the two new accusations of franken-groping are from somebody that claims it happened before a picture was taken (with the picture being of him touching her arm) and from another anonymous source.

there remains no meaningful evidence, here - just a militant demand to accept hearsay as evidence, despite all legal norms to the contrary. you could make the case that the plurality is evidence, except that these are all questionable sources. army vets are property of the establishment, not paragons of virtue. she may very well have killed innocent people in her role. they train you to be a psychopath, and to take orders.

and it remains the case that franken is the #1 guy that the establishment would want to ditch, right now. there is an overwhelming motive for a co-ordinated campaign against him.

with each hokey claim designed for obvious maximum media effect, the credibility of the accusations is diminishing, not increasing.

but, again: it's clear that this isn't going to stop until he resigns. he's not wanted in the halls of power. at all.

there is again a lesson here: be careful of who you let photograph you. any picture of anybody touching anyone....

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

so, i'm from canada. and, as such, i'm pretty normalized to a multicultural society. i wouldn't say i attach any real value to it - i don't think it's preferable to, nor do i think it is worse than, a less diverse society. diversity is neither a strength nor a weakness in totality - it has pros and cons and balances out. i might not have made the choice that was made in the 60s, but i wouldn't act to reverse it, either. but, i'm used to it. it's what is.

what i'm hostile to is any attempt to moralize how somebody should or shouldn't behave, so long as nobody is being harmed, in context. the harm part is fundamental. it's academic, really. and, i'm pretty equal opportunity in what i go after, despite realizing that certain cultures are less free than others. i think i have every right to criticize them for that, too.

but, canada is a colonial state. virtually everybody can state that some of their ancestors migrated here from somewhere else, with the promise to build a life in a free society. there are indigenous peoples here, but they have been marginalized to an extreme point.

a country like poland is not a colonial state. in fact, poland is barely even in the realm of historical civilization. but, when it entered history in the middle ages, it entered it not as colonizers but as the colonized. poland has no history in the greek or roman worlds as anything more than a staging ground for nomads to wander south. the only reich it was a part of was the third one. the areas to it's north and east were not christianized until the renaissance.

as such, poland is not within the mediterranean cultural sphere, defined by romans and greeks and carthaginians and arabs and jews. it is a completely different cultural space, with a completely separate history.

the protestors in poland are completely incoherent. they're regurgitating right-wing talking points that are neither complete nor consistent. one should not take what they say seriously at all. but, at the core of their reaction is a legitimate rejection of a force that has wreaked havoc on who they are as a people, and largely stolen their identity from them.

multiculturalism in canada is a function of what the state is, as a colonial entity. but, there is no reason at all why poland should adopt multiculturalism. and, the poles are right to see the idea as an invasion by stealth.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.