened.
the prime minister recently told stephen colbert, who is the least funny host of his program in it's long history, that canada is the best country in the world.
he is relying on statistics and rankings from the 1980s, which was 40 years ago. canada has not ranked anywhere near the top of these lists in decades.
today, canada is the dumbest country in the world.
this is the predictable outcome of an unregulated market economy, and we're particularly stupid in canada for following this path, because it was already so predictable due to the existence of so much evidence.
canada's late embrace of neo-liberalism is like the idiot that starts smoking pot in their 20s.
why doesn't he just hand over the suez canal to the chinese in a special ceremony?
what a fucking idiot.
i'd rather see the president put a 20 million dollar reward out for the death of john bolton.
this might be the one thing i agree with the iranian national guard on.
i guess there's always possibility for common ground.
see, this is really not a very conservative perspective. doug ford apparently think that drug addicts deserve social assistance money while those with disabilities that are not addicted to crack or meth or heroin should get jobs like everybody else.
this is what happens when you elect somebody with a loser drug addict in their family, they have warped and backwards thinking about drug addicts.
i would rather call on the ford government to take a harder line stance on cutting off social assistance to drug addicts so that those that need assistance and actually deserve it aren't stuck in line behind a parade of junkies. i'm in the absurd situation where it would be easier for me to get housed if i was a heroin addict.
should i go out and get hooked on crack like his brother did so the government will help me find housing?
that's retarded, like his brother was.
there should be a zero tolerance policy for drug addicts accessing any kind of social assistance and people with a history of drug use should be subjected to routine drug testing and thrown off welfare if they fail it.
i suspect his caucus agrees with me and i'd encourage them to push the point.
too much public money is wasted on drug addicts and it's crowding out access to services for those that need and actually deserve it. it needs to end.
no more welfare for addicts.
let's make that real.
it just makes no sense for anybody to pay rent right now. there's no context where paying these prices is rational. you're just paying the rentier class, which is out of control and needs to be regulated.
anybody and everybody should be doing everything they possibly can to avoid any sort of rental agreement, until the market corrects itself.
i have a case conference on friday morning that was scheduled by a stupid court employee instead of doing her job and answering my questions. it will probably merely result in motions being scheduled, which is what i was trying to get done, and which this stupid conference has dramatically slowed down and screwed up. there are no grounds to quash, but it gives the landlords an opportunity to quash an appeal that i should win easily and which they don't deserve to have. this idiot woman should really be fired.
i moved to windsor because the rent was affordable. it's no longer the case. i'm left with the harsh reality that the units i can afford here are not worth renting.
for example, i could rent a room in a shared building for something like $900/month. but, why would anybody rent a room when they can stay at a shelter for free? it's the same thing, basically - you have to share a bathroom and a kitchen and you can't move anything into the house with you because your roomates could steal it. renting a room seems like a stupid waste of money when you can stay in a shelter instead for free.
can somebody explain to me what the difference between living in a rooming house and living in a homeless shelter is, besides the cost of rent?
this is a reflection of the parasitic nature of the rental market, as well. the reason the rents are so high is because there's too many middle class people trying to profit from renting out rooms to poor people at inflated prices.
it makes no sense to participate in this system. i'm really better off putting my items in storage and sleeping in a hotel than i am renting a room and being forced to endure shared accommodations, given i'd have to put everything in storage, anyways.
i don't think i'd be unhappy living that way, per se. i mean, i don't want to waste my time going to work; that would get me absolutely nowhere, in finishing my art projects. i've recently been wasting weeks at a time washing my body off because these disgusting perverts won't stop drugging me. getting out of here under any circumstance at all seems necessary to get my life back in any context at all.
if i can get all of my items in storage except a couple of laptops and some devices, i can focus on building the offline archive out of a hotel room (and at tim horton's, or the library) and eat out of the food bank until they can find me a subsidized unit. it's a lot of effort to get into a stable housing situation, granted, but it's better than wasting my time going to work.
absurdly, if i do the math on this, i might be able to save up a down payment on a house by living in a hotel on odsp. if i can keep shelter costs down and eat out of the food bank, i could put aside around $400-500 a month by avoiding paying for rent by being homeless instead, which is pushing to $6000/year. i can maybe start accruing a little interest on that. if it takes more than five years to place me in a unit, i could have around $30K by the time it happens, which might be enough for a down payment on a 30 year mortgage that can reduce monthly fees to a "rent" i can afford, which would be substantively less than the current market.
i could also win a couple of court cases between now and then that could give me a boost to towards that goal.
the reality is that i have a lot of writing to do in order to complete my discography and that it doesn't really require having an apartment in order to finish. the spartan existence associated with living out of the library may actually help me focus.
i want to put something else out there: if i end up on the street, the straight edge lifestyle i've been living for the last few years will become permanent. i will not be touching any sort of intoxicants if i end up on the street: no alcohol, no marijuana, no cigarettes. i will drink a lot of coffee and do a lot of writing.
my odsp is stable and permanent (i will not face the stress of renewal. i'm permanent. for life.) and should easily cover the cost of long term storage. they will cover the cost of sleeping in a hotel every second or third day as well.
so long as i have a bicycle and a laptop and access to coffee money, i should be able to refocus on working on my art instead of wasting my time doing meaningless labour, which is what i haven't been able to do since this house was bought in early 2023. these people are forcing me to waste all of my time on legal battles and on washing the filth off of my body instead of being able to focus on my art.
i want out. i want my life back; i want to be able to refocus on my art.
the situation i'm in is so shitty that i just want it to end and am starting to look forward to homelessness. i just want to get out of this hellhole and get away from these disgusting perverts.
people are accusing trump of isolationism, but, in four years, joe biden has failed to station a single us soldier overseas anywhere, including in places they should beyond any reasonable debate be, such as afghanistan and yemen, and if that isn't the most extreme form of isolationism that the united states has ever seen, i don't know what else is.
nobody should expect that kamala harris would attempt to micromanage global events like biden has, which has blown up in his face. trump demonstrated in his four years in office that he will likely listen to his advisors rather than try to force his policies down on anyone.
i have indicated that i think trump is the predetermined winner of the election and democrats will stand down, as they did in 2000 and 2016. nonetheless, i want kamala harris to begin to broadcast who she would delegate foreign policy responsibility to should she win.
Wednesday, September 25, 2024
i would prefer to oppose a ground invasion of southern lebanon by israel. unfortunately, the complete and abject failure of the un mission in the region, which is mostly run by the useless french, has rendered it necessary for the israelis to carry through on. the french are apparently only interested in "peacekeeping" in areas that they can extract resources from, like western africa.
france should completely withdraw from lebanon and stop pretending it's interested in it.
that means the israelis are justified in occupying the south of lebanon up to the river litani in order to show the french how to do what they've demonstrated that they're incapable of doing. the french should be embarrassed by their uselessness, and should stop pretending they're a world power and stop trying to involve itself in the region. the israelis should also send the french a bill for the labour costs of having to do their work for them.
if hezbollah continues to attack israel after setting up positions in the demilitarized zone, they will be justified in pursuing them, but i cannot support a full ground invasion of lebanon until that happens. it's consequently up to hezbollah to decide if it wants to get invaded or not.
i don't normally support israeli attacks on civilians; i'm normally relatively critical of israel. october 7th created an exception, and partly because it was carried out with the broad support of the people of gaza. israel had no option but to obliterate gaza. when the romans wanted to destroy a city for carrying out crimes against it, they would kill who they could and sell the rest into slavery, they would burn every structure to the ground and then they would unearth the paving stones, letting the fields reclaim the space. there are at least two well known examples of this, carthage (in north africa) and corinth (in greece). gaza is only being spared this fate, which is what it deserves, due to (i think regressive) changes in social attitudes around this kind of retribution and due to a lack of resolve in the west. the west should be making an effort to reconnect with it's indigenous religions and value systems, as it continues and completes the long overthrow of christian colonialiasm.
as hezbollah acted in concert with hamas, and has in the process created a deadzone in israel, israel has no choice but to secure it's borders by pushing hezbollah back.
however, there is a fundamental difference between how the gazan people, who are muslims that are mostly descended from the philistines, influenced and participated in the terrorist attack on oct 7th and what level of participation the lebanese people, who are christians that are descended from the indigenous phoenecians, have played in the attacks carried out by hezbollah, which is a colonizing muslim occupying force trying to control and dominate the indigenous christian population, and this cannot be conflated.
israel has told lebanon that it is targeting hezbollah and not lebanon and that it is at war with hezbollah and not lebanon. it needs to hold to it's word as closely as possible in doing everything it can to minimize civilian casualties.
the following are examples of legitimate targets:
- members of hezbollah leadership (or anything that targets people working for or associated with hezbollah)
- weapons depots
- missile launch sites
the following are not legitimate targets:
- united nations missions in lebanon, who have failed to secure a buffer zone
- civilian infrastructure
- civilians, and particularly not christian civilians
further, i need to state again that israel should be seeking political allies on the ground that want to expel hezbollah (which is a colonizing imperial military occupation) from the country, of which there are many to choose from.
Tuesday, September 24, 2024
Monday, September 23, 2024
there's a conspiracy theory that kamala harris' father was actually white, making her white and indian and not indian and african/jamaican. this would have some effect on identity voting in some places in the united states, which exposes the flimsy reasons why some low information voters make voting decisions.
obviously, that shouldn't matter.
however, kamala harris does seem to have a lighter skin tone than her presented parentage would intuitively suggest.
her mother's skin tone was similar but discernibly darker than hers:
you'd expect that if her father was black, harris would be darker than her mother, not lighter.
however, this isn't science. guessing genotypes from phenotypes is pre-mendelian. you can't do that.
it's a rough rule of thumb, though.
at the least, if i was kamala harris, i would seek a dna test. i would have reason to wonder. it has been reported that she doesn't have a relationship with her father, and the obvious reason might be the correct one.
it is not unusual for women to seek mating partners outside of their civil law arrangements. studies have indicated that upwards of 30% - one on three people - are raised by men that are not their biological fathers. women in a free society are consistently forced to balance economic and biological considerations in who they choose as mates, and those things don't necessarily align and they don't necessarily make compromises when they don't.
the united states has a public election and a private transfer of power. if you read the news carefully, you can generally understand what the private transfer of power is going to be before it happens. this has been the case since at least the 2000 election, when the public election did not predict the private transfer of power. i can't comment in this way on earlier elections because i don't remember them well enough.
based on the language being used, i would expect donald trump to be the next president, and that everybody performing in the dramatic production called the election (including kamala harris) knows that this will be the outcome.
it would also appear that jill biden is going to run in 2028.
Sunday, September 22, 2024
if there's anybody reading this that wants to rent to me, for an affordable amount (i'm poor), i need to point out that i have learned via experience that i need a male landlord. i have learned over the last 20 years that ciswomen just can't handle me.
this wasn't my impression when i went into transition around 2002. i actually thought i'd prefer the company of women, and one of the reasons i went into transition was to break down that barrier. women that knew me for a while generally figured it out pretty easily, but i didn't like the walls that women shot up when i approached them. on first impression, women always saw me as a potential sex partner, and never as a friend, and i was trying to abolish that. i had some male friends, but i didn't have anything in common with them (besides common interests in music, which was the only basis for friendship with men that i have ever been able to establish), i didn't get along with them well, i didn't trust them very much and i wanted to get past it and start fresh. i was having trouble building friendships with women because they didn't want to be my friend, they wanted to have sex with me. that was incredibly frustrating to me.
going into transition actually made that problem worse, not better.
i learned this truth a long time ago and have consequently avoided female landlords, female managers, etc in my life, but what has happened since i moved to windsor on two separate occasions is that i signed a lease with an older male and found myself happy in the arrangement for around five years, until they sold their property to women, who instantly targeted me for removal. i didn't put myself in either of these scenarios. in both cases, the house was sold to women who i would have never signed leases with because i would have easily predicted how it turned out.
the problem is that ciswomen expect me to behave masculinely and get extremely angry with me when i don't. i actually don't have that problem with straight men, who tend not to care much, but ciswomen just can't handle me being trans. they just can't deal with it. they find out a little about me, that i'm a musician, that i'm well-educated, that i'm clean and cook....and they just can't deal with it. this has been constant for 20 years and i decided a long time ago that i don't want to deal with them, wither. i just want to avoid them.
i did date a few women when i was young, and one of them yelled at me for an hour when i told them i was going into transition, and used the phrase "crime against women" as she was screaming, while half laughing and half crying. that sounds like an abjectly stupid thing to say, but she was just being honest.
i wanted to establish a greater level of equality with the women in my life, but they can't and won't accept it, and i don't want to deal with it.
so, i will be seeking a middle aged male landlord. again. i can only hope he doesn't sell to another cisfemale, because i can predict what will happen if he does.
Saturday, September 21, 2024
this is not the kind of thing to do on the cheap. canada should own it's own satellites, not rely on those owned by south african companies. the cost is the least important metric, when organized in terms of priorities.
i would rather see this done through a crown corporation than via loans to a private company and it would be far more efficient and far less expensive for the government to do this itself than to pay investors and shareholders in a marketization scheme, although that's no doubt a part of the plan. the way that corporate capitalism works is that investors pay politicians to write laws that send them subsidies. this isn't ideal, but it's real life. telesat has no doubt sent the liberal party a fair amount of money, and they get the contract in return. that's what really existing actual capitalism actually is.
however, it's better than offshoring it to a south african company, and the conservatives should be ashamed of themselves for proposing offshoring the country's satellite network in order to print less money. what a bunch of cheapskate losers. that's exactly the economic model that has led to the hollowing out of local industry and the collapse of the middle class. it's exactly the wrong economic model for the country to follow if it wants to compete in the 21st century.
we need to invest more in local industries and stop offshoring in order to do everything on the cheap.
american politicians will have a shit, but this is in truth very good news for canada as it indicates that the market pressure is relieving itself via people acting and voting with their feet.
the market is not the correct way to deal with social problems, generally, but in the absence of a government willing to do anything except pass laws that benefit property owners, we're not left with any other choice but to rely on the inefficiencies inherent to a market-based society.
this is not the ideal way to reduce migration into the country, but it's probably the only way it's going to actually happen. and it has to happen, and probably for a long time.
there are currently minimal to no opportunities for economic migrants in canada. there's not even a housing supply sufficient to provide them with shelter. they need to clear out and move on.
Friday, September 20, 2024
it sounds to me like these people tried to grab the guy because they didn't like how he looked and he defended himself. if that's what happened.
this story doesn't really add up.
i'm not going to speculate further.
a few men approached the suspect and brought him to the centre's basement to speak with him
like, did they forcibly confine him to the basement? that's not legal in this country. i'd defend myself if somebody did that to me, too.
i understand that the political system in lebanon is impossibly dysfunctional and they have to redesign their constitution. however, that's a necessary but not a sufficient condition for lebanese self-determination.
as a very small country with a very strategic port, the lebanese have been constantly dealing with outside manipulation for decades. the israelis are probably the only actor in the region that will let them govern themselves, but they have to convince themselves that it's true.
i would like to see lebanon help israel rather than fight it and i want israel to try to make that happen. i admit i'm driven by a desire to correct mistakes in history. this is a single ethnic group that should be reconnected.
there's a saying about horses, water and drinking.
on some level this is pointless, but it's the correct tactic: just keep taking out the leaders. yes, they will be replaced. take them out, too.
a corollary of this approach of neutralizing hezbollah in lebanon rather than trying to take them on directly is that expelling hezbollah from lebanon also helps liberate the lebanese people from an increasingly brutal occupation, not just by iran, but by muslims more generally. the lebanese have essentially given up and accepted it. it's not clear that they're going to react immediately, but anything that gives the lebanese back their freedom is a net benefit to the area and really the planet.
this is a small area with an ancient history that has usually been a part of the west. lebanon is a country that potentially belongs in the european union. it deserves full self-determination.
Thursday, September 19, 2024
i'm trying to understand how israel might be behind the pager attack in lebanon and coming up blank. i think a more likely suspect is the chinese, and it opens a can of worms. could they do this to american devices?
the media is speculating that they planted bombs in a production facility. that sounds ridiculous. it's a plot in a james bond film.
it is physically possible that they might be zapping them with a satellite using gps, which is why everything in the area is blowing up rather than specific targets. they would essentially be shooting out a frequency all across lebanon that causes devices of the sort to do something like vibrate, or overheat. this would be an application of quantum physics, rather than some kind of sneaky production sabotage. the israelis are currently working on replacing and expanding their iron dome with a laser system. a high frequency audio attack isn't crazy at all.
muslims tend not to keep dogs as pets, but are there stories in lebanon about dogs freaking out at the time of the attack?
i'm more likely to lean to the idea that it's something the chinese are dropping into all kinds of devices, probably including chinese made chips and phones. the pentagon has been warning about that kind of thing for a while. if so, it's a positive signal that the chinese aren't going to tolerate terrorism in the region.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)