Wednesday, November 30, 2022

temporary full november, 2022 backup archive (not source material - to be permanently deleted when pdf uploads)

note to moderator: i don't want to be moderated. i want complete free speech. that is why i'm taking my blog down, i don't want to adhere to your "community standards", i want to post somewhere else. that said, i'm currently being harassed by some childish dykes that are mad at me because i'm not a lesbian. they should choose not to read my blog if they don't like it, rather than continue to annoy me for rejecting them.

i am republishing everything temporarily in order to use mirroring software to pull it down. i expect this post to be taken down within 24-48 hours. i would request you refrain from unwanted moderation in that time frame, so i can take my site down from here and upload somewhere that cares more about speech rights and less about conservative value systems.

wednesday, november 2, 2022

the government continues to announce more and more ridiculous immigration targets, because it thinks it has a mandate for it and it thinks it will help it win votes. the liberals are so racist that they think they have a monopoly on brown voters (who, in actual truth, usually vote conservative), and thinks it needs to wipe out white voters, who are actually it's base (specifically, in quebec), in order to win.

many, many observers have pointed out that the long term result of these unsustainable immigration levels is going to be a major swing to the right in this country, and the truth is that it has already happened in ontario. doug ford exists because he won recent immigrants by huge margins, and he's the kind of politician we're going to see more frequently at the federal level if these numbers continue at this rate. it was jason kenney that put the policy in place, and we ended up with exactly what he intended. that the liberals are accelerating their own demise by accelerating the policy is a reflection of their own deep stupidity.

i don't actually care about the liberal party.

if we keep bringing in 500,000 people a year into an economy with a severe housing shortage - and that is creating less than 100,000 houses per year - we're going to end up with the kinds of population problems they have in india. this is the real problem with the policy: in a misguided attempt to win votes, the liberals are bringing in a policy that is going to ruin the country, along with themselves.

we'll deserve what we get, and it's going to be an exceedingly competitive society where people are at each other's throats for crumbs of bread, as the government dumps bodies on top of each other, in a racist vote-buying tactic. that kind of neo-liberalism is a world i don't want to live in.

i need to find a way out of this society before it crashes and burns.
7:37

thursday, november 3, 2022

i just want to briefly update my conclusions on the family tree part of the dna, as i'm disassembling and archiving october.

i won't be reposting this to take it down; i've found a different method that avoids that. nor will i be storing this anywhere. when i take this down, it's coming right down, until i can fix it. this month, in particular, was brutally edited.

1) i was able to more or less confirm my mother's ancestry, which is overwhelmingly norse but also has some celtic and some jewish. i have long thought my mother was part native american, and she has long considered herself to have some uralic from the finnish, but once i found the jewish on her side, i was not able to unsee it - it's phenotypically obvious. there is no discernible evidence of uralic finnish; the finnish ancestry is essentially just swedish.  this would be nineteenth century philadelphia jew, probably franco-sephardic in origin. there are also some weird names that show up in the acadian portion of my mother's side that may plausibly be indigenous, or may just as plausibly be african-american. there is a less likely chance they may be greek, which would be odd in 18th century nova scotia. the hebrew did appear in the dna results, but the dominant genetic footprint was norse/celtic.

2) i could not build a substantive dna link to my father's side, but i was able to find some distant cousins. my family name is parent, but zero parents appeared in the results. my father believed he was quebecois & italian, and he was aware that he looked indigenous; he grew up in an indigenous neighbourhood around bayshore, ottawa and would have acknowledged some indigenous background if pushed, but it was always a vague concept in his mind, and he would have identified as franco-italian. my father's name was robert, his father's name was william, and his father's name was stanislaus. stanislaus' father was supposedly named michel. there was a discernible slavic component in the dna, but i could not make sense of it in studying the genealogy. there is a detailed quebecois parent family genealogy, but i would consider it to be legendary. rather, there were two breakpoints on my father's side:

1) stanislaus' mother in the baptismal records is unclear, and does not seem to be the same woman that michel was married to. stanislaus was clearly adopted into the family in some manner, but whether his father was michel or not is unclear. i strongly suspect that stanislaus' mother was michel's wife's sister (and therefore the maternal aunt of the other children in the family), but whether what happened was that michel had a child with his wife's sister and then adopted it or his wife adopted her sister's illegitimate child (with an unknown father) is not clear. michel's family relocates within quebec at about the same time as it adopted stanislaus.
2) if you follow stanislaus' supposed paternal ancestry backwards, you get to a charles parent in the gaspe that was supposedly born in quebec city to a prominent francophone colonial parent family. i could not verify that linkage and had to stop there. this charles parent married a known metis woman from the gaspe, which might explain the indigenous ancestry. i do not think that the legendary relationship between this charles parent and the prominent french colonial family in quebec city is legitimate, but i cannot otherwise determine this charles parent's ancestry.

i have confirmed indigenous ancestry via a clovis report (meaning i have ancestry from the clovis culture, which is the alpha culture of almost all existing indigenous groups), but it did not show up directly in the ancestry report.

yet, given that there were zero parents in the search results, and that stanislaus was in some way adopted, it isn't entirely clear that stanislaus was a parent, in the first place, meaning that that known metis woman in the gaspe might not be the source of clovis genes, after all.

my father's side is clearly dominantly quebecois, and some distant italian did show up in the report (along with a genetic link to the gotti clan), but if stanislaus' father was not michel then that would explain why i'm not related to any parents. an entirely different francophone family showed up in the results, instead. the surname that appeared was trudeau, but trudeau is a common name, and there was no discernible connection to the prime minister's family.

my y-dna came back as r1b* and was peculiarly halstatt in origin, suggesting my father's paternal y-dna was of ultimate austrian or celtic origin. i might wonder if it might have been czech, or south slavic. i seem to have a genetic affinity with south-eastern europeans, according to some other tests that were done.

the indisputable conclusion is that there was a mistaken identity inserted into my father's side, at some point several generations ago. my father's father had unusually dark skin for a francophone, but it is variable on his side; i know that i tan pretty darkly in the summer, but can also end up pasty white if i avoid the sun. an exact answer isn't clear, but it is either the case that stanislaus' father was not michel or it is the case that the charles from the gaspe was not really from quebec city.

my take is that stanislaus was probably really the son of michel and an unknown eastern european woman. stanislaus was adopted into the family of michel, despite not having the same mother as his half-siblings. if stanislaus knew that, my father did not. stanislaus married a quebecois woman with last name st. denis that had a colonial quebecois background, and i was able to find direct genetic links to that family, despite not being able to find direct genetic links to any parent family.

that would mean that the link to the gaspe metis woman is probably legit, and the charles parent that appears in the gaspe was probably not born in quebec city, but was of some other background. he may have been an english loyalist, and may have moved north from new brunswick. another idea is that he may have had a name that was similar to parent, but not parent, and may have undergone a name corruption upon moving to the gaspe from a nearby island chain. he was known to be a fisherman and connected to a channel island fishing corporation that dominated the gaspe region at the time. given the r1b* background, that might suggest ultimate welsh or breton background.
1:44

i wouldn't swear an oath to any king in any assembly or any context at all. no bill is required; i would ignore any criticism by pointing to s. 2a of the constitution, and challenge any dissenting parties to sue, if they don't like it.

13:26

Asked if it was appropriate to spend some of the newfound revenue with the economy in a precarious state,

this is bizarre language, and it indicates that the media has really gone full retard over the last six months in terms of how it analyzes government finances. that sentence can only be deconstructed with the starting point of the author not understanding what "government debt", which is not actually debt, really is. further, it clearly assumes that deficits are bad for the economy, which is completely backwards.

the government needs a stimulus plan right now because we're functionally already in a recession, and this is actually a relatively good one in that it targets the right income brackets. if the government were to shift into austerity, that would create a longer and deeper recession because it would further dry up spending. what the conservatives are arguing for would be disastrous, and it would be their own voters that would be hurt the most. it's encouraging that the government is broadcasting that it hasn't lost it's mind, in adopting some kind of foolish "the government is like a household" conservative fiscal mentality.

i might expect this framing from the national post, but it is disconcerting to see it from the cbc, when the liberals are in power.

yes, it is appropriate to run deficits during recessions - that is standard economic theory and what any competent person will tell you.

20:41

there is clearly a lot of bad economic theory floating around in the media, right now.

people are reading a lot of garbage.
20:47

the liberals win lengthy majorities in canada for the almost sole reason that they're good at economics. that is their major vote driver; tory times are tough times. it's an actual truth, here. they can't be dabbling in fringe chicago school or austrian-style economic theories, if they want to win elections; they need to stick to keynes. that is their prime directive.
21:00

the media is presenting polievre as a friedmanite, but friedman never made those arguments at all. i could post - and have posted - corrections to that analysis, but the truth is that it's a strawman.

what polievre actually is is an austrian school economist, and what he's rambling about is in truth actually really specious, fringe stuff.
21:04

friedman's argument was really technical, and most keynesians don't exactly think he was wrong. friedman actually supported a negative income tax, which is probably the best way to get to a ubi. yes, i have disagreements with friedman, but he wasn't as evil as you might decide he was from reading naomi klein, so much as he was co-opted by people with ulterior motives, who misrepresented his work. friedman was, broadly speaking, a liberal economist and he was actually relatively interested in wealth redistribution, in what he determined was a fair way.

friedman would not have argued that what the bank of canada did during the pandemic was inflationary.

that argument actually comes from the real evil bastard, ludwig von mises (and his crony, the dastardly friedrich hayek).

this article briefly explains why what polievre is pushing is not chicago school but austrian school:
21:15

inflation is complicated; there isn't a single factor that creates or reverses it. if it costs more to produce things, those costs will be passed on and, for that reason, increases in the price of energy can have a dramatic effect on the cost of items on the shelves. other input costs that could drive inflation would include the cost of labour, tariffs, "supply disruptions" (which is it's own complicated thing) or increases in taxes. the standard theory of inflation is that most inflation is determined by fluctuations in input costs, not changes in the money supply; the biggest change in input costs happening right now is the increase in the price of oil.

that doesn't mean that monetary policy has no effect on inflation at all, but nobody thinks it can be modelled linearly, or that inflation can be adjusted for in a causal manner by fluctuating the money supply, except the fringe mises school that i just posted a link to. the article explains why friedman didn't make that argument.

i've explained in previous posts that the best way to understand inflation is by modelling it as a game of chicken between buyers and sellers. sellers will attempt to maximize their profits by selling items for as much as they can, independent of any other factor at all. if a seller thinks they can mark something up by 1000% and get away with it, it will do so, even if input costs are falling and money is contracting (the pharmaceutical industry will do this, if you let it). what that means is that consumers have no choice but to push back and say "no! i won't pay this!" if they want inflation to come down. there is simply no other solution. 

what banking policies that are supposedly designed to reduce inflation are actually intended to do is to incentivize consumers to pay less, which any freedom-loving or free-thinking person should consider to be tyrannical and despotic and should rightfully be resentful of. i don't need the government to tell me that these avocados are over-priced, and i don't want money taken away from me to ensure i don't pay for the over-priced avocados; i can figure that out on my own, thank you. now, give me my avocado money back, you assholes.

where expansionary monetary policy might potentially play a small role in this is that it generally increases disposable income (albeit disproportionately for higher income brackets, where disposable income is already great; this effect is really so small as to be immeasurable and is only being mentioned here at all rather generously), which may make people more likely to overpay because they're less focused on savings because they have more to spend. we all know this is true; we'll pay that extra $2 if we have it left over from the budget, but may shop around more if we don't. when disposable income is at high levels, sellers are more likely to take advantage of it, if they're perceptive and scrupulous enough to realize it. this is why i was pointing to media reports that were conditioning people to expect inflation as a serious problem; if you tell people to expect inflation, sellers will take note of the expectation and you will certainly get it. 

that doesn't extricate the issue from the game being played between buyers and sellers, which exists strictly on a psychological level. sellers might very well choose to avoid price gauging during periods of high disposable income, if they think the market won't tolerate it, or if the market they're selling on isn't actually experiencing substantive increases in disposable income; if sellers increase prices, and consumers pay it, they've won the game of chicken, at least for now. the bank has indicated that it understands all of this in it's explanation of it's rate hike policy, which is in truth intended to psychologically bully sellers into easing up on price gouging.

the reality is that prices will keep going up until consumers stop paying them. these abstractions determined by the central bank are only vaguely important in the act of setting prices and are really functionally disconnected from the basic market relation occurring at the cash register; they may or may not have a non-linear influence as components in a list of potential factors, but they are certainly not effectively modelled in a causal manner, and there is no enforceable reason why outcomes should even make sense.
21:39

maybe one day we'll have electronic price tags at stores that fluctuate in real-time to reflect accurate market prices determined scientifically by computer algorithms, in centralized servers.

today, we have individual human beings that make independent decisions based on a variety of factors, some rational and some not. abstractions at the central bank can only mildly influence those decisions, and how they influence those decisions might or might not make mathematical sense.

the better way to model inflation is consequently in terms of a game of chicken between buyer and seller that is only vaguely influenced by outside factors, and whose outcome depends strictly on the actions of the players, who are being driven by factors that can neither be predicted nor understood, in aggregate. it's impossible to generalize why one person will pay a set price for a specific good while another won't.

this is microeconomics, it's not macroeconomics.

game theory is a powerful tool to understand conflict; this is a choice application.
22:04

friday, november 4, 2022

worse, people are bringing the philips curve back from the dead. it's a fucking time warp: we're back to talking about these debunked concepts like monetarism and philips curves all of a sudden, in this delusional need to rewrite economics, when all that happened was an increase in the price of oil.

if i end up having to decide between voting for the philips curve or voting for monetarism, i'm going to write in sid vicious.

there is no need to overthrow or rethink anything. the things we threw away in the 80s are still garbage and should still be thrown away. we got a lot of things right in the last few decades and should not jump to unlearning any of it. we simply need to adjust to the new reality of oil scarcity.
0:03

the economic theory is fine.

our reliance on oil is not.
0:04

is there any meaningful connection between employment and inflation at all?

there isn't.

there's a correlation, if you tweak the presentation enough, until there isn't any more, and you need to tweak it again, a few years later. i don't know why there's such an obsession with saving an idea that doesn't have a logical basis to it.
0:06

so the wittle saudis are scawed of the big bad iranians and want to run to the safety of america's skirt.

awww.
6:02

it's a good opportunity to remind the saudis of their place in the order of things.
6:38

you have to be assertive and dominant with them because they don't understand anything else. they're like dogs. you have to show them who the boss is; you have to teach them to sit.
6:39

monday, november 7, 2022

what twitter users have wanted for a long time now is to be members of an exclusive club, without paying membership fees. while this is a fundamental disconnect in what a service like twitter can provide over any sort of market, it's largely not their fault, as it was presented to them that way - they were told that they can be in this club, and they wouldn't have to pay for it.

that's fine - until they started to decide that they wanted to censor people.

censorship criteria are club membership terms, and breaking those rules results in you being thrown out of the club. while people tend to have defined views on this topic, they are not lawyers and mostly have no idea what they're talking about. the language you here from the mainstream soft left on this topic just makes them sound despotic, ignorant and retarded. the only way to make sense of the concept of censorship in social media in a free society is to tie it to being in a club; otherwise it's just corporate fascism and, even if people want it, it can't exist. for some useless hollywood comedian to tell me what i can and cannot say without any sort of consideration is not a sustainable arrangement in a free society or in a market society, and it cannot continue to exist. if you want to tell me to shut up and enforce it, you need to build a clubhouse, call it private property and say "you cannot talk like that in my house".

twitter is not doing so well, in fact; it was on a direct line to collapse, and the censorship issue as a big part of it. twitter has recently received the reputation of being removed from reality and has become unpopular amongst normal people - the people that the advertisers that fund the servers being used want to reach. again, it's a contradiction - the advertisers want to use a platform to reach a lot of people, then need to create rules that only the elite want to follow, thereby severely restricting their audience, but without being able to avoid it. that can't work - people will stop using the service, it's inevitable. it's happening, already.

so, the result of twitter users demanding strict censorship is that nobody wants to pay for it, and you can't have any twitter at all.

i'm an anarchist; i would tell twitter users to build their own platform, but the inevitable result is co-op fees. right? these are now your options if you want a police force on your social media: build your own twitter and charge user fees, or let elon musk take the role of the state and do it, and then tax you for it. 

you can't have censorship for free, forever. if you want to be in a club, and you want bouncers at the door, you'll need to pay to get in. i'm sure there will be tiered accounts.

it's been clear for some time that google is moving in the direction, as well. i don't use facebook or pay attention to it anymore.

that doesn't mean that there won't be social networks to use for free, but you'll have to deal with less or no censorship. that's the trade-off.

as it is, twitter users asked for a leviathan and received one. it looks like a shit show to start, but i think they may actually grow to welcome and appreciate their new quasi-fascist overlord; the truth is that he's actually what they want.
9:04

tuesday, november 8, 2022

just a reminder: this is a personal blog written by a blogger and is not a news outlet written by a journalist, self-appointed or not, so the main topic of this space is myself, and not any analysis i might do, which is really just my scattered thoughts about any specific topic.

i'm not an american and cannot vote in the united states. my interest in this particular cycle is minimal, as i find the current incarnation of the democratic party to be far too conservative for me to consider them a lesser evil. women voting for the democrats to save their abortion rights are in truth being manipulated, just as the democratic party manipulates queer rights activists and climate change activists. there's little evidence that the democrats would write or pass the kind of bill being hoped for, given that they have had a majority for years and haven't managed to, yet. the so-called climate bill they just passed is in truth a subsidy bill for offshore oil drilling; biden even tried to appoint a pro-life judge, recently, in a supposed concession to mitch mcconnell. if anything, the unpopularity of abortion legislation in the african-american and latino voting demographics is something the party would be keen to move on from. is that something you really want to naively vote for, and then get the opposite of (like everything else)?

re-establishing abortion rights in specific states is going to have to be done locally, state-by-state. the sooner that this is understood, the better. it's not entirely clear how that might alter voting patterns in the midwest, particularly.

rather, i'm going to suggest that the primary issue that you should look at when you cast your vote is trying to determine which of your candidates is most in the pocket of the war industry. this isn't intuitive anymore; there was a time when there was a good chance that the democrats were less corrupt, but that hasn't been true in a long time, now. you really need to look at your specific candidates and determine which one you think is more likely to continue funding this stupid war in eastern europe, and which is more likely to try to pull funding. i can't tell you which party the candidate most likely to pull war funding represents in your riding, you need to figure that out yourself.

if i were an american, i would need to make a careful consideration by weighing out who has a chance to win with who is most likely to pull funding for the war and try to maximize the chance that i'm going to get an anti-war candidate in the house. this is going to be the single most important issue before the house for the next 6 years, as the world careens towards a world war that i do not want to have and you should not want to have, either. if you think you can block a pro-war candidate that is in the back pocket of some defence contractor, you should try. 
1:01

there is some chance that abortion may effectively splinter the democratic party back into northern and southern components, but with a race reversal. i don't think it's likely that black, southern and conservative democrats are going to rally around abortion rights the way that northern white liberals are currently doing. this is becoming the ballot issue amongst white women; statistically, a majority of black and latino women in large swaths of the united states are going to find themselves increasingly alienated from a party pushing that messaging, which is a substantive problem for the democrats, as they exist, as black and latino women are their voter base  
1:30

the divergence of northern white liberals from southern black conservatives within the democratic tent is a long standing trend. we'll have to see if abortion is the final catalyst to actualize something that is inevitable, regardless.
1:31

it is easy to predict that there will be a popular white liberal candidate that will run for the next democratic presidential nomination on abortion rights, win early northern states...and then get stonewalled by the new solid south, which is the solid black south.

when do white liberals finally admit that they're disenfranchised?
2:07

fwiw.

5:19

the fundamental mistake made in this article is deciding that job growth (and these are not good sources, they are unscientific surveys, but let's ignore that. the idea that all of these jobs were created last month has yet to be demonstrated by sound, empirical methods. those numbers might turn out to be exaggerated, or they might be downright wrong. the source is simply not reliable. given that we're dealing with an ipsos survey in canada, the results might have even been paid for by the government, who might even be trying to manipulate expectations - ipsos is a fake polling firm that presents results that were bought before hand via the scam of "online surveys". there are no margins of errors in their so-called polling. i would assign the usefulness of their methodology as being equivalent to a coin toss. but, let's put that aside.) implies increases in gdp.

job growth reflects what employers feel about the economy, it doesn't say anything about the economy itself. high job creation numbers in october are likely to primarily be mostly reflective of students taking jobs post-pandemic, in a return to normality, however fleeting. that doesn't necessarily imply anything about gdp, one way or another - and it is nothing more or less than specious to suggest it does. it's not a good guess or a strong hunch, it's just a fucking terrible, irrational, illogical argument.

if the numbers are correct, which is to be determined, my suggestion is that they reflect misplaced optimism about where the economy is headed, which is consistent with the stupidity you're seeing in the dow right now, as people inflate a market that is being chopped down at it's knees by quantitative tightening. you can call it a dead-cat bounce, but that's being generous; it's really investors refusing to face reality, and being lost in simple delusions. it's hard to hear your plans have to change because you foolishly expected the bubble to keep going forever; you'll put your faith in growth after tightening, like a religionist does in life after death. in the end, you're going to die, anyways. your faith won't save you, not in life or in quantitative tightening.

there's clearly a lot of optimism about the future right now, and a sincere desire to avoid a recession. 

faith doesn't matter. facts matter.

the market is on the brink of collapse, and the economy is already in recession. foolish investors creating absurd bubbles and employers producing absurd job numbers, if the latter is even true, cannot and will not undo the inevitable effect of money destruction & rate hikes together, which is indeed a prolonged onset of vicious stagflation.

a good day for the market to completely collapse would be wednesday.

i would get out today.

6:13

i got disarm stuck in my head some time last week (i think i heard zombie playing in the grocery store), and i've had the entirety of siamese dream running through my head ever since. it's just on loop in the background, in there.

so, i'm, like, chopping garlic and have to deal with random interjections along the lines of whispered vocals from hummer, guitar solos from soma (which require me to stop to listen), or that random voice in your head screaming that it feels no pain and that it's there and what do i want?
7:02

wednesday, november 8, 2022

i did not do a lot of analysis for the midterms this year and indicated yesterday that my primary interest, as a human being, was in getting anti-war candidates elected. this issue was not important to american voters, who are on the brink of getting into a major global war that will almost certainly feature forced conscription of american children.

i briefly looked at the polling a few days ago and tersely stated that it was obvious that the democrats were in a strong position for the senate, and would likely pick up at least 2 seats. while they have won pennsylvania and will probably hold georgia in the upcoming run-off, results in north carolina and ohio were disappointing. the democrats still have a good chance to win in wisconsin, which would eliminate the manchin cock block.

regardless of the outcome in wisconsin, it is clear that the governor will outperform the senator and the unavoidable conclusion is that state-wide elections in wisconsin are decided by a small number of racist white liberals. democrats do better in wisconsin when they run white candidates. black voters should be pragmatic about this, but they should also acknowledge the simple reality that wisconsin is a predominantly white state. democrats should seek to win seats as their primary prerogative and be pragmatic in their approaches as they do so.

i also pointed out that the most likely outcome of the election in the house, according to the 538 model, was a small republican majority that would give functional control to some of the smaller factions, like the fake leftists that aoc calls her friends. i did not do any analysis of my own, i simply read their model and presented an informed understanding of it. frustratingly, 538 went against it's own data in it's final analysis, in order to align with the media consensus, which was petrified of over-projecting a democratic outcome.

the only thing i can take credit for in correctly projecting the outcome (again. i'm good at this.) is knowing how to read models created by others. i did no work here, at all, and did not spend more than an hour analyzing polls and models. these were really casual comments, but they were almost dead-on.

what this demonstrates is the importance of seeking qualified opinions in analyzing polls, which is a point i've been making for a long time. the polls were not just correct but remarkably accurate, and all i did in presenting a correct projection is know how to read them correctly, because i have the formal education to know how to do so.
2:10

i do not think that donald trump is a serious candidate for the 2024 republican nomination. he can't get that lucky twice.
2:51

hrmmn.

this would be great.

6:09

if the district is legitimately a christian right backwater, they should actually see through this woman as a phoney, rather easily. her many moronic comments suggest she's anything but a christian, but is rather an obvious cynical opportunist that is playing her audience for idiots. the things she has said that she thought would play well with christians have merely demonstrated that she actually isn't one, but is instead cynically pretending to be one for profit. nor does should have much respect for christians.  <----rewrite this

the trumpist voting demographic is, rather, largely secular. real trumpists don't go to church; real christians would not be interested in the equally phoney trump, who is not any sort of real christian, either.

that is not to give these people any credit. i would rather see fake christians elected than real christians. yet, this outcome was actually fairly predictable, and i saw it coming quite some time ago.
6:10

she could maybe pull off a stunt like that in an urban district in florida or texas, but given that she was trying to represent an actual real christian right district full of legitimate christian crazies that actually really believe this shit, her act was bound to fail.
6:20

i mean, it's also worth pointing out that she comes off as a stupid dirty slut, and that's not the kind of thing that does well with actual right-wing christian voters.
6:24

the real christians no doubt came out to vote against the whore of babylon, and expel her from the party of the godfearing.
6:25

these are the official results as of early this morning:


i'm bringing that up because there are clearly some mistakes in the various network projections, and they seem to largely be in the democrats' favour.

i'm not reversing the projection because i don't know (i can't sort through 435 seats one by one), but the democrats are both losing and flipping seats and the margin is going to be exceedingly small, one way or the other. that boebert seat is one that is currently listed as a republican win, everywhere, and that looks like it's wrong.
6:38

i did a quick count and it's currently 219-216, giving the republicans a three seat lead, according to the ap.
7:19

the number of spoiled ballots in nevada is remarkably high:

8:22

it's not really reasonable to blame pandemic restrictions on the sitting senator, but it's also not surprising to see the abortion issue not be as important in nevada as it was in pennsylvania, michigan or wisconsin. this is a predictable demographic reality, in that nevada is dominantly catholic and hispanic (notwithstanding the vegas population) whereas the previous states are broadly liberal and white. issues that drive secular white liberals are not going to drive hispanics with the same force, and democrats need to brace for that in the south.

i would expect her to pull this off, still, as the remaining ballots are in fact largely in las vegas.
8:29

that was a detour, and i ended up losing not one but two days.

i'm still between systems, so i'm going to post this here, but it won't be here for long and i wouldn't get used to it. i'm currently looking at a probable january 1st switchover date. 

over the summer of 2022, i spent a lot of time trying to build an update post from late june to the point where i succeeded in installing linux to my chromebook. as i was doing this, it became clear to me that my writing, as it was stored on this server, was constantly being edited. i initially naively tried to get into an editing war with whatever entity is responsible for this, only to realize that it was essentially futile, as my edits were merely undone. i have deduced that the likely editor is a government and have decided it is likely the canadian government, although i have also repeatedly realized that the editors are operating from a clear and discernible pro-muslim bias, in an apparent extension of the historical translation event. i have, mostly incidentally, spent a fair amount of time deconstructing badly written islamic histories over the last several years, and in the process realized that some shady body somewhere is trying to guide the writing on the internet to have a pro-muslim bias, which is something that muslims have made a dominant attempt to do for over a thousand years. the systematic re-writing of history to display a pro-muslim bias is an intrinsic part of islamic cultural dominance in the middle east, but i never for a second thought it was something that was still happening, today, on the internet (this is something i'd assign to the translation event, which occurred from roughly 800-1200 ce, and which is the term used to describe the systematic translation of greek and latin texts into arabic, followed by their alteration to be consistent with islamic scripture and finally by the destruction of the originals. this was a massive, centralized, centuries-long undertaking that irreversibly altered huge amounts of the foundational literature of roman civilization.); to my shock and surprise, i learned the hard way that my attempts to criticize islamic narratives of history as manipulated would simply be manipulated, presumably by some unknown but very well funded and very well connected islamic entity. how much of this is being done by the canadian government and how much is being done by some other government, such as perhaps the saudi government, is not clear to me. i can only look at what's being done and draw conclusions.

yes, this is insane, but i've been under clear attack for many years now. no, i don't understand what's going on, why i've been targeted or have any idea of the extent of it. yet, i need to react to evidence, and i am certain this is being edited, eve if i can't prove it.

near the end of august, i decided i wasn't getting anywhere in spinning around in circles in editing and re-editing posts and that the list of posts i had to edit was getting unmanageable, which was throwing me into deeper and deeper levels of recursion. i decided i would have to get out, and that i could not post here. i also began to realize that it is a matter of time before this site starts to charge hosting fees, and elon musk can fuck off for setting the process in motion nearly immediately afterwards. google's messaging around deleting inactive accounts also began to worry me, as the whole point of building this ridiculous archive up in this manner is that it was supposed to be permanent. it's not going to be, so what's the point of building it?

the answer is the search function, so i decided to try to experiment with the idea of building one post per day in such a way that migrates off the page while maintaining the searchability, but i found these posts were also being edited. i then shifted to just taking the site down, while storing it temporarily in monthly archives, but that just seems to have been interpreted as being more convenient. i've come to understand that the real point of this is less about controlling information and more about controlling me, and i just don't have time for such stupid games. where am i going in doing cat and mouse chases, or playing hungry hippo in getting sites up and down? i'm at an impossible disadvantage. i can't win this struggle.

so, i started trying to shift to a monthly posting format, without being sure where i'd host it and decided i had to get a short narrative done for the previous months first, just to document events outside of the house at the least, while trying to move to the other machine. attempts to organize these various thoughts could not come together, and instead all were left unfinished: i did not finish a monthly archive for september and i did not complete a shortened narrative for the month. 

over the first few days of october, i made an attempt to get a pdf version of this site, via monthly archives, available from a google drive link, while trying to fix the typing machine (which was hacked into by the police when i went out for a bike ride, as they appear to be looking for something, which i don't remotely understand) and while trying to write the narrative. some files were uploaded, with the last one on the 9th; a file was prepared for upload on the 10th, but that didn't get uploaded. when i came in on the 12th after going for rides on the 11th and 12th, i decided to stop multitasking and instead spend a few days focusing on getting the typing machine in order, in order to do some legal work on it and switch the blogging over to it. right when i was finishing that process, the usb key i've put aside to store legal documents was targeted in a remote attack by the police  (i'm having a hard time taking this seriously, too, but it keeps happening, and i'm convinced there are spooks sitting upstairs) and i had to stop to address the issue before i could move forward on it. i then decided to spend a few days organizing my gmail (in both addresses) into folders, so i could download all of the legal attachments stored in my email and store them locally on the usb drive. after mostly organizing my thoughts and deciding that organizing the email was a prerequisite to organizing the documents (and therefore organizing the typing machine), i had to put this aside on the 21st to enjoy the last bout of warmer weather; after getting groceries on the 22nd and going out for rides on the 23rd, 24th and 25th i got back to it on the 26th and was simultaneously doing two things: compiling data for november, 2021 into archives and organizing my email. it was at this point that i came across a post from late 2021 that had been edited to reverse the meaning i was trying to convey and decided to simply take everything down, immediately. this took a few extra days and left me with only a music skeleton on all blogs, which i subsequently rebuilt over the last days of october. i then decided to finish the november, 2021 archive first, and then get to finishing the email, which i at least completed in my secondary account (i'm still working on my primary account). i also started working on october, 2021, which i had to put aside without finishing, before i went out to enjoy some warmer weather on the weekend.

i meant to get out earlier than that, but i slept in on the 1st (which was a legitimately warm day that i missed) and skipped the 2nd and 3rd because they were days where it was only legitimately warm for very short periods late in the afternoon; these were days where it was under 15 degrees until 15:00, and peaked at 18 or 19 for a few minutes late in the day. the highs are sort of misleading, in that sense: yes, it barely go to 19 on both days, but it was much colder than that until well into the afternoon, and the colder air was lingering, even as the sun peaked in the afternoon.  

friday was legitimately warm, and it may be the last legitimately warm day of the year. i was able to get out for the long ride in the afternoon at peak heat and humidity, before getting out to the grocery store in the evening, and coming in to eat and get some rest. it was still warm enough to walk around in a tank top on this day at 10:00 at night, but my plan got broken in half by the need to pass a large bowel movement when i should have been out shopping, which caused the store i wanted to go to to close. i toyed with trying to get out to some of the other stores after 22:00, but i reasoned that it would make just as much sense to stay up all night and go out early in the morning, where there would at least be some sun. it turns out that this was a mistake, as it took longer to warm up on saturday than forecast.

something seems to have happened to my bicycle when i was out on friday at the store, and it's not the first time i've noticed it. i don't understand why the police would want to vandalize my bicycle, but it's something that has happened repeatedly when i'm out. my best guess is that they're trying to get something else up and down the stairs (it's locked to the stairwell down into my apartment) and are either damaging it accidentally or purposefully in order to get that other thing up and down the stairs. whatever the reason is, the end result is that my brakes have repeatedly been damaged while i'm out, something i notice when i take my bike back out again.

i want to be clear about this because it's happened many times now: i will go out for a ride, bring my bicycle in and then leave it inside while i go for a walk somewhere, only to find the vandalism when i come back. the vandalism, specifically, is that the brakes are, for some reason, adjusted to be looser than i need to brake, something that may be a relic of other modifications. 

i did not get a chance to get any bloodwork done in october and instead went out on saturday morning to get it done as my first trip, after having taken a shower early in the morning. i only got around the corner before my bike chain halted itself, forcing me to try to figure out what was wrong with the bicycle.

i am not a bicycle technician, nor do i have any interest or aptitude i servicing bicycles. i am smart enough to figure out how a gear system operates with a little bit of trial and error, but i'm not good with tools or with proportions. i have generally been able to fix my own bicycles via trial and error, which is required because i am too poor to afford to service it, but my lack of ability doing work of this sort is inevitably going to lead to me breaking my own bicycle. unfortunately, my attempts to turn the gear shaft in order to try to understand why it was halted may have made the problem worse, and i could not have been expected to understand that without making the mistake, first.

after looking at it carefully, i decided the gears were probably gunked up with too much dried oil and tried to force the pedals forward to dislodge it. after a few tries, i realized that the pedals were halted because the brakes were closed, which did not make sense to me. eventually, after adjusting the brakes, i realized that the gears were somehow misaligned and this had actually bent the brakes. there was no sign of this when i left to go shopping on friday, but the result of trying to push the pedal forward in a bent gearing system may have severely damaged the bicycle. i didn't fully realize the extent of this until sunday night.

what i realized on saturday morning - after wasting an hour of my time on it, which is what really pissed me off, the wasted time - was that i had to adjust my brakes, so i did that and then rode out to the blood lab. the place was too busy on my first try so i took a detour around to the far store to get some groceries, including an intent to buy some calcium pills. 

i have been rigorously taking two tums between my meal and my after meal coffee for a few weeks now and it has largely hardened my stool up, except for two caveats: it stops working after bicycle rides and it runs into complications when the actual iron passes, which is violent about half of the time. what i'm learning is that something in my salad - most likely the habanero - is causing a violent reaction, but that that violent reaction only occurs after bicycling, and seems to be being pushed out by the iron, itself.  i actually think the iron is giving me diarrhea, which is reducing absorption of itself. the calcium mostly fixes it, but only if i avoid strenuous exercise, so i'm also slowly convincing myself that i have an anal fissure, and the bicycling is aggravating it. hardening the stool up has made it clear that there is no sign of bleeding, as well.

i like the hardening effects of the tums, but i don't like the fact that the tums have so much sugar in them. i decided a few weeks ago that i'd just get some sugar-free tums when i was out. that should not be difficult, right? sugar-free tums sound like something that should be available everywhere, but tums themselves stopped making them roughly ten years ago and none of their competitors ever made it in the first place. there was an equate/walmart version of tums that was labelled as being sugar-free but that included corn starch, instead, which is hardly an acceptable solution. there is apparently no such product anywhere; i spent a good part of the day saturday looking for one and speaking to baffled pharmacists, who suggested just buying calcium supplements.

i would indeed like to just but calcium supplements, but that is not a solution, either. everything else aside, i was not able to find a single calcium supplement that did not also include some form of sugar, starch or polysaccharide type affair (like maltodextrin). the better options were calcium citrate, but calcium citrate does not have the neutralizing ph of calcium carbonate (it's actually slightly acidic, due to the claim that the acidity increases absorption); the calcium carbonate options that i could find not only included sugar but were all made from oyster shells. 

the only sugar-free solution i was able to find was the limestone powder that i bought for my teeth, which is food grade but which is also exceedingly potent. i'm looking for 200-400 mg. a single teaspoon of this stuff is 1200 mg.

if tums could reconsider making a sugar-free product - or if one of the supplement companies could re-evaluate their delivery - that would be appreciated. most vitamin c supplements have sugar, but there are sugar-free vitamin c pills. likewise, my vitamin d has nothing else in it but magnesium stearate and vegetable cellulose. why is it impossible to find calcium without sugar?

it became apparent when i got back from the first trip that it was starting to warm up, so i went back to the blood lab and then intended to go out for at least a half-ride. the slower warm-up was making me worried about an early rain storm, so i wanted to be careful about not going too far. however, i also had to get out to the walmart, which was a detour from the ride route.

the ride on saturday was frustrated both by the brakes and the temperature. it was actually a temperature record here on saturday, even if it didn't feel like it due to the hurricane forced wind gusts. if you were out on saturday, you might recall the periodic pleasant 25 degree humidity, during moments when the wind eased up but the brutally cold wind beating down on you at vicious speeds was likely the far more memorable experience. i was intending to go most of the way around and turn back early, depending on the cloud cover, but even that had to be cut short due to the need to repeatedly readjust the brakes, after i reset the gears. it is reasonable to need to readjust the brakes after resetting the gears, but it was very odd to realize my gears were randomly out of alignment, and i don't understand how that could happen randomly; that could really only be vandalism. i only got about half way around before the clouds pulled me back, and that was the right decision; i was able to get to the stores and back before the wind got too vicious and the rain started falling, but just barely. what pissed  me off about this was the wasted time; i could have and should have been able to finish the full 60 k exercise routine, but instead had to waste my time on bike maintenance. 

the end result was that i'd need to wait until sunday morning to do the last bit of shopping and maybe to do a final bike run, and that at least seemed reasonable, given that it was going to be sunny on sunday, after the time change. unfortunately, the day was again slow to warm up and it never got as warm as was forecast, although it was certainly pleasant (if still very windy) in the afternoon. i was able to get to all four stores within walking distance and get everything i wanted, except that:

1) there was no grapefruit juice at the food basics and
2) the soy milk was no longer on sale at the shopper's

as these were the last two items for the month, and it was still relatively warm, i decided to go back out on my bicycle to look for grapefruit juice at a different food basics and to try a few different stores for the soy milk.

when i took the bicycle out, what i first noticed is that it was creaky, which is something i hadn't ever noticed before. i began to notice that the pedal on the left side lacked normal tension, and that the gears were behaving oddly (again), but i was able to get to the store to get the juice and get back. it was when i went out a second time to get some soy milk that the back brake started making some strange sounds and the bicycle stopped moving at a sufficient pace. i was too far to turn around before i realized i had a flat.

flat tires happen when you bicycle; if anything, the fact that i hadn't had a flat on this bicycle since 2018, given the frequency i rode it at, was unusual. i was long overdue. yet, i didn't realize the extent of it. i decided i'd get my soy, walk the bike home and take the opportunity to change the tube as an excuse to reset the gears and the brakes. i changed my brake pads about a year ago and thought it would be best to reseat them altogether, to make sure everything was aligned.

after getting the tire off, i realized that there was a hole in it. i cannot tell if the hole in the tire is due to wear or vandalism; it doesn't look like it was cut through with a very sharp knife, but i would beleve it was serrated through with a less sharp knife. i just can't tell, but the premise of a tire wearing through like that due to use strikes me as obscure. i have been bicycling for 35 years and i've never worn a tire out before.

nonetheless, it is abundantly clear that i need to replace the tire, along with the tube.

more concerning is that i realized that the bicycle crank arm is disconnected from the frame and i don't know if that's actually fixable. apparently, that is often the death of a bicycle. i've ridden this thing pretty hard over the last five years, anyways; the bike was given to me by my grandmother in 2012 (she bought it for herself and did not use it) and sat for a while after i moved before i fixed it in 2017. what is it worth to fix it? given that i would replace it with something second-hand, for cheap, the answer is "not a lot". i feel an obligation to at least try.

i need to purchase a ratchet in order to disassemble it as the one wratchet i have is too small. i should probably have a wratchet, anyways. i can handle that.

however, this is a level of damage that may be beyond repair and, if that is the case, i may need to put the biking down for a while.

i still have my detroit bike, as well, although i'd have to fix the flat. that is likely the easier task, for now.

i'm disappointed, but i can't undo it. i do, however, wish i knew why my bicycle is often damaged when i leave it inside when i go out. if this is how the police behave, who needs criminals?

i wanted to get a start on that on monday in order to potentially get out tomorrow. it's not clear to me if that's still feasible or not.

as it is, i still have to finish filing the email in the other account, as well, as i shift back to fixing the typing machine. it is going to get cold again on saturday, so i could be inside for a while, whether i can get out tomorrow or not - and right now it seems likely to be "not".
11:15

what we're learning is that the legislatively required inquiry into the government's use of the emergency powers act, which is supposed to be strictly about the government, is in truth a classic show trial for the participants in the protest.

the government here is indeed in very dangerous territory.
18:32

there is indeed a longstanding understanding that breton and basque fisherman made it to newfoundland before columbus made it to haiti, if not before the norse landed in baffin island, labrador, newfoundland and, by some accounts, sailed as far south as virginia. they may have had access to norse maps of the region that the romanized european monarchies did not. i need to point out yet again that roman and swedish civilization were very distinct entities until roughly the year 1500 and that the norse would not have necessarily shared their findings with the latins or the franks - the french or the spanish. there was a dramatic cultural, linguistic and religious gap between the latins and the norse. there's some thought that the irish or welsh ventured in that direction early on as well, and what connection that had to the norse settlement (iceland, for example, is as irish as it is norse) has never been really clear. the migration from the european coastal (breton and basque) fisherman was seasonal, and they just came to fish, not to trade or build. there's no evidence of first contact.

it is entirely plausible that a breton or norman fisherman may have dropped the coin in the water, and that it may have washed up there, as a result of it.

that said, this actually sounds like a forgery, to me.

22:05

there are no reliable records indicating when these fisherman first arrived in north america, and the general argument is that no evidence exists to frame a theory around, so it can't be done, even if it's compelling on it's face. there is some suggestion that they may have been there in the 1300s or earlier, but it's worse than hearsay. the greenland settlement existed from roughly 985 to 1500, when it seems to have been abandoned. it is not clear where the settlers went, but the way the abandoned settlement was discovered later on is indicative of a sudden disaster, like a volcano or a tsunami. 

the fact that the region was in the norse world for 500 years - a world that included britain and northern france - makes it far from unlikely that there were maps circulating amongst viking...traders...and basque or celtic fisherman. due to the immense cultural barrier between the swedes and italians, there's not any good reason that the maps would have ended up in an imperial or colonial roman european court, which would have considered the swedes to be useless and ignorant heathens, savages and barbarians. what did they know?

if this coin is real, it may be the first evidence of european fishermen in the region before the 1490s, and perhaps well before the 1490s.
22:42

no, that doesn't have anything to do with what the stupid pope said, nor is it relevant in attempting to corrupt a religious doctrine designed to stop the spaniards and portugese from fighting with each other over africa, instead of working together to drive the muslims back to arabia.
22:43

the reason i'm presenting the cultural barrier is to point out that it's not really necessary to argue there was a conspiracy to hide the location of the distant fishing holes out in the ocean. the fisherman need not have any idea where they were, either. the basques certainly weren't expecting a spanish inquisition (it's too early for that) about where they went when they sailed out to sea to fish. the norse, who were granted a plot of land in northern france from which they conquered england and sicily from, knew greenland and vinland were there; that wasn't a secret at all. the reason the latin european courts didn't realize that there was a giant continent out there is because they didn't consider the swedes to be a civilization worthy of having a conversation with, not because there was some deep conspiracy theory amongst sneaky vikings to hide it from them. in fact, there are walrus tusks from the period all over europe that ultimately came from greenland and were generally sold as unicorn horns.

there's legends that the carthiganians use to sail out past the pillars of hercules and come back with boatloads of gold. this is framed to us in terms of a conspiracy theory without an answer - the history books tell us this happened, and the carthaginians refused to divulge the source of wealth. where did the gold come from? south africa? mexico? we don't know.

likewise, we know the byzantines kept the state secret of the greek fire for centuries. they use to light the water on fire; that was magic and sorcery to their barbarian foes. we guess it's some kind of napalm, but we don't actually know. the fact that columbus sailed out 50 years after the fall of constantinople is usually explained as a search for better trade routes, but it's easy to wonder. 

so, it's not entirely crazy to think it was a conspiracy; that happens, in history. it really does. they say the greatest trick the devil can play on you is convincing you he doesn't exist, in which case he's get me fooled, but the point stands: conspiracies are a part of history. the american revolution was a giant conspiracy.

it's not necessary, though. latin disinterest in the norse, and a general lack of cultural interchange between the latin and the norse, is enough of an explanation.
23:11

thursday, november 10, 2022

might mr. biden acknowledge that the amount of sleep he requires on a nightly basis is a national security issue, as he decides against running in 2024?

he should not misinterpret the results.

as i stated would be the case many months ago, mr. biden was not a ballot issue in the midterms.
3:09

i was considering going out to fix my detroit bike (which has had a flat since late 2019) and then going for a ride, but i am not going to be able to do that at this point and am going to miss the last bikeable day due to the flat. that's disappointing, but it's life.

the detroit bike is a mountain bike for a 15 year-old or somebody that is otherwise in the 5 foot 3 to 5 inch height range. i'm 5 foot 7 (my parents were within a half inch of each other, and essentially the same height). i believe my sister is also exactly that height, but she might be a little taller than me. my maternal grandmother was taller than all of us, even as an old woman, and i have an aunt on my mom's size that is over 6 feet tall; my dad's side is all around the same size. my mom's shorter stature is unusual on her side, but she also looks a lot less swedish than the rest of them, in general. it would be specious to assign it to the sephardic genes, but there might be some truth to it (she also has some irish, but the irish is actually mostly norse, too). i bought it for a low price to get between bars on the other side of the border in the middle of the night, and to get back to the tunnel after late shows (which i couldn't do when i was on foot), and it worked well for that purpose, but it's not big enough to be an exercise bike. the smaller size offsets the fact that it's also a mountain bike, which means it is that much harder to ride over long distances. the bike i've been using for exercise is an adult hybrid, which is the perfect size and weight for me, given that the main goal is cardio (and i am making an  explicit effort to ensure i do not build muscle, as that is the last thing i'd want, for obvious reasons). i am pretty toned, but i am entirely free of any muscle mass on my body and want to keep it that way, thank you.

what i was considering doing was just fixing it for today, but i don't want to spend all of my $200 inflation check on fixing bike tubes. even if it only costs $20 to fix this backup bike, which is a lowball, i'm just going to put it away again, for who knows how long. i may very well end up riding it for the winter and buying a new bike in the spring, but i need to determine if i can fix my existing bike before i start putting money into the backup. i believe the tire was slit and i'll have to replace at least one tire and probably two tubes. i'm also going to want to get backups.

i have a backup tire for the bigger bike, but i don't want to change the tube until i know if i can fix the arm. if i have to let go of this bike, so be it. for now, i'm going to order a wratchet set, instead, and wait this one out. i'm expecting this cold snap to be short-lived, but i don't think we'll see another 20 degree day, and it's disappointing to not have anything to do outside in it, with the broken bicycle. alas.
13:23

i put well over 5,000 km on that bicycle this summer. it might have been closer to 10,000.
13:34

this is the primary problem:


that gap opened up some time last weekend, and i think it was bent out of shape by a misaligned gear. i do not know how the gears became misaligned; it seems to have happened when i was walking to the grocery store.

i will need to get a wratchet to disconnect it, clean it and try to hammer it back in. if it stays put, great. if it doesn't, i'll need to replace it, and it will probably make more sense to buy something used on kijiji, instead.

i do not buy new bicycles at the store, it's bad for the environment.
13:54

this is the tire that needs to be replaced:



while it clearly looks like the tire was "worn out", i've never actually seen that before and find it hard to actually believe.
13:59

that's what you get for voting republican, florida.

serves you right.

where's your god, now?
14:19

how were the blood test results on saturday?

my hormones were a little off of where i want them, but i can explain that by it being at the end of the cycle due to prioritizing fasting. i took my pills around 23:00 the previous evening, with the intent to get the blood done early, but the weather didn't warm up until later, and then i lost an hour due to the bicycle being broken, and then had to go back to the lab because it was too full the first time. i didn't get the blood drawn until close to 13:00, meaning it had been 14 hours since my last application; i try to take them every 8-12 hours. i'll be taking some more tests before the end of the month and expect those levels to renormalize.

the cholesterol - which is what i was more concerned about - was great, though.

total: 3.68
hdl: 1.77
ldl: 1.58

that was on a 14 hour fast. i was a little worried because my diet is going to shift in the upcoming weeks, as i try to isolate what i'm reacting badly to.

my eosinophils were up a little, but i'm going to decide that was allergies. i had a runny nose on saturday and sunday and was coughing a little.

the iron is trending down a little, but i'm still in a comfortable range. i need to remind you again of all the exercise. that is going to reduce this month, so we'll see if that makes a difference or not.

my vitamin d, surprisingly, increased to 110, which is one of the highest readings. i hadn't eaten since the previous night, but i was out in the sun fixing my bike, and it was bright and sunny in the minutes leading up to the draw. alp was low at 41. pth was great, at 3.8. this is a weird result that i'm going to mostly assign to having just been out in the sun at midday, but it also suggests my vitamin d stores are in good shape. it is a reminder that d fluctuates; i'm more interested in the fact that my pth came back down, which is a nice surprise. i would not expect that to continue, but i'm doing the experiment for a reason and we'll find out what happens.

my doctor wants an appointment and i suspect it's about the hormones. i've asked him to increase the dose in the past and he's said he can't, so i may be a little sly about this. however, i don't think the results are indicative of anything other than the fast, and i expect the results i get at the end of november, before the appointment, will be back to normal.

so, the answer is that the bloodwork is great, with that caveat about the hormones, and that i'll need to monitor the bone and iron related tests over the winter, as was the plan.
14:53

i would like my estrogen higher than 700 and can get it there by taking pills every ten hours. they won't prescribe that; they have me on every 12 hours. this can get me in the 400-600 range, which is considered acceptable, but which i don't consider ideal. the result was a hair under that, which, as mentioned, does make sense, given the time lag.

if i can get him to overprescribe based on the reading, great.

i should just listen to what he says, first, and only interject if i have to.
15:00

i mean, i don't have testicles, anymore. the doctor now has an obligation to make sure my estrogen is at sufficient levels, to prevent me from getting osteoporosis. this is a permanent, irreversible and not debatable reality - i will need to be on substantive estrogen supplements for the rest of my life.
15:01

the russian withdrawal from kherson was broadcast some time ago.

the russians seem to be using the same approach that was used to defeat napoleon, which is to tactically withdraw with the intent of starving them to death.

the ukrainians should not be exporting grain, right now.
15:32

the republicans are currently sitting at 221 and the democrats are sitting at 214.

however, this includes the following seats that i think are going to flip:

- colorado's 3rd. it looks like more blue vote is coming in than red vote.
- california's 13th. the same is true, here.
- oregon's 5th. this is also true, here.
- arizona's second, where the pima county vote is likely to be decisive, and flip the seat. this is no doubt about abortion.

that would put the result at 218-217, and the democrats would hold the house.
17:34

friday, november 11, 2022

i posted a fair amount of analysis when this first started about how the bank's real concern is reducing relative wages, which has nothing to do with controlling inflation, but has a lot to do with increasing profit.

let us recall marxism 101.

what is profit, also known as surplus value? the answer is that it is the difference between what a capitalist charges for a product and what it pays it's employees to make it. all profit is theft, by definition; the higher that wages are, the less that the capitalist class is able to steal from the working class. conversely, when wages are higher, less wealth is being stolen from workers by the capitalist class.

all wealth in the hands of the capitalist class has been stolen from the working class, which generates and should control all wealth. socialists argue that the capitalist class is superfluous and should be abolished. they're just useless, worthless thieves that should be sent to work camps to atone for their crimes.

what macklem is really saying - and competent economists have seen through this from the start - is that the reason they are increasing interest rates is to attempt to reduce employment in order to create a greater supply of labour than there is demand for it (note: the idiots tried to edit this to reverse the meaning of it. this is the kind of post i expect to be targeted for editing. it should be clear from the context of the post what it is that i'm trying to say, which is that the central bank is trying to push wages down in order to increase corporate profits), which then suppresses wages. immigration also has this effect, and it is this wage suppression that right-wing liberal politicians are really referring to when they talk about this make-believe "worker shortage" that requires unprecedented immigration levels to solve.

"worker shortage" is just code for "we want to flood the labour market with excess workers so that we can suppress wages, in order to increase the amount of surplus value we are stealing from workers, which we call profit.". capitalists do not care about access to healthcare or housing for members of the working class. trudeau won't even return phone calls regarding health care transfers, and is rather obviously trying to privatize it. this is actually terrible economic policy, as canada gains an immense competitive advantage from it's health care system, but trudeau is very much a legitimate right-wing idiot when it comes to his clear faith in market theory. the party really needs to step in on this.

is there a relationship between inflation and employment? no, there is not; it was theorized that that was the case in the middle of the last century, but the relationship was thoroughly empirically debunked. some attempts to manipulate data to save the relationship have arisen, but they invariably break down after a few years, as well. it's just wrong. however, high interest rates will always eventually produce a recession, if you hold to them for long enough and that will always decrease employment. when employment decreases, wages also decrease, which increases profit. the correct relationship, then, is that higher interest rates create higher profits, and that is really what is driving the bank's policies. we live in a capitalist dictatorship, where the investor class legislates itself above the law; it is workers that will pay for the war, not investors. 

your wages will need to be decreased in order to pay for the war, by central bank dictate. if you thank that's bad, just wait until they conscript you. they don't send their kids to die, after all. 

it's easy to read through the speech and scratch your head and say "this was debunked fifty years ago. what is he talking about?", but this is naive. mr. macklem is not intending to be taken seriously. these words are not a reflection of serious policy. this is a propaganda announcement by a politician that is very consciously telling you what he's doing, and obscuring his motives at the same time. it's right out of orwell.

the banks and the political class are working together to reduce wages in order to increase the amount they are stealing from workers. the correct response to this is a labour movement that has the intent of socializing resources and placing them under the common ownership of the people, and not in the hands of an exploitative capitalist class.
6:37

i've never been to kherson, but it looks like a nice place.

i will repeat a question i asked previously - is it really necessary to destroy it?
7:44

this canadian does request you put down the vodka and have a moment of sober second thought.
7:49

it's relatively easy to understand what the russians are doing, and it's what they should have done in the first place.

this is based on a slightly old map from the italian embassy, but i wanted one without any arrows on it.

right now, the russians are bogged down defending areas that lack natural defences, and fighting gruelling hand to hand combat that eliminates their vast superiority. if you reduce the conflict to guys fighting with guns, the russians lose their advantage. the ukrainians have guys with guns, too. that kind of war will go on for 100 years, as nobody can win, when it's just guys with guns shooting at each other. so long as the ukrainian forces in the east can be resupplied, the russians are left without an end game.


worse, the russians have had their own supply lines bombed out. the difference here is that the russians are relying on a small number of choke points, whereas the ukrainians have a large, contiguous country behind the war. the russians can't bomb out the two or three bridges that the ukrainians have, because the ukrainians have dozens or hundreds of different transit options.

this is a consequence of bad tactics by the russians, which is the result of them not taking the situation seriously.

pulling back to behind the dnieper is the smart decision to make and they should have done it a long time ago. if they were going to move into kherson, they should have moved rapidly to odessa, but it wouldn't ultimately resolve the problem, even if they had. if they had moved to odesa, the truth is that they'd just have that much larger of a front to defend against an endless supply line from central europe and, so long as it's guys with guns shooting at each other, this is an algorithm for infinite carnage.

they really should not have crossed the dnieper in the first place, they should have advanced to the river, bombed out the bridge, taken up defensive positions and moved north up the river in a single offensive, designed to control the waterway. that is now the clear logical next step, and they are already bombing north of zaporizhzhia.


as they move up the river, they will need to destroy the bridges, thereby breaking the supply lines into the east and making it relatively easy to move into the rest of the eastern part of the country, from bases in russia. i say relatively because these particular guys with guns are true believers and are going to fight to the death. without supply lines, they will eventually starve to death.

this will make it a lot harder to invade the other side of the country, which is no doubt why it wasn't done, but the situation is now requiring it. the russians are not going to be able to just plow over the ukrainians from the donbass and drive over the dneiper, with the country's infrastructure taken in tact; they're going to have to break the supply lines by destroying the infrastructure and ultimately complete the process in two phases. they will then (eventually) need to invade the other side of the river from belarus, in order to finish the job. now, we'll get the secret war in belarus, if it hasn't already started.

kiev will then also need to be sacked.

unfortunately.
13:34

what i'm worried about is the russians burning down kherson on the way out.

you should look up the russian abandonment of moscow during the napoleonic wars, and the logic that went into it. napoleon thought they were crazy, but consider the source. when napoleon thinks you're crazy, right? it was actually a great example of dour russian logic.

if they had stayed to fight, moscow would have burned, and many people would have died. if they destroyed the city and left, moscow would still burn, but the people would survive. the logical solution, then, is to leave, and burn the city down on your way out, if the city is to burn, anyways - that way, at least the people survive. pure logic. i love that.

kherson is in a similar situation. the russians could no doubt defend the city, but it would be destroyed, and many people would die. it is logical to withdraw, if a victory will be so pyrrhic. withdrawal, however, is likely defined as destruction.
13:38

you have to realize how big ukraine is. i don't think the russian generals did.

just the eastern side of the dnieper is roughly the same size as germany. this is a big region to try to erect boundaries around, even if the population is largely on your side (which is the case, despite the propaganda on tv).

the russians just evacuated 150,000 people out of kherson (pre-war population: ~275,000), and cnn wants to show you pictures of the depopulated city celebrating. it's absurd.

the current population is something like 20,000 people. certainly, if you're still there, it's because you didn't want to leave. you might not be alive for much longer, though.
14:49

i do not use twitter and i do not intend to start, but i'm interested in the fiasco as a form of entertainment. out here in the real world, twitter users are largely seen as whiny, coddled, over grown children. i stated previously that they called for a leviathan, and have received one.

the only way twitter users are going to get the twitter they want is if they pay for it, whether they realize it or not.

might i interject: is it not the responsibility of individuals to determine the validity of the information they read, rather than the responsibility of the leviathan to determine it for them?

let the fake accounts be - and teach people how to evaluate information more effectively. it's a teachable moment, truly.
23:29

saturday, november 12, 2022

a positive result in the election where i am in south detroit is that the democrats have won majorities in the state congress for the first time in decades. michigan democrats have been in the minority for so long that they are not corrupted by the kind of opportunism that exists in your typical liberal type of party. it sounds confusing, but a pragmatic or a moderate would be certain to become a republican in michigan, because they want to govern and not to oppose. the legislators coming into the congress are consequently going to be actual liberals, and are going to be passing actual left-wing legislation.

i generally criticize the democrats for being too conservative. i don't expect that to be the case in michigan, this session.

it might be difficult to hold the congress, which is why they will need to work quickly.

abortion will be the primary priority, because they have been given a clear mandate. they also have an exceedingly clear mandate to shut down that pipeline, which is something i'm excited about. 

(note: i would never use a stupid, bourgeois word like "agenda", and the sentence structure being forced on to this post, which i have attempted to undo, is exceedingly upper class. i don't write like a journalist and i don't want my writing edited to make it seem as though i do. i am not a journalist; i vehemently reject that characterization. i use non-standard grammar intentionally, and purposefully break linguistic rules in order to prioritize expression over formality. go take your bourgeois english major bullshit and cram it up your pretentious ass.)
0:44
saturday, november 12, 2022

it's becoming clear that it will not be decided who has a majority in the house of representatives until a recount of a handful of seats is completed.

the republicans do not have enough seats for a majority, at this time.

i am not the only person that saw this result in the polling, and all i did was know how to read the polls.
21:33

it will be interesting to see how scientifically illiterate journalists - which basically means all of them - attempt to navigate this issue from a dunning-kruger perspective. in terms of meaningful education, journalists are just glorified grammarians, and they really have no business saying much of anything about science.

it is true that your immunity to a virus will not wane over time, which is why vaccines don't "run out" and you don't need boosters to increase circulating antibodies. the reason you need updates is to protect against new variants, as viruses evolve, and your immune system is an arms race. i do not expect most of these idiots will even understand the fact that they're contradicting themselves, or that it would matter much if they did, given the ubiquity of doublethink in the media. to your average ignorant journalist, whether immunity wanes or not depends on if it's convenient in advancing an argument.

there is, in fact, sound science underlying the idea that children, specifically, might be experiencing higher levels of infection due to being shielded from developing their immune systems, but this is not about immune systems "wearing out" like an atrophied muscle but rather better compared to muscle mass never building in the first place due to malnutrition. children do not have inborn immunity to anything, so if you do not expose your children to pathogens then they will not develop immunity to them. further, while your immune system will not "wear out", the efficiency and effectiveness of an immune system is certainly proportional to how often it is used. you need to train your immune system to be efficient, and it will not be efficient if you don't train it.

in theory, your body shouldn't react differently to a live virus than it does to a a dead one (these rna vaccines, on the other hand, are only pieces of viruses, and i don't like the idea of training my immune system to react to distorted stimuli. i have committed to receiving a full virion or inactivated vaccine, should one become available. that is currently not the case.), but staying inside and hiding from evil spirits that you think are going to get you will absolutely deprive your body of the training it requires to identify pathogens, which will make it more difficult to defeat them later on.

this is not technically an anti-vaccine position, but the skeptics are correct to question the value of sheltering young children from routine pathogens. sheltering old people makes more sense, but your kids will need to learn to fight their own battles in the end, and you are in truth merely severely harming them by trying to shield them from reality.

so long as everything goes back to normal relatively soon, the vast majority of these kids shouldn't experience any long term damage, but the world is a disgusting place that is full of hidden and constantly evolving pathogens and any child that is kept sheltered from that at a young age will eventually need to undergo a baptism by fire, which is an inevitably stressful and potentially dangerous event that could have and should have been avoided. it is in truth exceedingly likely that the pandemic restrictions are in fact a dominant factor in the larger hospitalization rates amongst children for the flu and other flu-like diseases, right now.

don't let ignorant and barely educated journalists try to confuse you into thinking otherwise.

20:43

the primary historical example of this phenomenon is the effect that old world diseases had on native american populations after first contact. the indigenous people of the americas were not born with genetically inferior immune systems, and a native american child would not be any more likely to die of smallpox than a european child. the reason that old world diseases had such a disproportionate effect on the indigenous populations is that native american adults were not exposed to and did not develop immunity to them when they were children (when their immune systems were strongest) and were then unable to defeat them as adults.

this is, incidentally, why it is so important to make sure that monkeypox does not mutate into a more deadly strain, as almost nobody has immunity to it.
22:06

it is estimated that various common european diseases that white kids defeated easily in childhood killed upwards of 90% of the indigenous population.
22:08

there is no such thing as "inborn immunity". that is pseudo-science.

there is, however, good evidence that immunity can be passed via breast milk and also via the placenta, and the question as to whether that might be inherited from distant ancestors (whether a child could inherit antibodies from a grandmother or great-grandmother via sequential applications of breastfeeding) is still open.

that would be obscure, in regard to smallpox or the flu, as it would require the antibodies to be circulating through all ancestral pregnancies (in order to inherit a smallpox antibody from your grandmother, both your grandmother and your mother would have had to have had exposure to smallpox when they were pregnant or breastfeeding). the reason that indigenous populations in the americas experienced such high rates of mortality is that they weren't exposed to these diseases as children, could not train their immune systems to eliminate them and then weren't able to defeat them as adults.

you can pluck a kid out of the rainforest and teach them to speak english and do algebra. that plucked kid would very likely defeat smallpox as a child, if exposed, as well.
22:20

sunday, november 13, 2022

the majority party in the senate has now been determined; everybody expects that the democratic candidate will get the most votes in georgia, as well. this effectively eliminates the manchin cock block, and it opens up the question as to whether the republicans might even want to throw the state.

certainly, republicans must think they have a good chance to beat manchin in the next senate election. making him irrelevant for a few years would help, in that task.

it does not help democrats to have manchin continue to be elected, either. 

this might be seen as a positive outcome for the democrats, but it is actually a seat short of my projection: i expected them to win all of the seats they won (as well as georgia), plus at least one of the following: {wisconsin, north carolina, ohio}. i was really expecting them to win in wisconsin, given that abortion was on the ballot and wisconsin is an overwhelmingly (85%+) white state.

the democratic candidate for governor in wisconsin was re-elected, which is state-wide, and it does not look like the governor won a majority in any county except the two democratic ones (i would have to turn on javascript at the new york times site to be sure, which would require me to log in, which i won't do). 

i am presenting numbers to you, at this time. that is all.

vote counts:

tony evers: 1,358,662
tim michels: 1,268,203
joan ellis beglinger: 26,987

ron johnson: 1,336,870
mandela barnes: 1,310,416

delta: 
democrats: 1,358,662 - 1,310,416 =  48246
republicans: 1,336,870 - 1,268,203 = 68667

(edit: doing arithmetic in public is generally not advised.)

the independent candidate in the election for governor was a right-wing extremist on abortion. 68667-26987 = 41680.

tony evers received roughly 40,000 more votes than mandela barnes and tim michels received roughly 40,000 less votes than ron johnson. the third party candidate makes the math a little bit unneat, but doesn't change it. the difference is strictly in rural and republican held counties, as evers won both of the two democratic counties. 

ron johnson is not a moderate and is not getting votes due to his pragmatic vision or his centrist policies. wisconsonites are not electing ron johnson due to a desire to hug the centre, and that is not why he is winning the state.

rather, i claim that the democrats would have won in wisconsin if they had run a white candidate. that is a claim i can suggest by pointing to these numbers, but that i could only prove by doing the experiment. yes, the candidates for office in wisconsin are determined by the voters in wisconsin.

i do not want you to respond emotionally to my claim; rather, i want you to answer two questions, in the process of generating a rational response:

1) do you think that my claim is true?
2) after you have decided if my claim is true or not, do you think that my suggestion is acceptable?

you might decide i'm right, but that you would rather that wisconsin run a black candidate and lose than that they run a white candidate and win. if that is your position, you should be prepared to articulate it as is in an attempt to defend it.

it is up to wisconsin primary voters to determine who their candidates for office are, but that doesn't change the fact that the data is clear - democrats can win in wisconsin when they run white candidates; democrats cannot win state-wide offices in wisconsin when they run black candidates. the reason for this is due to the presence of a small number of racially motivated and otherwise politically liberal voters in the counties that currently have the balance of power in state-wide elections. this is the reality in wisconsin. it doesn't matter if anybody likes reality; what matters is that reality is real.

a third ron johnson victory is a very poor outcome for black voters in wisconsin.

a major ballot issue for black voters in wisconsin is voting rights. white voters are less concerned about voting rights and more concerned about abortion rights. given what the data says, what is the most rational way for black voters to behave in the next wisconsin primary in order to protect or advance their voting rights?
4:07

are there similar lessons for democrats in north carolina and republicans in georgia, or even for republicans in pennsylvania?

there might be. the demographics in these states present a more complicated picture. i would certainly question the wisdom of republicans running a muslim for senate in pennsylvania, given that they need to win large majorities in the rural areas as a pre-requisite to being competitive.

however, the race issue in wisconsin (which is 85%+ white) is overwhelmingly obvious and i will restrict my analysis to the senate race there.
4:43

very few people would think it would make sense to run a white candidate in a district where more than 85% of the population is black.
4:51

to finish a thought from last night: the history books are unfortunately rampant with this idea of "inborn immunity" to smallpox amongst european populations, due to outdated or blurry ideas about the inheritance of immunity, which we know today is pseudoscience. immunity, like language, is 100% acquired and has no genetic component; genes only affect immunity via malfunction (auto-immune disorders) or accident (sickle cell anemia). due to this, it's been difficult to find a direct reference to indigenous children having a lower mortality rate to smallpox than indigenous adults.

i found this:

Not surprisingly, Indian children at Cumberland House appeared to survive smallpox more frequently than did their parents, though the sample size is not sufficiently large to be conclusive.

this is a first hand account of the issue from the 18th century. he also talks about the europeans being exposed to smallpox as children, and points out that the disease was so efficient at killing the indigenous populations that survivors would have died of starvation, given the lifestyles of the indigenous people, at the time. that would be especially true for very young children.

there are obvious ethical implications regarding an experiment of this sort, but the fact is that the spread of disease happened so quickly - and was so efficient - that there wouldn't have been time to define one.

6:13

UPDATE: HERSCHEL WALKER TRADED TO MINNESOTA FOR AL FRANKEN

this is just in, breaking news:

for the first time in his life, herschel walker has realized that republicans are racist. i repeat: herschel walker has now realized that republicans are racist.

"i just ain't never thought about it before", he responded, when asked directly. "i don't want to sit with no racists".

in reaction, he is demanding a trade.
10:57
as before, there is no possibility that i will adhere to a mask mandate.
15:32

the burden of responsibility to evade infection falls strictly on the individual.

let the weak stay in, or die if they choose not to.
15:33

i would only support mask mandates in healthcare settings that involve vulnerable people. if i make a choice that brings a virus to somebody that might be substantively harmed by it, and they cannot evade that, i have the duty of care to behave responsibly and can be reasonably charged with negligence if i act recklessly. otherwise, the question as to whether the vulnerable are behaving reasonably or not is paramount - not whether the strong are.

we need to stop with the authoritarian dictates and get back to a reasonable person standard. there are some exceptions, but almost all situations will require the vulnerable to take reasonable steps to protect themselves, with a very high burden of proof towards negligence in regards to the general behaviour of the general public.
15:38

going to a concert or a store without wearing a mask is not negligent or reckless, unless you are at high risk, in which case the negligence only lies upon yourself.

we know that vaccines do not work well and that cloth masking is useless. for the vulnerable to ignore that and just act like they don't need to take special precautions is self-negligence, and that is how the situation should be approached from now on and how it should have always been approached in the first place.
15:41

the only reasonable limitation to impose on individuals, in context, is a duty to stay home, if you know you're sick. if you're coughing and sneezing and out and about, that would be negligent; you should not do that.
15:52 

i understand that i have a different concept of the social contract than is typical amongst contemporary fake leftists, but the proudhonian social contract is actually relatively well represented by existing tort law.

this might be helpful:
16:00

i'm, broadly, further left than proudhon, who i consider to have been far too pro-market. however, he got a lot of things right, too. 
16:01

i tend to cite marx directly on economics and either proudhon or kropotkin directly on social organization. i will get as liberal paine or mill on political theory. i do not like or respect authority.
16:03

i don't want to downplay the effects of these kids getting rsv, but rsv is a fact of life and while the term "immunity debt" is certainly kind of fascist, there is going to be a backlog of exposure as a consequence of over-sheltering. it's not helpful to blame freaked out parents for following instructions, but your children must defeat rsv when they are young, some percentage will fail and that is not avoidable. when they look at the stats five years from now, it will balance out.

we do remarkably well for child mortality, here.

if you think your kid is extra vulnerable, you may want to shelter them a little longer. otherwise, you want your kid to get this over with as young as possible.

ordering me to wear a mask is not rational and will not help your child and i won't have it.
19:19
monday, november 14, 2022

the russians will need to send a crystal clear message to these uppity ukrainians that the time window for negotiations has passed, and that their country will now need to be obliterated, their capital will need to be destroyed and their leaders will need to be executed.

there can be no further negotiations until kiev is in ruins.
7:04

these bufoons have created their problems for themselves by behaving irrationally. nobody should feel bad for what is about to happen to them.
7:05

this is why stalin had to starve them - they're illogical.

it's too bad he didn't finish the job; putin will have to pick up where he left off.
7:16

there's some suggestion that the russians are moving a large number of forces into brest, belarus. 

i've been focusing on cutting off the dnieper to break the supply lines, but another approach would be to march down the polish border, although that means controlling the air space.

one way or another, the russians are finally realizing the importance of cutting kiev off from central europe. that is a positive sign.
7:43

tuesday, november 15, 2022

the russians must address the supply chain. they can't fight an endless war against central europe and pretend there's some magic line at the polish border they can't cross. this is where the ukrainian nazis are getting their weapons, and the russians have no choice but to bomb it out.

there have been missile attacks into russia. history will not record this as unprovoked.

18:18

to understand what the russians are doing around the dnieper, realize this point: the wider the dnieper is, the more of a defense it forms.

the western media has done a good job in confusing people about this, but the russians are obsessed with defending themselves and this is entirely about a russian defense strategy.
18:27

should the poles be worried about an attack?

the most likely truth is that the russians locked into a target, and the target either pulled back into poland, or never crossed the border. the media wants you to think the russians are missing targets, but the truth is that their missiles have better accuracy than western ones do. the way they work is that they electronically lock into a target and then, using satellites, track that target, which then sends instructions back to the missile to change course. we all continue to imagine missiles as dumb projectiles, like the old v2 rockets, but the term "smart bomb" comes from the first iraq war, which was now 30 years ago. if the russians sent a missile to hit a truck coming out of poland, and the truck saw it coming, the truck might have turned around and driven back into poland - in which case the missile would have followed it across the border. this is actually a demonstration of successful russian tracking, if that is what happened.

i mentioned at the start of this that the russians think their hypersonic missiles change the balance of power, in the sense that the west doesn't have anything that can stop them. the russians are no doubt using the missile barrages in the way i suggested - to take out ukrainian defenses and to test to see what defenses the ukrainians actually have - but they're also getting rid of old missiles, as they replace warehoused last gen missiles with these new hypersonic missiles. ukraine is in truth getting hammered by surplus russian rockets, that the russians are just trying to use up. the kremlin wouldn't want them to fall into the hands of terrorists.

the premise that they missed - oops - is not real in contemporary warfare. does that mean they targeted poland?

as mentioned, probably not, but the next line of defenses west of the dnieper is the carpathians, which is the defense line that stalin wanted in place, and crosses into the baltic sea across the vistula. this would be a russian objective, in the long run. right now, it would be an insane suggestion for a number of reasons, including that there are three (perhaps soon to be four) nato backed states north-east of the vistula.

however, if the russians have decided that we're too far gone - that this war in it's worst definition cannot be avoided - then they might give it a try, to attempt to cut nato off at the narrowest part of the eurasian plain.

i mean, these are the two options - the vistula as a border, leading towards the carpathians, and eventually south to the danube, below the mountains or the dnieper, north into belarus, which would require some other solution to the north west of it's source.

it's easy to understand why the russians would much rather focus on the vistula. it's just essentially insane for them to be considering it.

so, yes, the poles should be slightly concerned, but the possibility of a russian attack into poland any time soon is very obscure. more likely is that they're going to continue to target the supply lines, and that might mean the odd strike into eastern poland.
20:27

i posted a map here months ago explaining the old rhine/danube roman borders and pushing them past the elbe, past the oder and to the vistula, in the north:


what you don't see on that map is the carpathians, which run clean from the vistula to the danube.

the russians would want that defense line.

however, they're clearly building defenses on the dnieper for a reason and that's a more realistic line, for now.
20:41

wednesday, november 16, 2022

the chinese made it abundantly clear to canada that they don't have time to waste with trudeau at the g20, which is reasonable for two reasons:

1) trudeau, himself, is a waste of time. biden won't even come to canada to talk to him, which is very unusual. this is just an objectively accurate analysis - a meeting with trudeau serves no purpose other than a photo op for trudeau. trudeau has no substantive understanding of anything, and nothing worthwhile will occur. it's a literal waste of time.
2) canada has no independent foreign policy at this point and is essentially not in the same league as china, in terms of global powers. it would be more appropriate for the prime minister of canada to schedule a meeting with a chinese dignitary; he has no place scheduling a meeting with the president of china, and the idea that he might is a delusion of grandeur on behalf of the prime minister.

in response, the prime minister of canada tracks the president of china through the summit and runs him down in a hallway, where he cuts him off at a pass and corners him in order to get a photo op with him in front of baffled reporters.

they should charge trudeau with criminal harassment; that's stalking. it's outrageous, juvenile behaviour. then, our government gets confused when nobody takes us seriously or wants to discuss anything with us. well, look at how we act. you can't take this prime minister anywhere, he doesn't know how to behave like an adult.

the chinese president then makes a reasonable comment about how the situation is inappropriate, and they can't be negotiating through the press, and the prime minister has the incredible arrogance to try to spin it around on him, as being a criticism of the free press. maybe you should cancel china's bank account in response, el douche.

when will the party tell this imbecile that enough is enough and he needs to go disappear to the ski hills, now?

what an embarrassment.
8:11

it does not appear as though el douche had anything to actually say to the president of china.

he just wanted a picture with him.

maybe he got an autograph.
8:22

it is of the utmost importance that twitter users re-learn how to think for themselves, and forcing them to take two-three seconds to google the veracity of jimmy fallon's death is a good start.

you can figure this out on your own, twitter users.

i believe in you.
12:48

it is a shame, though.

for a brief moment, i was excited about the possibility that they might replace jimmy fallon with somebody that is actually funny, like conan o'brien.
12:57

the argument for months has been that, despite contracting gdp, the united states cannot be in a recession because the unemployment rate is low.

well, we've been seeing major job losses in the tech sector over the last few weeks. given that much of the tech sector is involved in selling goods, that suggests that the manufacturing side is next.

if inflation is being caused by demand exceeding supply and the rate hikes further reduce supply by reducing production via job losses, what effect does that have on inflation?

that's right - it goes up.

stagflation. we're there.
21:22
thursday, november 17, 2022

they should tear it down and build subsidized housing in it's place.

the prime minister doesn't need a chef and a mansion. build him a nice apartment suite on wellington, instead.

17:40

i have just received notice that both of the officers involved in my illegal arrest in 2018 have now resigned. the first officer involved in the illegal arrest resigned some time ago.

the oiprd thinks that means the case is closed due to it no longer having jurisdiction to further investigate, but that is ridiculous. rather, it actually gives me an opportunity to directly petition the superior court for what i wanted to have done in the first place before vavilov ruined everything, which was for the court to rule directly on the question of the legality of the arrest, without the interference of these stupid, extrajudicial tribunals. that is the reason i filed for certiorari, which in it's broadest definition allows for the court to take over the function of the lower court. this used to be routine in canada, before the recent backwards precedent dismantled it and upended the court hierarchy.

i have no idea how the court will react if i ask them to rule directly on the legality of the arrest, but i've just been given an opportunity to do so, in the face of the backwards precedent that otherwise made it so difficult to actually access the courts and i'm certainly going to take advantage of it.
20:10

the police cannot be allowed final say on the legality of an arrest; that is preposterous, and legally illiterate.
20:12

has this ever happened before?

i'll need to spend the night reseraching the answer to that question.
20:13

this is a court of inherent jurisdiction. under common law (the real law.), certiorari is foundational to the functioning of the court; the precedent is incoherent. this is an example as to why; if the court doesn't intervene, it is alllowing the police to evade review, which is impossible in a society based on the rule of law.
20:16

i actually think they were trying to halt the process, that this is a tactic to prevent me from exposing the corruption and collusion that occurred any further by disingenuously attempting to remove statutory jurisdiction from the reviewing body. i filed a few things in the human rights case earlier this week that i think scared them, in regards to my legal acumen (which is a bad reading. i'm just good at research.). they're trying to stop me from winning by blowing up the case; it's a scorched earth policy. however, i think it actually helps me by transferring the jurisdiction to the court, which is where it should have been in the first place.
20:20

i'm going to be filing four cases in superior court at the same time some time next week:

1) will the court rule directly on the illegality and unreasonableness of the arrest? 
2) does the report contain defamatory statements about me?
3) was i held, unconstitutionally, in contravention of my right to not be detained arbitrarily?
4) is the human rights tribunal in contravention of a requirement to exercise a statutory power, in not hearing the case brought before it?

i know that this woman is very powerful and very rich. that is why this happened. we'll have to see just how powerful and how rich she really is, and whether she can stop it from escalating further or not.
20:28

she's already managed to prevent the hrto hearing from being scheduled, to the point where i have to take the case to superior court to get an order against them by arguing that they are not exercising a statutory power, which is an unprecedented situation. now, she's managed to get the second officer involved in the illegal arrest to resign, in an attempt to prevent judicial review on the oiprd report.

the correct response from myself is necessarily to escalate accordingly and see if she's able to stop it.
20:31

the police services act allows for appeal to divisional court within 30 days of the review and indicates that all activity "under this part" shall cease if the officer resigns. the police services act does not restrict filing under the jrpa - there is no privative clause.

i should petition the court for leave, to be certain about it.

that's fine.
21:20

actually, that's a misreading. 

the police services act specifies that appeals to the board may go to divisional court without being reviewed, while my type of review needs to go to internal review, first. the act does not otherwise define the boundaries of applications for judicial review.

as there is no discussion of procedures for judicial review in part II of the act, i would not be filing for judicial review under the act, and the cessation clause would not apply to any judicial review that is initiated under the jrpa.

i cannot find a precedent and doubt there is one.
21:34

the correct argument should be that the superior court's inherent jurisdiction now defines the process of review, not s. 90 of the police services act. it follows that the divisional court now has sole jurisdiction over the review, because the oiprd has defaulted on it's jurisdiction.
21:39

to be clear: the legislation certainly prevents the oiprd from continuing to review the situation further.

however, the legislation does not prevent me from filing for review for an already completed report.
21:42

the issue is now void of statutory jurisdiction, meaning the superior court has inherent jurisdiction.

that's clear in my mind, now.
21:44

to complete the thought: inherent jurisdiction also means they have a right of reply, and need to be named as respondents. i can't drop them from the case, like i'd like to.

they can skip the internal review process by pushing the officer out, but they can't avoid the judicial review. sorry.
22:28

thursday, november 18, 2022

i am going to explain the hrto case, which i filed for review on under s (2)(1)(2) of the jrpa on monday and which i'm getting an inexplicable block on from court staff, who are claiming they will "advise shortly". i'm interpreting that as meaning that they're refusing to do their job, but there is a more sinister interpretation.

the human rights tribunal has clearly all but shelved my application, after a juvenile attempt at mediation last fall. i got stuck trying to explain an adversarial court process to some dipshit hippie that wanted to insist on "reconciliation". this isn't ecclesiastical court and we don't live in the dark ages; fuck off with your "reconciliation". i want to fight a court battle against an adversary, i want to vanquish my enemies and i want to win compensation. i have no patience for stupid christian bullshit, and i have no prerogative to have patience for stupid christian bullshit. our court system is secular, roman, germanic and pagan; it is not christian, religious or jewish. you can take your idiot jesus and fuck off on the cross you rode in on. this is a common law country. 

the court hasn't disposed of the application, but it has not responded to anything i've sent them for months and it is now so far beyond it's service dates that i'm left to conclude it's refusing to exercise a statutory power. for that reason, i am filing for an order under s. (2)(1)(2) of the jrpa. this is a rarely invoked clause that is usually used incorrectly, but i'm actually doing this right and expect the application to be filed. if they don't want to hear the case, they are obligated to dispose of it in order to allow for review.

the response from the divisional court when i filed the application was to not understand the filing, and due to an inarticulate and terse response that i can't force a clarification of over email, i don't know what the court is doing. when i asked the court to explain it's behaviour, it responded twice that it would "advise shortly". that response is not sufficient from a superior court in a common law jurisdiction in a democratic society. that either means that the court is not doing anything at all (which is what i initially thought was true) or it means it is attempting to do something improper (which i am increasingly suspecting is the case). if the court was behaving properly in the transparent manner it is required to behave in, it would have responded to my request in more detail when i requested it; it's unusual and frankly childish response indicates it is hiding something, necessarily - or that the staff member is on drugs and incoherent for that reason. when i ask the court for information, i expect the court to provide that information in an unambiguous and transparent manner, not respond in vague or unclear language that leaves me unaware of what it is doing. i have no intention of having this action halted by some shady conspiracy at 130 queen street.

the way around this is to file in superior court instead of divisional court under s. 6(2) of the jrpa, and i'd like to do that in toronto superior court by email. the superior court civil intake is trying to force applications electronically, but it's list of allowed documents (in the rules of civil procedure) is incomplete. i suspect the answer is to file over email, and the direction vaguely suggests as much, but the links in the practice direction (which is a poorly maintained, sprawling mess) at the website are dead and i can't get anybody on the phone to clarify it. the strong implication in online communication from toronto superior court is that they want people to file in person at the court house, then upload the documents electronically. trying to drag the court into the internet era has been a slow and difficult process; they're adjusting as they're forced to, but are planting a foot firmly in the past. i don't know what the point of insisting people come in to the office is, other than people trying to save their jobs and, if that's the case, i'm not going to get somebody on the phone because the non-communication, while contemptible, is deliberate. i consequently believe i need to do this in person in windsor, instead.

for that reason, i am prioritizing filing for judicial review on the oiprd report before sunrise and readying the other three cases for further filing in superior court in windsor at the start of next week.

this just got very intensive, but it's actually a process of consolidation. these four cases should work their way through together, from this point on.
3:17

seems like christmas came a little early. this is a major fuck-up by the oiprd.

it's been sent for filing. will the divisional court staff behave, or will i need to find some way around them?
7:38

is there some ambiguity regarding the divisional court v the superior court, on the question of inherent jurisdiction?

i don't think so.

if i invoke the superior court's inherent jurisdiction in terms of filing a review, what that means is applying it to divisional court, because the divisional court is the appellate branch of the superior court.

i would not expect an argument otherwise to be successful, as i could not file in superior court, directly. in context, the divisional court must inherit the superior court's inherent jurisdiction, but only on requests for appeals and judicial reviews.

otherwise, nobody has jurisdiction to do anything, and that is absurd; that contradicts the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court.
8:19

if they reject the filing on the basis of the divisional court not having inherent jurisdiction, it would mean that the superior court doesn't have inherent jurisdiction, either.

inherent jurisdiction means you hear cases that nobody else hears.

that's the point. that's what inherent jurisdiction is.

as the procedure is that all requests for review filed in superior court are to be heard by the divisional court branch of the superior court, the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court merely assigns the case to the divisional court; otherwise, the superior court does not have jurisdiction over the review, which is a contradiction of their inherent jurisdiction. 

i can understand how some people might get confused by this, but they're wrong.
8:21

in context, it doesn't matter, because the issue is legislated. i am explicitly appealing under the jrpa.
8:25

this is really a political debate, not a legal one.

there are some people that think the jurisdiction of the courts should be limited. i would, personally, support a weak legislature and a powerful court system, for the reason that politicians are retards and judges are at the least necessarily educated, if not necessarily wise.

i would find the idea of attempting to restrict the jurisdiction of the appellate branch of the superior court to be disturbing. others may applaud it.

i don't think there's merit in the argument - i think it's clear that the divisional court has almost unlimited jurisdiction to hear reviews in administrative decisions and almost nothing, besides an explicit privative clause, can restrict that.

there is simply no such clause in the legislation in question.
8:50 

i'm using the language of "inherent jurisdiction", and somebody may want to have a semantic debate about it, but i don't expect it to have an enforceable outcome.

the divisional court will accept jurisdiction in the matter, if i can get the filing past court staff
8:56

i would prefer direct democracy to a dominant court system, but that option isn't currently being discussed.

representative "democracy" is really the worst option in the list.
9:00

if we must have representatives, i would rather they be determined by merit than popularity.
9:01

in trying to understand how to apply the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court to it's divisional court branch in ontario, we might consider the court hierarchy in alberta, where they don't have a segregated divisional court (or court of appeal) for appellate concerns, but rather have one superior court that deals with all superior court matters. this comes right from their web page:

As a court of inherent jurisdiction, the Court of King's Bench of Alberta also functions as the primary forum for judicial review of government action in Alberta and hears statutory appeals from the decisions of certain provincial administrative tribunals.

my application may use difficult language, but it is solidly grounded and i'm actually willing to argue the point. the divisional court should really come out and declare that it has inherent jurisdiction; this isn't something that should require language that tip-toes around it.

let's be bold and assertive, divisional court.

we can do this together.
9:39

the divisional court should have inherent jurisdiction (in the realm of appellate reviews); as the divisional court is a subset of the superior court, it should inherit inherent jurisdiction (in the realm of appellate reviews) from the superior court, due to it being a subset of that court.
9:40

i'm willing to argue about that.

i don't expect i'll need to.
9:41

my notice uses the term "inherent jurisdiction" repeatedly, but always applies it to the superior court, then allow the divisional court to inherit that.

it's a technicality.

law is technical, though.
9:48

if ontario didn't have a specialized divisional court and just had one superior court - like alberta - the discussion wouldn't exist. i would apply for review in superior court, because it has inherent jurisdiction.

i'm thinking about this too much, because it's an excuse and i don't want an excuse to be used as a loophole.

i'm right, and i know i'm right, and i know a reasonable justice will understand i'm right. however, that's asking for a lot.
9:51

if it weren't for the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court, there couldn't be a divisional court in the first place.
9:54

the divisional court is required to apply the concept of doublethink to it's assumption of inherent jurisdiction.

on the one hand, the court is required to be vague about stating it's inherent jurisdiction, although i hope to embolden it to do so.

on the other hand, the court must always behave as thought it has it - because it does.
9:59

the point for now is that i'm confident that nobody is getting anywhere arguing that the divisional court is limited in it's review powers because it's a "creature of statute", like a federal court. that's a disingenuous argument, and it's not going anywhere. that's just going to piss them off.
10:01

this case indicates that the basis of judicial review is inherent jurisdiction in the first place:
10:25

you could argue that the divisional court is defined in the courts of justice act. i mean, that's the argument.

the superior court, however, is also defined in the courts of justice act.

you could argue that the superior court is in the constitution. ok; but, the divisional court is a subset of the superior court, and so is also in the constitution.

in ontario, certiorari exists in the court of justice act and in the jrpa. our writs are statutory. what does that even mean, then?
10:34

i'm overthinking this and am going to immediately stop.

there's no ambiguity that the court can do what i'm asking it to.
10:35

they filed the hrto appeal.

i was worried.
11:11

they filed the other case quickly, as well.

great. two more to go.

i got my ratchet set in today, so i can look at my bicycle over the weekend. i also finally replaced my broken knapsack. it was initially just the shoulder strap that fell apart, and i thought i could sew it when i got around to it, but there are also some holes opening up on the bottom of the bag, itself. it's a relatively rugged polyester knapsack, but it looks like it's been through a few too many bicycle rides over gravel trails, or so i'm guessing. it could just be general wear and tear.

i purchased this bag in 2017, so it had a long life, for a knapsack. i don't expect the knapsack experiences consciousness (that would be a breakthrough for science, if it could be demonstrated), but it lived life to it's fullest, and i'm sure i'll continue to use it for some time, still.

i was able to find an identical bag with a different brand name on it for $35, so i decided to do it.

there's a 5 tb external hard drive coming, as well.
13:52

i've decided that filing a defamation case, in context, would be redundant, as it is one of the reasons for the certiorari request. it would have made sense to do so in the previous context, but it does not any more. the most likely outcome is nominal damages, but i'm asking the court to take over jurisdiction, now, anyways. i don't gain anything from doing this twice; we can discuss the issue of defamation in the review context and ask the court to rule on the matter directly.

likewise, if i was getting impatient about the constitutional rights challenge (the logic was always to use the result of the review to argue for arbitrary detention), and concerned i'd have to wait until i appealed it to the supreme court due to vavilov, that concern is no longer pertinent and i need to retain my patience.

there is no statute of limitations on a charter case. i'm better off waiting it out.

i'm  consequently done filing for a while. i still need to mail off two access requests - one to ask who ordered the record check for the name change (the check cleared, but i haven't received my card in the mail yet) and one to figure out how far the oiprd review got before it was cancelled.
18:49

on the other hand, i think i have enough information to decide that i was held arbitrarily, by citing the second oiprd report, which actually admits it.

let me look into this a bit more.
19:02

i could have potentially filed the constitutional challenge closer to the event, but i had no actual evidence to make any sort of claim around. what i had was a hunch (a logical deduction) that there was some level of colllusion or corruption happening regradng the relationship between the karen and the police. this simply couldn't have happened unless there was some kind of corruption, collusion or broad discrimination at play; it's not reducible to base error. it was just a ridiculous display of thuggery by the cops. a feeling that something is wrong is not enough to win a claim, i have to prove it. i was not a victim of police violence, i was a victim of police overreach, which doesn't leave physical scars but rather leaves mental ones. if there had been a trial of some sort, i could have uncovered some kind of wrongdoing, but there wasn't. the crown realized it walked into a trap and withdrew the charges without providing full disclosure, and i was just left in a post-kafkaesque daze and with the need to strategize some tactic to defend myself against what happened.

the purpose of the oiprd action was to act as a fact-finding exercise. through a series of foia requests and over two oiprd investigations, i have been able to get a vague picture of what happened. i know the woman used to work for the attorney general, and i know she filed a false report. i also know, now, that the police did not intend to charge me when they arrested me, that the process was in fact merely intended to intimidate me.

had i filed previously, i would have done so without the evidence i have now, so it would have amounted to an accusation without any evidence, and i would have been unlikely to win such a case. a clear decision by the superior court indicating that i was in fact arrested illegally by the windsor police would certainly be a convincing basis to construct a s. 24(1) case around, but then vavilov interjected and ruined the entire court system. the pandemic then further slowed the process down, for years.

the question at this point is whether the review at divisional court is going to substantively better my argument, and i'm not convinced it will. it would certainly be a helpful citation, but the actual evidence has at this point already been gathered.

yeah. i should file this asap.
19:33

i'm not really interested in going after the individual officers. the police force has corporate personhood. the system can deal with it's own. i've always intended to file against the force, so the resignation of the officer is not actually relevant to me.

i've never intended to file a tort for false arrest. i've always intended to file under 24(1), partially because that is the outcome that i want - i want a declaration that my rights were infringed upon.
19:47

"police are people, too".
20:02

based on the admissions in the oiprd report, there are a number of torts i could potentially successfully base a civil case on - false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution. however, i'd be filing in parallel to the oiprd review, and i'd be forced to make leave due to limitations having passed. i could potentially argue for an exception if i had a divisional court ruling (which was the plan...), but i'd be introducing a redundancy, otherwise, and probably with the same court. i don't want to piss them off by asking them to do the same thing repeatedly.

at this point, filing for any of these torts would be the same thing as asking for the judicial reference. it follows that my argument would be substantively bettered by waiting for the judicial reference to complete, for the reason that i'm otherwise asking the court to repeat itself, which is just going to piss them off.

i may be approaching this from an overly methodical and incremental perspective, but it's how i operate, in general. i have a better chance of trying to convince the justices of the value of that process than i do of bombarding them with redundant cases and hoping one sticks.

it follows that i really don't want to file any torts until the reference exists, although i might want to think about it if i wait to file the s. 24 action, as well.
20:55

what i'm thinking is that, because it's already been such a long time since the event, and because i've already been filing around the oiprd report for so long, i'm probably better off waiting it out.

i'm already going to be required to request for leave by arguing that my case relies on the statements produced in the report, and that i couldn't have successfully filed without it. i'm then necessarily going to take that report and file it in the same court and request that the same judges look at that same report and ask the same questions in order to arrive at the same conclusions. that is now unavoidable. 

it is true that any court i file in is going to do it's own analysis, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to repeatedly ask the same questions in the same court at the same time in order to arrive at the same answers multiple times.
20:58

i don't think there's a right or wrong approach to this, at this point. it's easy to tell me i missed the timelines, but i couldn't have possibly won any case with the evidence i had in the context of the statutory timelines. if i had filed then, i would have certainly lost. now, i have to ask for leave, but i actually have a case.

i have to get the value of my methodical approach across, and that might not be easy, even if it's so blatantly logical. i understand why there are statutory limitations, but they are prone to creating more problems than they solve. in most cases, it makes more sense to be slow and methodical than to cram things into an arbitrary timeframe. canlii is full of cases where statutory timeframes are overturned or discarded. 

i know i'm better off making that argument, but i also know there's a chance it won't work. it will depend on the justice.
21:08

if you're going to be slow and methodical as a tactic, it doesn't make sense to stop halfway through.

i can blame this on the pandemic, partly. it might work; it's largely true.
21:13 

if that's the case, should i ask to amend the application for review to include the tort actions?

i doubt that would be proper, and i don't think it would help me.
21:24

i couldn't file a tort in divisional court, to begin with. it's an appellate court.
21:25

i'm learning the value of a unified court, like the one that exists in alberta. it would be efficient to fil everything together, at the least. unfortunately, it's not possible.
21:26

now, how would doctor lenin enjoy his beer if he had a mask on?

is that a beer, or is it a scotch?

21:52

i don't support mask mandates, as anybody that has read this site recently knows. i'm not criticizing. i'm just pointing out the drink, which is clearly the central fact of the matter.
21:55

it's all up in smoke, it would seem, cheech.

there's more marijuana stores here than coffee shops. it's absurd.

everybody wants to be a drug dealer.

22:11

if i understand what happened correctly, the rum-running business got bought out by large companies and consolidated. free markets are not sustainable; they will  always result in monopolies in the long run, without anti-trust legislation. an open, competitive and "free" market can only exist when the government aggressively regulates it. if what the government really wants is a tax pyramid, it should let the market fail by refusing to intervene in it.
22:18
are time limitations on civil actions constitutional?

i don't think they should exist at all. i should examine advancing the argument from that perspective.

i don't think it makes sense to file under s. 24 until my request for certiorari is addressed, but i think it's time to go to the justice of the peace in windsor and request an investigation into the false police report filed by the karen in order to get a clear determination as to whether ryan myon exists or not. that is a point of fact that needs to be clarified, and that the reports from the oiprd have failed to clarify.

i will need to do some more research into that this afternoon.
12:31

(note: i would never use the word "bunch". such language is reserved strictly for retards. that is a word that does not exist in the vocabulary of educated or intelligent individuals. fuck off.)
15:47

i have a very strong aversion to what you might call "cool" people. it's a level of disdain that is probably unusual, but it's as visceral as could be possible and is central to my core being, as an individual. i legitimately hate cool people - i hate everything about them, and i condemn them in the fiercest terms possible.

i rather define myself as anti-cool, and will frequently advocate positions or advance arguments because those arguments are the opposite of what is popular or cool.

ukraine is a good example. although i have no specific interest in russia, and i would not get along with vladimir putin very well (he's very conservative), i am legitimately a pan-slavist and legitimately think eastern europe is better off under russian leadership, even if i'd like to see a more socialist government in moscow. the governments in ukraine, poland, latvia, lithuania and estonia are not any less right-wing than the government in russia. the scandinavian countries were previously a counter-example, but nato membership will inevitably lead to right-wing puppet governments installed in nato-backed military coups. the government in poland is about three degrees to the right of the government in hungary, by any discernible ideological analysis, but we only talk about hungary because they're less hostile towards the russians. the government in serbia is relatively liberal, but we target them and coddle the latvians. pointing out that i don't agree with putin on anything isn't relevant, because i don't agree with any of them on anything; slavic culture hit rock bottom in recent decades and has yet to recover. i'd argue that it's more likely to recover in russia than it is in poland; i think russia is more likely to see a moderate government in the near future than poland or ukraine are.

the reason i hold ukraine in such disregard at the moment is that all of the cool people are vocally pro-ukraine, which means that ukraine must be despised, in order to be anti-cool.
16:19

i'm just annoyed by the pop psychology trying to "figure me out". i'm not that difficult to understand, really. it helps to start the process by listening to what i have to say, instead of making stupid assumptions.

the idea that i'm "trying to be cool" is definitely a completely idiotic assumption. i go out of my way to try to be uncool.
16:25

psychiatry is not a science, and you should not waste your time listening to psychiatrists.

they're not doctors, they're just glorified clairvoyants.
16:28

i don't use social media. i don't monetize my sites. i don't have like or share buttons. i'm not looking for validation. i don't care what you think.
16:33

this site is intended to historically document the thoughts of an awkward, aloof artist that has spent their entire life attempting to escape from society because they are utterly disinterested in fitting into it. it is intended strictly to be read in the context of analyzing my electronic score writing compositions.
16:34

this is not a platform. this is not a launching pad. this is not a starting point.

this is a journal.
16:39

if you want to read an accent into this site, it is not a cool, contemporary ebonics accent but rather an exceedingly white early 20th century british liberal accent. i'm neither british nor would i identify much with modern liberalism, but i am culturally most affiliated with the bertrand russells and richard dawkins' of the world, and that's the correct accent to attach to the writing.
17:02

i'm not english, but i am a strong advocate of the historically british system of westminster-style parliamentary government, of the common law, of the british contribution to science and of disinterested, secularist british culture.
17:07

i'll remind you that i live in canada and, if it is not clear, will inform you that i would have opposed the american revolution as an exercise in right-wing extremism.

i don't believe i have loyalist ancestors, or any ancestry on this continent that is pre-revolutionary at all, except for some indigenous ancestry around the gaspe region of eastern quebec.
17:07

on the other hand, i would have supported the french revolution.
17:09

the government expenditures for 2020 were 650 billion dollars. 1/650 = 0.15%.

how much money did canada waste on weapons sent to ukraine this year?

20:19
sunday, november 20, 2022

this is theft.

6:57

the absence of time limitations on charter claims is something i learned about in school. that is unfortunately as incorrect as the idea that the divisional court is a "creature of statute", which you will find in any first year textbook (and is completely wrong in any conceivable sense of the concept).
7:55

that said, this is the limitation act:

Discovery
5 (1) A claim is discovered on the earlier of,

(a) the day on which the person with the claim first knew,

(i) that the injury, loss or damage had occurred,

(ii) that the injury, loss or damage was caused by or contributed to by an act or omission,

(iii) that the act or omission was that of the person against whom the claim is made, and

(iv) that, having regard to the nature of the injury, loss or damage, a proceeding would be an appropriate means to seek to remedy it; and

(b) the day on which a reasonable person with the abilities and in the circumstances of the person with the claim first ought to have known of the matters referred to in clause (a).  2002, c. 24, Sched. B, s. 5 (1).

i should be able to argue for a limitation period starting in december, 2020, which is when ms. chevalier admitted she lied about being mr. myon.
8:13

i will need to file in windsor by the end of the month for that reason.

if i'm going to do this, i should file everything all at once.
8:14

i can then point to the delays in the various other processes as the reason it took until the end of the period, which is broadly true.
8:17

no. this is relevant information in the case against ms. chevalier, but it is not relevant information in the case against the police. i can't blame the police for the woman lying to them, even if they knew she was lying and went along with it.

there is no clause in the limitation act allowing for judicial independence. there was a clause in the provincial offences act allowing for a right to a fair trial, so i had no basis for a charter claim; the act had already been amended to be constitutional, the idiot judge just ignored the law.

you'll note that the limitation act does not apply to government or the investor class. this is typical in canadian law, where the state and capital are consistently legislated (usually together) above the law. then, you read dicey and it's full of nonsense about the rule of law, which has long been non-existent in this country.

i think that limitation periods are a barrier to the application of social justice and should be abolished outright, but that is my opinion. at the least, there should be a clause in the act that allows the judge discretion to make the decision, and i think it's worth bringing an action to try to establish one.
8:39

i would argue that bringing the issue to the court is more efficient and more appropriate than bringing it to a legislature. you might disagree. that's nice.
8:40

i can, however, argue that the limitation period against the police should start when i learned that the police did not intend to charge me when they arrested me, because that is when i knew that a proceeding would be appropriate.

i slept too much this weekend and i haven't had any coffee yet this morning.

that would mean the clock started running in oct, 2022 and that i should at the least get some structure in the request for the court to take over jurisdiction before i file everything under 24(1), together.

i'm again left with the redundancy of needing to ask the same justices at the same court to answer the same questions the same way in different proceedings, but i need to file one case in divisional court and need to file the other in superior court, regardless, so i should file all the superior court cases together, once i understand how the divisional court is proposing the case move forwards, and whether the oiprd even opposes the application.

i have a strong suspicion that the oiprd will argue that they no longer have standing, which will functionally convert the case to a request for a reference in writing (which i'm not supposed to be able to do, otherwise), which means it could move relatively quickly.
9:19

there is no statute of limitations in canada for indictable offences, so i can't run out of time in my request to ask the judge to investigate the issue of filing a false report (that is considered mischief, in canadian law). i will, nonetheless, want to get that done by the end of the month.
9:28

i will need to plan a trip to city hall to fill out an application for a change of name on my health card when i get my name and gender change certificate in the mail, some time next week.
9:29 


my argument will be exceedingly efficient.

1) i will show the emails send to mr. myon, where i repeatedly explicitly address mr. myon. there were no emails sent to caroline chevalier. at all.
2) i will show the police report, where ms. chevalier claims the emails were sent to her.
3) i will show the email where ms. chevalier acknowledges she is not mr, myon.
4) i will show the letter from the lawyer claiming mr. myon does not exist.
5) i will show the report, which provides no further information on the matter.
6) i will show the letter indicating the oiprd claims it no longer has jurisdiction, meaning the evidence collection is complete.

i will seek a determination as to whether mr. myon's identity may be determined by the police. if he can be located, ms. chevalier should clearly be indicted, and her lawyer should be charged with abetting her. ms. chevalier did not misspeak once, but has maliciously promoted a lie for many years, in an attempt to avoid civil action.
 9:52

you might have seen this previously:


i've managed to spin the process around on them; the police have incriminated themselves in their own report.
10:04

my actual political position is that leather is murder.

you wouldn't catch me dead in the stuff.
20:25

i have never purchased an article of leather clothing in my life and consider people that find the need to kill things to satiate their fashion sense to be contemptible.
20:27

"but it's fake leather!"

so, that makes you a fake murderer, then? you're missing the point. i don't find anything sexy or cool about draping myself in dead animal skin, and i don't like fake leather for the same reason i don't like real leather.
20:28

besides, leather is uncomfortable. it's not warm, either. in addition to looking like a barbarian, you also look like your'e too stupid to dress sensibly for the weather.
20:29

i'd prefer a comfortable cotton sweater.
20:30

that's not because i'm over 40, either. i would have taken a turtleneck over a leather jacket at 15, at 25 and at 35, too. it's never been how i want to project myself. leather jackets are synonymous with idiocy, and they make the people that wear them look uneducated. do you want people to think you're a high school dropout? wear leather, then. otherwise, i'd advise avoiding it.

it's not my fault if you thought otherwise, as i've never told you anything that would lead you to believe i would ever wear leather. i've told you i'm an environmentalist, that i'm a leftist activist and that i'm an anarchist punk. where does wearing leather fit into any of that?
20:32

the musical and artistic culture that i'm a part of would throw paint on your leather or fur jacket and call you a murderer to your face for it.
20:33

you couldn't order me out of the house at gun point in leather.
20:45

anybody who has spent any time with me at all will tell you that they couldn't imagine me in leather. the premise would be baffling.
20:59

it's an old tune, but it still works.

it's frustrating that we live in a reality with no counter-culture, but this is where i'm actually coming from. this is the type of propaganda that shaped me, as a young person.

21:02

i've argued that their last couple of records - particularly the ones released in the early 90s - are the absolute high point of art rock, as a concept. 

listen to this loud.

it's encapsulating, mortifying, demented and transformational all at the same time.

you can't say you understand rock music as an artistic concept until you assimilate (ahem.) skinny puppy's final material, with the late dwayne goettel, who barely made it to the age of 30 before he disappeared. further, i think the correct date to assign to the decline of rock music as an artistic force is dwayne goettel's death.

this is where it peaked.

21:51

oddly, a lot of the music intense industrial music never got proper releases.

this was intended for a ballet. it's one of the most insane things they ever did.

loudly, please.

21:58

one more. 

this is an early mix of knowhere?

listen to this very loud, please.

22:05

everything dies.

it's ok.

i just wish something replaced it, and nothing ever really did. 
22:06

i stumble upon something every once in a while that is nearly as interesting (almost always something with a very small and very limited audience), but it's always isolated, and nobody can ever follow up on it.

22:11

there was autechre, for a while, but autechre has intentionally rejected any conceptual association with their music. autechre is sound. that is all. and, that is fine, but it doesn't fill the void.
22:13

yes, they were huge beatles fans (every dwayne-period record has at least one beatles sample, including a charles manson collage in warlock and a revolution #9 sample in love in vein), and the above tracks are in a very real sense next level martin-period beatles:



that's what i'm getting at. yes, dwayne is sampling a lot of atonal music, but the structure of a lot of these tracks is essentially the late beatles sound collage, taken to a ridiculous extreme. this is the end of the road, as far as that is concerned, as there was really nothing else left to do after that. like, really. if you can tell me how to make lahuman8 that much more intense, you go and do it by example, please.
22:46

you'll also notice a massive early peter gabriel influence in everything ogre does on stage, and it's worth asking the question as to what kind of influence the lamb lies down on broadway really had on him.

this is a recent video of an old song. i'm demonstrating the performance art:

22:49

there's clearly continuity from the following to the above:


22:57

that's to say nothing of the joy division influence.

so, you really had a high point of divergent periods concepts converging, in skinny puppy.
22:58

costumes in rock performance aren't exactly unusual.

but, gabriel was sort of out there, and ogre really picked up on it.

23:10

monday, november 21, 2022

it's impossible to accept that (and exceedingly difficult to understand how) a society could be so bereft of critical thinking skills that it needs to forcibly prevent somebody from trying to convince others that an easily empirically demonstrable event was somehow invented by some class of people to advance a policy that is already in force, but doesn't work. the premise is truly baffling.

a healthy society would not need to ban alex jones; a healthy society would laugh at alex jones, not fear him. twitter is not a healthy society, and it's previous insistence on banning voices that should simply be ignored or ridiculed is a depressing reflection of it's schizophrenic psychological condition.

resources should be directed towards teaching people how to properly evaluate information, not towards banning people that present challenging or incorrect information. it will never be possible to eliminate dishonesty or disingenuity; we have to be able to figure that out, and we especially have to be able to figure out when governments and corporations are lying to us, which is by far the more pertinent threat. people are not very dangerous; governments and corporations are exceedingly dangerous.

likewise, jordan peterson is literally a retard at this point (after getting addicted to painkillers and choosing mentally destructive therapy as a tactic to undo it. this is somebody that's supposed to write self-help literature. it's a joke.), rather than being a figurative retard, which was the case previously. jordan peterson is not an academic, a scientist or an intellectual, and he never was; he's a glorified motivational speaker masquerading as an intellectual. what he does is not science and he's not a real doctor. today, his proper title is "disgraced former professor of what is actually bullshit pseudoscience in the first place". i'm not remotely interested in hearing anything he has to say, except perhaps to laugh at him, from time to time, because he's a clown. i may mock, ridicule and in some sense pity him, but i don't fear him; he's too stupid to be frightening.

i'm not remotely interested in microblogging, and i'm trying to get off of corporate hosting solutions. however, i'm in agreement with the changes at twitter, and hope it triggers a cultural revolution towards free thinking and away from information control and aggressive authoritarianism.

the jordan petersons and alex joneses of the world should be laughed at for their idiocy, not censored for their irrationality. we shouldn't need to censor them; we should be able to dismantle and discard them with minimal effort.
10:36

if we don't exercise our critical thinking faculties, we will be left defenseless when some more competent, truly fascist version of jordan peterson appears that wants to take away everybody's rights. jordan peterson is neither smart enough to be a fascist, nor is he capable enough to organize a serious political movement; he's really your typical backwards christian conservative, that you can throw a dart in a bingo hall and hit. he's really little more than a glorified motivational speaker and should be taken about as seriously as one. 

yet, the idiot thinks european culture is based in christan values, which is just a demonstration of overwhelming historical ignorance (and sounds like something vladimir putin would say). europe actually spent 1500 years fighting off christian colonialism and roman imperialism, before it succeeded in doing so in the 16th and 17th centuries, leading to a set of transformational revolutions in the 18th and 19th centuries. christianity is a middle eastern religion that is rooted in values that are distinctly foreign to european culture and which middle eastern imperialists spent centuries failing at enforcing in europe with some of the most barbaric violence in world history. contemporary europe has essentially the same culture that it did 2000 years ago, notwithstanding the post-revolutionary injection of some lapsed roman and greek customs that stem from much more sophisticated pagan times. plato has had a much deeper and much more important influence on european culture and civilization than jesus has. an objective, comprehensive survey would in truth find very few traces of christian influence in european culture or society at all; what little there is that looks christian is almost universally properly assigned to other influences. europe's great revolutions have all been about sending the church back to israel, and it's fundamental axioms are nearly literal negations of christian doctrine that almost entirely originate in celtic or germanic tribal laws or customs. france has always been where the free tribes have fought against christian rule; that is where the name france originates. if jordan peterson wants to live in a christian society, let him move to the middle east; i somehow doubt he'd like that much. yet, this is the same argument you'll have with any stupid, ignorant old man, anywhere, and it is a reflection of how unextraordinary that jordan peterson and his perspectives actually are.

a substantive component of the argument in favour of free speech is that we need to be able to actually argue with and actually defeat actual fascists when they actually appear and that we won't be able to do so if we don't have a culture of discourse to practice our debating skills with. an intellectually dead society is easy prey for fascism; a society that promotes lively debate is the best defense against authoritarianism.
10:38

does jordan peterson live in a van down by the river yet, or is that still to come, in the tragic comedy that is his life story?
10:50

disgruntled young men should listen to this far more intelligent motivational speaker, instead:

10:53

11:15

11:22

11:28

admit it.

it's a perfect satire of jordan peterson. it's dead-on accurate.

11:43

11:57

12:01

surprisingly, the divisional court is acknowledging it has jurisdiction to take over the oiprd report, but is suggesting it doesn't have standing to do so (although it used different language that is actually a little bit confused). i'm being asked to provide a purpose for the action in a ten page essay within the next 15 days.

the court is stating that it doesn't have standing to investigate the officer, which i do not dispute. however, i thought i was clear enough that i was asking for a review of the legality of the arrest, and not for further investigation of the officer, which is a judicial function. i tersely cited the precedent:

i'll need to show that the administrative body has taken on the role of a judicial body, which grants inherent jurisdiction to the superior court. i will then need to ask if the court feels it's worthwhile to formally apply in superior court, with the intent of having it transferred to divisional court.

i pointed out that this is tricky. the court isn't actually pushing back on the jurisdiction question, it's pushing back on the basis for review question, and i feel i can make a strong argument. this is unusual, though, and the police are clearly using an exit clause with intent. the court needs to take that latter fact into consideration, if it's in divisional court; it doesn't if it's in superior court. yet, if i file in superior court, it will immediately go to divisional court. it's incoherent because the statute is incoherent - that's the actual truth.

these are all arguments that would have appeared in a factum, but i'm being asked to file them immediately so that the court can determine if there's a purpose in carrying through with the process or not.
20:03

the purpose of the review body is to investigate the officer. the officer has resigned, so he can no longer be investigated. i do not dispute that - that is correct.

yet, a report exists that makes (i claim false) claims about the legality of an arrest, and that cannot be left unchallenged. i need somewhere to appeal that to, and that's what a superior court does.
20:06

i'm going to argue that the report exceeded it's jurisdiction - because i petitioned it to - which brings it under the scope of the court, because this is a judicial matter. no tribunal can rule on the legality of something, that is a court function. that is clear. it follows that the deduction in the report is legally irrelevant, because the officers of the report had no jurisdiction to make it (except that i requested it). what is less clear is that the process is worthwhile, so i have to convince the court that it's worthwhile to rule on it.
20:08

the other tactic is to skip this step and file the various torts in superior court (and ask them to rule on the legality of the arrest in the process of working through the torts), but i wanted a judicial reference, first. that's why i did this - it was the only way to get a clear answer.

i don't care about the well-being of the officer - if he lives or dies or works or starves. i have no interest one way or the other. this had nothing to do with him. he was just collateral damage.

i'll know in the next week
20:10

there is some possibility that the judge might decide "sure, the report makes legal claims, and those claims might be wrong, but they're of no legal effect, so nobody cares".

if that's the case, we'll move directly to the torts.
20:12

what i have to argue is "the tribunal is making legal claims, which brings it under the scope of the court system due to the above precedent", and allows for inherent jurisdiction in the superior court, which the divisional court may or may not require the legal formality of filing in that court.

 i would have had to do that in the factum, so this speeds that up, and that's fine.
20:15

i mean, if the justice tells me it has no standing because it's not the superior court, i'll file in superior court, then. it is superior court. that would be a dumb response by the judge.

superior court will certainly then transfer it to divisional court, immediately.

but, we can be stupid and waste time, if preferred. i was trying to be efficient and speed this up.
20:16

i think that if i can convince them that there's a good reason to do this then they'll do it.
20:19

there is inherent jurisdiction, here.

i will need to be able to file in the superior court or the divisional court. if they're going to try to tell me i can't file in either, the result is that the courts of justice act is ultra vires.
20:31

the idea of trying to get me in a logical loop here is not sneaky and not smart. inherent jurisdiction is paramount.

the inherent jurisdiction is in the superior court, but the superior court instructs cases of the sort to be transferred to divisional court.

so, we can do this the short way or the long way. the result is the same.
20:32

my name change card was mailed today, so i should be at city hall some time this week.
20:35

should i read into this?

the court is supposed to be independent. i have learned that the courts work pretty closely with the police, and who knows who else. when i actually got the issue before the panel, it seemed as thought it was interested in a just outcome, but also slanted towards a systemic body. that's likely unavoidable.

i am asking for a case in writing. if they thought that they could dispense of this easily, they likely wouldn't be trying to block me at this stage.
21:37

the request is to demonstrate a reason. a reason for what? they wouldn't need a reason to tell me i'm wrong; they would need a reason to contradict the officer.
21:38

the logic is clear enough: either the report means something and i have an obvious right to appeal or the report isn't worth the paper it's printed on, and there's no point in bothering because it has no value, anyways.
21:40

tuesday, november 22, 2022

keeping in mind that i'm trying to shift storage off of corporate servers, is there a place in my online presence for twitter, as a show of ideological support?

i have a twitter account:

that is the only twitter account i've ever created, and i have never used it. there is a twitter account @deathtokoalas, but it was not created by me and is not run by me. it appears to either be a young person from new york (they wouldn't be a teenager anymore) or some kind of troll pretending to be a young person from new york. deathtokoalas has always presented herself as a transgendered gen x canadian, so it is empirically clear that that account could not belong to me, as it is operated by a gen z (or young millenial) cismale american. i'm also rather obviously not a donald trump supporter (i'm a self-identifying anarchist/communist), and nobody that reads my writing or listens to my music would think that i am a donald trump supporter. i have asked the operator of the profile to disable their account or otherwise change their handle and they have refused to do so.

i would not utilize the handle on twitter if it were made available to me, so i have no interest in fighting for control over it.

i have posted clarifications here regarding the issue a number of times. my sites are on the side; if the site is not on the side, it is very likely not mine, or likely that i'm not maintaining it. an actively maintained site that it is not on the side is definitely not mine. i am not a shady person and do not want my writing to exist out there in the internet ether uncredited; i want to take credit for my writing and want to link to it from this site. i'm not rdj, and don't think like that; this site exists for the explicit purpose of being comprehensive. i would label people that are legitimately deceived by the aforementioned fake twitter account to be retards and not worth communicating further with; i would expect that any legitimate audience that i might be able to generate would be able to easily ascertain that i am not a cismale trump supporter from new york, and would consequently interpret the twitter account comically, as obviously not being operated by myself and as being an obvious troll. i am interested in the perspectives of honest fans, not the perspectives of people that are too stupid to figure out an obvious forgery, or happily willing to go along with disingenuous trickery. i have not concerned myself with the issue, for that reason, other than to post periodic reminders that my sites are on the side.

the above dgkfgjklgjkgjka profile is my one and only twitter account and i only signed up in 2010 in order to parody it, in reaction to it's growing popularity. i did not expect twitter to be successful, due to the character limit; the desire of people to want to restrict their ability to communicate is exceedingly surprising to me, and is itself a sad reflection on the user base.

whether there is absolute free speech or authoritarian fascist tyranny on twitter doesn't actually alter the reason i don't use it, which is that i have no utility for the character limit. i really have no interest in the platform for what it is.

that said, i'm thinking about converting the profile into a link dump. that's about the only worthwhile thing you could do in the presence of the character limit.

it's not high on my list of priorities and it is likely it will never happen.
9:38

i would be more excited about youtube dismantling the censorship bots in their comment section, as that is a platform that actually allowed me to go right to the people in a way that i found had actual utility. twitter's design flaws in conjunction with the class identity of it's user base inherently eliminate any utility it may have in actual social agitation.

1) the character limit makes the platform useless as a hosting solution.
2) you can't post substantive videos to twitter, meaning you can't have serious discourses about serious concerns. what you can do is shitpost about a corporate advertisement. it's a waste of time.
3) while twitter users may consider themselves enlightened and superior and think they're enacting positive social change, an actual leftist looks at the twitter user base and sees exactly the kind of upper class liberals that have been a massive problem in advancing socialism for decades. their aversion to free speech just demonstrates the problem. there is no revolutionary potential in twitter because the user base is too bourgeois.
10:32

it is possible that the changes that musk is going to make may resolve some of these problems, but the restrictive speech policy is, in itself, not the reason i don't use twitter and abolishing it will not, on it's own, convert twitter into a useful tool in which to reach the proletariat in order to advance social change.
10:34

as it is, the existing twitter user base is composed strictly of exactly the kind of people i don't talk to at parties and try to avoid in real life. i have no incentive to post there at all.
10:37

i also want to briefly address a narrative around trudeau's juvenile behaviour at the g20, because the right-wing press seems to have picked up on a lot of the points i posted here. the narrative is something along the lines of that criticizing trudeau is unpatriotic and puts "party before country", which is supposedly a bad thing.

i can't speak for conservatives, but i'm an insurrectionary anarchist. imagine there's no countries, kids - and no religion, too. i will put class interests ahead of nationalism at every possible opportunity and even criticize those who put country ahead of class. i'm not persuaded by such arguments from the bourgeoisie, but will rather simply agree that i don't believe in the concept of nationalism and do not support a world order that contains independent countries.

my solidarity is with the international working class, not with the bourgeois canadian political class. fuck countries. fuck trudeau. fuck canada.

vladimir lenin can take his fascist, nationalistic bullshit and fuck off, too. i have never been anything but overwhelmingly critical of lenin, who i consider to have been a fascist capitalist dictator.

i hope that clarifies where i'm coming from, as a leftist, even if it does create some deeper ideological strain on the right, which i don't care much about or for.
10:52

i don't think anybody actually believes that a kurdish activist detonated herself in constantinople last week. this is an obvious false flag.

there is a part of northern syria that the kurds must withdraw from, but erdogan must be condemned by the world for his barbarism.
12:36

the russians have previously indicated that they won't tolerate any turkish incursion on syrian sovereignty, which has nothing to do with the kurds. they're a little bit occupied at the moment. i'm curious as to how the russians react.

the green flag, though, seems to be the us midterms. biden appears to have put off a number of decisions, including the immunity for the saudi crime family dictator, until after the voters couldn't punish him for it - which is incoherent, as the midterms demonstrated that nobody votes for or against the president in congressional elections. it's clear enough, though, that biden told erdogan to wait until after the midterms, and here we are.
12:38

the russians seem to think the turks are their friends.

it's baffling.
12:56

too much wine - or perhaps cocaine - on wall street today, it would seem.

there is a valuable lesson, here: investors are not very rational.

without backing from the printing presses, they can only keep this bubble going for so long before it implodes.
15:05

"these stocks are almost as high as i am. woah."
15:06

i don't agree that the cause of drug overdoses is easier access to supply. it is actually the case - and this is well documented - that a large number of addicts get addicted due to prescriptions in the first place. somebody might need a morphine hit after a car accident or surgery, and then they can't escape the feeling it left them with (that is why i rejected painkillers when i had my testicles removed. the only drug i took was tylenol.). i have also noticed - and this is an anecdote - that people under a certain age seem to be less aware of the concept of physical addiction, and are convinced it's all government propaganda. they don't accept that there's a difference between cocaine and marijuana, in terms of potential for physical addition. i am aware of no evidence that safe supply policies are at the root cause of addiction problems, although i do expect to eventually see data that unambiguously states that safe supply policies have not only done nothing to decrease the number of addicts but have probably contributed to the problem, in terms of gross number of addicts.

i do agree that allowing doctors to prescribe addictive drugs should neither be condoned nor legalized, as it gives them an incentive to create addicts. the reality is that doctors get paid for writing prescriptions. they are not disinterested parties, and it is not correct to argue that they are strictly interested in the well being of their patients. allowing doctors to prescribe opioids effectively turns them into pushers and drug dealers who have the same interest in creating addicts that any other pushers or dealers do. it is for that reason that this is not the right approach. 

i understand that drugs on the street are dangerous, but that is a reason to not do street drugs, not a reason to allow doctors to operate as drug dealers. i don't have the faith in the angelic behaviour of doctors that same fake leftists appear to; i think they're naive. i'd advise that you look into who funded any "scientific" studies you see in the matter before you cite them, as well, as you may be surprised to see a lot of drug manufacturers involved.

the primary preventable root cause of the existing rise in addicts is that doctors are prescribing dangerously addictive painkillers in routine scenarios and this is creating addicts out of healthy people, often unintentionally. we imagine drug users as losers that make bad choices, but that is more often than not untrue, nowadays. drug companies don't have an incentive to make their drugs less addictive, either.

there should be a total ban on payments to doctors for prescriptions, to start with, and the issue should be re-analyzed after that change has taken effect. that simple change alone may very well be enough to take the severity of the situation down a notch. another idea that could be implemented is requiring that patients sign waivers for any kind of opioid - no matter how supposedly weak - before they are given it. 

rehab does not work and, unlike the conservative party leader, i do not believe in god. unfortunately, the reality is that the only solution to addiction in the vast majority of cases is overdose. the system should consider resource allocation as it's primary concern in how it deals with the hopeless cases, which is almost all of them, and for that reason should facilitate accelerating the path to overdose as it's primary policy position. these people will not get better and the best thing that can happen for everybody is for them to kill themselves as quickly as possible.

that does not transfer to a policy that gives up on trying to stop addiction at it's source, which, in today's world, doesn't mean dealing with disadvantaged youth or getting across "just say no" messaging so much as it means trying to stop doctors from injecting patients with heroin when they're passed out in front of them.

if the issue was put to me in the form of a referendum or a direct vote, i would vote to ban opioid prescriptions, but not for the reasons presented by the candidate.

16:04

this is the problem:

that is what public policy needs to address.
16:23

In 2018, almost 1 in 8 people were prescribed opioids. 

that's outrageous. that number should be 1 in 100000.

16:45

don't forget to listen to and trust your doctor, eh?
16:52

is it likely that conservatives would support a total ban on payments from drug companies to doctors in canada?

they actually supported campaign financing limits. our relatively strict campaign finance laws are from the harper government.

it's possible, but this polievre clown is trying to appeal to a very obscure audience.
17:01

the ndp are hopeless on this issue.
17:02

it may not take much thought to realize that drug companies are a more reasonable villain than some vague abstraction of "wokism", but that doesn't mean you'll get a cogent policy out of them.
17:02

erdogan actually has a twisted sense of humour.

he's going to invade syria on the american thanksgiving.

let us all enjoy some turkey poutine.
19:07

erdogan has very googley poultry eyes. you could mistake him for a bird if you weren't careful.
19:08

it certainly benefits nato to open up another front, but the issue is what happens if the whole region blows up, and you've got russian soldiers in georgia, or trebizond, all of a sudden. the obvious logical argument is that the russians can't do that right now, which is why they have to do it.

erdogan would not do this in open defiance of the united states. so, the question is if putin takes the bait a second time.

russia considers itself a protectorate and, for that reason, an attack on syria is functionally a declaration of war on russia, if the russians haven't already figured that out.
19:15

i keep coming back to this, because that is the actual war on the ground and nobody understands it, including the russians. this is yet another russian-turkic war for control over the black sea and middle east.
19:17

wednesday, november 23, 2022

i have now completed the essay.

this is fairly esoteric, but it has to be; what a mess.

i found a ruling where somebody sued the cops in a civil case, and the horrible police force then amazingly tried to apply for estoppel on an oiprd report that exonerated themselves. remember: this is the police investigating themselves. the supreme court eventually correctly decided that that was ridiculous and denied the estoppel, but the attitude on the court has almost completely reversed (which is a negative outcome. canada used to have an excellent court system before harper & trudeau colluded to ruin it, in order to advance the interests of the petrostate.), since. this is an excellent reason to hear the case, because i was planning on using estoppel, after the court corrected the errors in the report (the filing was pre-vavilov).

the difficulty i'm having with this is really demonstrating how badly vavilov has broken the court system in this country, but let's see if i can get through this block that just popped up, here.

i should be able to appeal this if the justice blocks it, which is in a real sense what i was expecting to do, anyways. it's abundantly clear that i have a good reason to file this.
4:00

i don't respect the legislature and i do not want to live in a civil law jurisdiction. the legislature has no legitimate place interfering in the common law courts.

i'm going to continue to cite common law principles with intent, in order to get around this bullshit, for as far up as i can take it.
10:55

it actually wouldn't be that difficult for musk to launch a mobile phone division, given the technology used in tesla cars.

20:24

friday, november 25, 2022

the return of el douche at the emergencies commission was less eventful than hoped for, but really more or less as expected.

of course el douche knows he was right, and never thought to question otherwise. what else would anybody expect?

el douche is not one to wonder if he might be wrong; el douche is a Strong Leader that rules with his iron gut.

where have we seen and heard this bullshit before?

you can vote for harper, or you can vote for harper. if you don't like that, you can always vote for harper, instead.
20:47

we don't have term limits in canada, but we have an unwritten three-term best before date. el douche should be winding things down, now - his time is up, and he is expected to step down. 

i'm actually worried he might be planning to declare himself king.

this strong man messaging is of some serious concern.
20:50

that said, it's also a clear reaction to changing demographics in the country, which is something that revealed itself in pandemic polling.

canadians are a lot more authoritarian and a lot less interested in democratic decision making than they used to be.
20:52

if el douche is being presented by his handlers as il duce all of a sudden, it is largely because their polling suggests that it will help them retain power.
20:55

of course, it will be my responsibility to make fun of any strong man or authoritarian messaging from the pmo. that's what i'm here for. that's my job.
20:57

some future author may decide the xi encounter was formative, and it may have been a catalyst, but this has been in motion for a while.

so, behold our dauphin's transformation into el douche.

machiavelli would be proud.
20:59

somehow, el douche's longstanding fascination with china's "basic dictatorship" was lost in the botched photo op media circus.

trudeau is no defender of democracy.

"if this were a dictatorship it would be a heck of a lot easier...as long as i'm the dictator." - george w. bush
21:08

"there’s a level of admiration i actually have for china because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime" - justin trudeau

it's funny how stupid people, regardless of political affiliation, universally gravitate towards authoritarianism. at least bush was mostly joking - sort of. (insert uncomfortable laugh). trudeau was, by all accounts, dead serious.

realizing that point is key in understanding why mr. trudeau was so emotionally invested in not being batted away by mr. xi. mr. xi is actually the kind of leader that trudeau looks up to.
21:12

we have time to vote trudeau out of office, still. we will get at least one more chance.

we might not get two more chances, though.
21:13

the messaging from the pmo presenting trudeau as strong, dominant, authoritarian and intuitive rather than intellectual - as a third world dictator -  is abundantly clear and it's going to get louder in the upcoming months.
21:14

21:34

21:35

mr trudeau never thinks anything through.

thinking things through is for the weak.

Strong Leaders act without thinking and strike without a second thought. 
22:46

second thoughts are for senators.
22:47

saturday, november 26, 2022

i ended up losing the entire week to legal concerns. i don't want to draw too much attention to it here, but it seems like the cops hacked the legal document, to stop me from advancing my argument.

have you ever tried to fix a vandalized legal document, with all it's technical language and intricate logic? trying to fix this site repeatedly is bad enough, but my argument, as it is, is pretty elaborate - more so than most legal arguments, even. i am first developing an application for inherent jurisdiction, then seeking for a court of inherent jurisdiction to apply in, and relying on s. 96. i have to get a lot of very specific things right to advance the argument, so any sort of vandalism becomes exceedingly time consuming to unravel and fix. at the least, i've proven to myself that i understand the argument i'm making.

i had to disconnect from the internet on wednesday night, change all of my passwords, flash all of my devices and carefully go over it in a virtual machine, all while trying to convince a superior court justice that i'm actually not crazy, and that somebody really did hack the document.

they ended up giving me an extension and asking me to upload it to a document management system, so i could error-correct. it's a workable workaround. i lost the week, though.

i was able to take a look at my bicycle tonight for the first time and realized that what has actually happened is that the "lock ring" on the "bottom bracket" has disappeared. i'm going to presume it corroded away, but it's gone. i'm able to date the bike to at least as old as the 90s by the bracket mechanism, but i suspect it was probably built in the 80s. my very finnish/swedish grandmother had a lengthy relationship with an italian over the second half of her life; the bike either belonged to him, or was purchased by him, and may have been manufactured in italy. he may have rode it twice. he was italian italian - eight course meals, kitchens in the basement, the whole thing. he had some kind of drywall business. or, that's what i was told, anyways. if it wasn't made in italy, it has a lot of italian parts in it, and that's of some relevance in understanding how to fix it because italian bicycle technology is non-standard.

i was not able to loosen the lock on the pedal with the ratchet, which is probably good news overall but means i probably have to take it in to fix it, and i think it's a very minor fix. after looking into it, i'm concerned that, even if i can loosen it, i won't be able to tighten it. i need them to use some kind of power tool to get the bolt off, clean it, put a $0.30 lock on it and retighten the bolt.

i needed some ratchets, anyways - that wasn't a bad purchase - but i won't be able to use it to fix the bike because the premise that the arm is loose isn't the case. rather, the screw that locks the arm to the frame has entirely disappeared, no doubt because it was just ridden down. i wanted to understand if i could fix it before i reacted and have decided i can deal with this relatively easily, but want it fixed by somebody with the right tools and upper body strength. it's not that i don't understand how to fix it, it's that i now understand that i don't have access to the tools to fix it.

i'm going to ask around for a quote. if i take it in somewhere, i'm going to ask them to take a good look at it before they try to fix it, to see if there's any glaring issues with crooked gearing, which is what i think somehow caused the actual problem.

it's both relieving and frustrating; if i could get the bolt off, i could order a very inexpensive part, but it's actually good that i can't get the bolt off because it means it's not loose, unless it's seized. if the bolt is seized or stripped, there's not going to be an easy fix, i'll have to replace the arm along with the bracket, and i'll have to pay somebody to do it. in that case, i'm likely better off buying a used bicycle to replace this one, and putting this one to fix at a later date, instead.
3:29

on second thought, this trick got the bolt off:


i used a block of wood held up by a speaker cabinet.

this video explains what i need to do next, and the tools i'll need to get, if i can find them for an inexpensive price.

the piece i need to replace is the "lock ring", because it's not there.

4:10

the media is talking about the public order bill in the uk.

time to pull out the autechre.

11:16

i've decided that i'm going to buy the tools to fix the bicycle. it might not be successful, but they're not that expensive, and i can learn something in the process of doing it. the worst case scenario is that i'll have the tools for future use if i need them and i'll need to either send the bike in somewhere or buy a new one with that $500 they give me.

i won't send more than $50 on a used bike. my bicycles aren't pretty things that sit in the garage to be marveled at; i ride these things until they crumble into shavings and dust. take your bourgeois bicycles away; give me your wretched refuse to destroy.

having a nice bicycle is a privilege, but having a working bicycle is a necessity. i will fix it or prove i can't, but it's going to take me some time to fully understand how to do it.

in the mean time, i'm going to properly maintain my detroit bicycle and use it for errands, instead. we'll have to see if i think i can exercise with it, but it's december in canada; i might get a day or two, at most, of usable bicycle weather until february at the earliest. 

that said, i think it's going to be an unusually mild winter, here. like, a frighteningly mild winter. we've had some cold snaps, and we'll likely have a few more, but the ambient temperature here nowadays hovers closer to 10 degrees celsius than 0 degrees celsius, which means that it's around 10 degrees here for 15 out of any random 20 days in the winter, nowadays. we don't get three months of winter here, anymore; we get three days of winter, scattered across the season.

i like to keep my nice bike inside during the winter, but the detroit bike was bought for more rugged applications, and it's appropriate to have it fixed at this point for that reason, anyways.

what happened to the detroit bike is that i got a flat in it in late 2019 and the pandemic happened before i got around to fixing it. all of the bicycle shops here were closed for months. it's time to fix it.

that's what i'm doing, then - i need to slowly fix and comprehensively clean up the nice bike for a re-ridable date set to early spring and get the detroit bike ready to act as a backup for what i expect to be a startlingly mild winter.
12:32

bicycles are made out of moving parts. there's a 100% chance they're going to break, if you use them.

i suppose that the more money you have, the more money you can waste, but it does not make sense to buy expensive bicycles, given that it's a device that will be destroyed by merely using it.
12:38

i'm going to spend the $500 inflation check on a bicycle?

no, i would never spend that much on a bicycle. i might spend $100. i have no idea what i might do with the rest of it, yet. i might just sit on it.

i tried to explain this before. poor people don't experience inflation because they don't qualify for loans and they don't purchase gas. the ndp and liberals are trying to win upper class votes by appealing to their desire for charity and noblesse oblige, but the policy doesn't actually make any economic sense. the mini-budget put a greater focus on middle class tax cuts, and that actually made more sense both because they're the people that are actually most affected by inflation and because we're teetering on a recession. my landlord could increase my rent by a legislation-controlled amount, but he hasn't and my rent hasn't changed since 2018. the ford government just made some sneaky changes to the hydro bill that's going to make it more expensive, but that's not going to hurt me much. i'd guess that i've lost maybe $50 due to inflation on groceries this year (yes, regular prices are up, but i've consistently been able to find sale prices. it has not been that big of a change, in truth.), and that was offset by the odsp increase last month. meanwhile, i'm getting all kinds of free money because i supposedly need it "the most". it's just not true; i'm actually shielded from inflationary pressures for the reason that i don't have enough money to buy anything anyways.

sure, i'll buy a bicycle.

my neighbours are going to spend it on marijuana; at least i'm not doing that.
13:07

i'd expect a rise in opioid overdoses around saturnalia that is directly tied to giving addicts $500 checks in the middle of the canadian drug season.
13:15

i can't oppose or turn down a $500 check. i can only appreciate it, even as i criticize the policy.

that's a lot of money, for me. 
13:16

the solution to a population revolting against tyrannical laws is not more tyrannical laws, to ensure that they cannot revolt.

this government needs to take accountability for the unjustified restrictions of people's rights during the pandemic, and there is no indication at this point that it has any intention of doing so.

that is merely an algorithm for more unrest
14:38

this is a recent case that touches on many of the issues i draw attention to in my notice and in my elucidation of purpose:

- it upholds the macmillan test
- it confirms that inherent jurisdiction is a s. 96 determination that cannot be modified by provincial statute (making the divisional court unconstitutional)
- it declares the court of quebec unconstitutional for attempting to declare inherent jurisdiction

you can't decide if a court is or is not one of inherent jurisdiction at the provincial legislature; it is strictly a decision made in s. 96. no exceptions.

the divisional court is defined in s. 96 and therefore has inherent jurisdiction, according to that new precedent (and that was always the actual truth!).

if applied directly, the divisional court can either transfer inherent jurisdiction to the case or tear down the courts of justice act. (and burn it to be sure).

the court gave me jurisdiction. i don't want to poke at the elephant too much on it, but they didn't realize the centrality of inherent jurisdiction to the argument.

i'm going to merely cite it in an addendum that clarifies that a recent case is very much in line with the request in my filing.
19:20

if the government ever rounds me up out of my house and tries to send me somewhere with a gun in my hand, i will use that gun to shoot the person that rounded me up, and not the people they want me to murder in the name of some bourgeois financial concern.

the state should think carefully about putting guns in peoples hands, by coercion or enforcement.

it might backfire.

19:32

i would not break a nail to protect the economic system or the social organization in this country; i would rather jump at the opportunity to burn it down and start over again.
19:42

if the canadian military cannot find volunteers, perhaps it should get the point, which is that this country isn't worth defending, and fuck off.
19:44

necessarily not conscription.
19:49

sunday, november 27, 2022

addendum to the essay response

i did not petition the court for a time extension, but i was granted one and am going to utilize it by introducing an addendum to the response. the addendum will consist of two sections. the first points out the existence of a recent case of substantive relevance that i was not previously aware of and the second summarizes the submission in the form of a question and answer session, as i realize my argument is complicated and i want to conduct certiorari on myself to be sure that i am getting the point across as clearly as i can. self-certiorari, as a life tactic, is under-utilized and highly advised, so long as it does not reach a level of neuroticism (i do maintain that my document was vandalized and that some entity that might be a state is consistently in and out of my personal communication, and i don't know if that is being conducted legally, or if the actor would even acknowledge the existence of a rule of law). the addendum also functions as a checklist, to ensure that i am not missing any key points in my argument.

part one

i will draw the court's attention to the second quebec reference case [2021], which declares that legislation passed in quebec parallel to the courts of justice act is unconstitutional because it infringes on the s. 96 inherent jurisdiction of the superior court and touches on almost all of the issues presented in my response. i wish i was aware of this case from the start. it is not necessary to rewrite my response to explicit cite this precedent; i will rather point out that the new case merely strengthens every component of my argument, and would strongly request everybody read the case all the way through and keep it in mind as they analyze my response, if they have not already, which i presume they have.

the link to the case is here:

part two

base:
1) does the oiprd exercise a judicial function in the report? yes, as per penner.
2) is it within the jurisdiction of the oiprd to evaluate the legality of an arrest? no, as per the police services act.
3) does the report contain statements evaluating the legality of the arrest? yes.

purpose:
4) are the conclusions in the oiprd report of any substantive legal value in a legitimate court of law? yes, as per s. 19 of the statutory powers procedure act, presumably relative to whether those conclusions are within the jurisdiction of the enabling provincial statute or not. as per (2), statements evaluating the legality of the arrest would presumably be of no legal value, inadmissible in a legitimate court of law (they would be hearsay, like any other police report) and strictly the irrelevant opinion of the author of the report. 
5) nonetheless, might some third party attempt to present the aforementioned (presumably) legally worthless statements evaluating the legality of the arrest in a legitimate court of law as a request for estoppel, should a civil case (for example, under s. 24 of the charter) be launched against them, in relation to the (alleged) illegality of the arrest? the precedent in penner allows for judicial discretion to evaluate the fairness of the estoppel request, but the deferential precedent set by vavilov may require revisiting that outcome. the quebec reference [2021] defers to vavilov, when the court is directly asked a similar question, but then rules that that deference dos not apply to decisions that assume the core jurisdiction of the court, as per macmillan. the direction of the court is increasingly to defer to the quasi-judicial or even extra-judicial body rather than to exercise independence or show discretion, but this tendency is not applicable to cases where the core jurisdiction of the court is being exercised [quebec reference [2021]]. the correct deduction is that a party might very well try, and might very well be successful, at least until the issue is appropriately appealed.
6) is the report unreasonable? i claim it is blatantly preposterous. it certainly contains statements that directly contradict longstanding judicial precedent regarding the necessity of evaluating claims of harassment in law using an objective basis of analysis (r v. burns, r v. george, r. v silip, r. v. kosikar) and i claim it directly misunderstands the precedent set in storrey regarding s. 495. the opposing parties understand their respective positions and no resolution is possible without direct judicial intervention; i'm never going to accept a police report that attempts to carry out a judicial function, and the police are never going to show restraint when given discretion to reinterpret or rewrite the law for their own benefit, to increase their own authority. there's a reason the court is supposed to oversee the police, after all; it's not an institution that has a history of enlightened enforcement of law, or restrained use of power. vavilov explicitly clarified that the deferential precedent requires serious pause in a rule of law context. the courts cannot be routinely deferring to police; that is the definition of a police state.
7) is that deferential tendency a pressing enough purpose to exercise certiorari on the report in front of us, which is now of orphaned jurisdiction due to the oiprd defaulting on it's statutorily defined jurisdiction, to petition a legitimate court of law to rule on the question of the arrest's legality in a document of actual substantive legal value, in order to prevent relitigation in the context of various civil cases, given that i am convinced the report is unreasonable, or is that question better addressed by the superior court, as the issue appears before it, in those various civil contexts? that is what is to be determined by this court at this time.
8) does the report contain defamatory statements about myself? i allege that it does. 
9) does the oiprd have immunity in making defamatory statements that exceed it's jurisdiction? is correcting defamatory statements in the report a substantive purpose for certiorari, in the context of the estoppel concern? that is also a question before the court.

inherent jurisdiction:
10) given that the oiprd is exercising a judicial function, are all three of the conditions of the residential tenancies test fully met? yes. this is left to the court's expertise and competence to confirm and elaborate upon, as the issue is wholly in the discretion of the court. as a party to the proceedings that is acting as a lawyer, i can only point out that the court never elaborates when it answers these questions, which provides for no actual direction in deconstructing stare decisis; the precedent is that the court has discretion and does not elaborate on it's decisions. there is some trickiness in the third part of the test that i leave to the court to analyze.
11) is the question of the legality of an arrest within the core public law jurisdiction of the superior court? clearly, yes. the court may elaborate, as per it's expertise. see the explanation in (10).
12) is the legality of an arrest therefore a question within the inherent jurisdiction of s. 96 courts? yes, as per macmillan.
13) would a theoretical enabling statute of the oiprd that includes exclusive jurisdiction to determine the legality of an arrest be ultra vires? yes, as per macmillan.
14) does the superior court retain the discretion to assume inherent jurisdiction over a report by the oiprd which exercises a judicial function, like evaluating the legality of an arrest? yes, as per macmillan.
15) is the question as to whether the oiprd had jurisdiction over that judicial function relevant? no - the jurisdiction is inherent to the superior court. if the oiprd wants to act like a superior court, the superior court has jurisdiction over it; the enabling statute, or lack thereof, is irrelevant. only the superior court may act like the superior court. that is s. 96. as per macmillan.
16) does the deferential tendency introduced in vavilov apply to bodies exercising (core) judicial functions that belong to the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court? the quebec reference [2021] would suggest that it does not.
17) does the superior court have the discretion to exercise inherent jurisdiction over the statements evaluating the legality of the arrest (a core judicial function) in the oiprd report if a pressing purpose might be demonstrated for it to do so? clearly, it does, yes.

courts of justice act:
18) if my petition for certiorari were filed in alberta, would the court of king's bench have inherent jurisdiction over it? yes, according to their website and longstanding precedent and s. 96.
19) can a petition for certiorari to the appropriate superior court have inherent jurisdiction in one province and not in another? no, that would contradict the federal government's exclusive right to define inherent jurisdiction, under s. 96 of the constitution.
20) must some branch of the superior court of ontario be able to invoke inherent jurisdiction in the case, then? yes - by citing symmetry with alberta in the application of s. 96 to the two provinces. proofs by symmetry may be somewhat unusual in law, but are considered very elegant in mathematics and physics.
21) which branch of the superior court of ontario is most appropriate to hear the case? as this is fundamentally a judicial review, the case is most appropriately heard in the divisional court, due to the jrpa and the courts of justice act.
22) yet, does the divisional court have inherent jurisdiction to hear it? i will refrain from answering that directly immediately.
23) can the provincial legislature create courts of inherent jurisdiction parallel to s. 96 courts? no, that would be in contravention of s. 96 [quebec reference[2021]] .
24) can the provincial legislature eliminate inherent jurisdiction from courts defined under s. 96? that wouldn't make logical sense, in light of quebec reference [2021]. the longstanding constitutional understanding is that the provinces cannot "touch" s. 96.
25) can the ontario legislature create a court like the divisional court that eliminates the inherent jurisdiction of the s. 96 court? according to academic tradition, it can, but that claim has no actual basis in law and would be strongly rebutted by quebec reference [2021].
26) did the ontario legislature even intend to eliminate inherent jurisdiction from the divisional court in the first place, or was the partition merely intended to create three specialized superior courts?
27) as a s. 96 court, has the divisional court always exercised a discretion that is functionally equivalent to inherent jurisdiction, anyways? in truth it has - and there is a plethora of precedents.
28) is the courts of justice act ultra vires for attempting to interfere with s. 96 in removing inherent jurisdiction from the divisional court branch of the superior court? it really would have to be, but the court decides cases, i merely argue them.

inherent jurisdiction applied to the divisional court

29) does the divisional court have really existing discretion to decide it has inherent jurisdiction to hear the case? 
1:16

el douche got picked on by the much manlier chinese president at the g20, which wounded el douche's pride, so el douche is going to carry out a mass shooting on china in response. that'll teach them to be mean to el douche.

talk about gunboat diplomacy.

don't mess with el douche. el douche is Strong. el douche is Tough. el douche is a Real Leader.

17:37

the terrorist attack on the nightclub in colorado is a disturbing consequence of the inherent belligerence of america's perpetual war culture, but it is not unique and this will not be the last time it happens. i do not understand - i mean that. i don't get it - why anybody would think that shuffling mean tweets under the rug by censoring them would in any way prevent the inevitable continuation of periodic future terrorist attacks by a psychologically damaged people in a broken and perverted culture of violence, exploitation and war. americans are taught to worship war; these terrorist attacks carried out by these people are an expected and unavoidable consequence of the war machine and how it teaches young men to glorify violence. rather, it is abundantly logically clear that the way to catch potential terrorists is to give them a forum, and then track them down when they broadcast their intentions. words don't matter, but intent is paramount and words can broadcast intent. banning these people from telling us what they think just makes it harder to figure out who these people are and consequently much harder to stop these people from acting out, in the way that el douche is doing with china. would you have previously labeled el douche a terrorist? he has to tell us he's a terrorist, or we wouldn't know it.

you can take away their guns and phones all you want, but so long as the intelligence-media complex continues to inculcate a culture that glorifies war in young men, this will carry on.

another important social policy consideration in encouraging these people to talk out their emotions rather than coercing them to bottle them up, thereby causing them to eventually explode in acts of violence and terrorism, is that it allows for diffusion. it is true that many of these people are thoroughly unloved, but in many cases there is somebody that can identify warning signals in an attempt to intervene before an act of terrorism occurs. now that el douche has told us that he's angry and ashamed about being embarrassed by the much manlier president of china in public, concerned parties can intervene to talk to el douche about his emotions in order to try to prevent him from acting out in a way that causes harm to others. el douche is still our dauphin, after all; there is still a fragile, young dauphin in there underneath the rugged el douche exterior. that is the ideal outcome; you want to identify these people before they act out and help them learn how to talk through their emotions without lashing out. you can't identify warning signals if you have a "don't say mean things" policy in place. it's an utterly backwards tactic that was discarded for good reason many decades ago.

if you want to solve problems, you need to get at root causes, which in this case is america's war culture (i am not talking about "culture wars". i am talking about the culture of war that defines america at it's core essence.), not put bandaids over everything and pretend it doesn't exist because you can't see or hear it. that is the logic of ostriches, not of human beings. i'm no aristotlian, but you probably are and he would take you and your ostrichism to task for it's inherent unhumanness.

so long as america remains a patriarchal and hierarchical society that is built not just on the culture of war but on a media complex that brainwashes young working class boys into glorifying war so that they may be willingly marched out as cannon fodder to be sacrificed to advance the interests of the capitalists and bankers, these terrorist attacks will continue to happen as blowback, and all that trying to censor angry people - who are a product of the hierarchical thinking and a product of the culture of war - will do is cause them to push their emotions deep inside, until they explode in acts of violence. we need more equality, not more hierarchy; we need more discourse, not less.

the rational reaction to the shooting is that we need to talk about it more, not less. i don't understand the opposing viewpoint; i don't understand how anybody would decide that this problem is solved by increased censorship. the proposal is incoherent. logic suggests that censorship would be more likely to make the problem worse and that those proposing censorship in response are therefore actually acting out of ulterior motives to advance a predetermined set of policy objectives, which is the continued implementation of a police state.

bizarrely, these are the same people that argue that you better address drug addiction by "removing taboos" around it, which is utterly unscientific (heroin addiction is a physical phenomenon, it's not some abstract social construction. it changes your brain chemistry.). 

it's a fundamental consistent truth: the fake or bourgeois left is inherently irrational. 
17:48

monday, november 28, 2022

core jurisdiction update
- note that contempt is like habeas corpus, which determining the legality of an arrest is an extension of. 
- habeas corpus can only be determined by a court of inherent jurisdiction and is therefore a core function of the court
- Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Chhina [[2019] 2 SCR 467] confirms the inherent jurisdiction of the court, as it loosens a tradition of judicial restraint to utilize that inherent jurisdiction
3:02

this is utterly baffling to me.

the premise that the government might step in and impose conditions on unionized private sector works is utterly insane. these workers need immediate solidarity, across the world.

paid sick leave is hardly an excessive demand, but that's not the point. if the government tries to intervene in the private sector in this manner, private sector workers across the country should rise up in a general strike. if that is allowed to happen, what is stopping biden from routinely dictating contract terms via executive order?

this kind of state tyranny cannot be tolerated. this is none of the government's business.

21:05

if the president must act like a king, why not declare paid sick leave by executive order, then?
21:06

this is a major attack on the rights of workers.

there must be some response.
21:09

tuesday, november 29, 2022
while there is plenty of good evidence to uphold gimbutas' presentation of the expansion of indo-european speaking proto-celts into central europe as a violent process, including the rewinding of the known history of steppe migrations (which is the argument i've always found most compelling.), observing waves of ukrainian migrants into central europe provides a different perspective on the kurgan expansion that also has historical precedents.

this large scale movement of slavic, or proto-slavic, speaking people from east to west has happened before. it's happened many times.
7:50

you realize we all speak a distorted form of russian, right?
8:02

we all came from ukraine, at one point.
8:03

it's always been baffling to me how many people think english descends from latin, sometimes via french. it's a point i used to impress adults in correcting, when i was a kid.

"actually, english is germanic."
"nooooo, you silly child. everybody knows english is french, from william the conqueror, in 1066."
"while the normans, who were a latinized swedish group, had a large influence on england, english is in fact a branch of german that is not that different than old frankish."
"oh, you don't know what you're talking about. silly children."
"well, i might invite you to look it up, sir."

(ten minutes later)

"by golly, this child is correct."

it kind of doesn't matter. english and latin are both perverted russian, anyways.
8:09

wednesday, november 30, 2022

after slowing down my diet to make sure i'm really not bleeding, i have been isolating my diet to determine what is giving me diarrhea on a regular basis due to what i presume is a food allergy.

i came in after a walk tonight and immediately took a giant shit. it was obvious that i was passing the quinoa i had eaten about 24 hours previously, as well as part of the eggs i had eaten about 12 hours previously. i've taken to paying attention to these things.

i then made a big spicy caesar salad:

- *80 g kale leaves  <----lettuce replacement. kale is far superior to lettuce.
- *1 whole lime (chopped, including peel & pith, which are diced)  <----lime is superior to lemon due to the presence of inositol. i would rather consume whole fruits than manufactured fruit juices. 
- 2 cloves of garlic 
- 1 tbsp cumin  <----source of iron & worcestershire replacement
- 1 tbsp nutritional yeast  <----part of worcestershire replacement.
- a lot of hot sauce (frank's) <----part of worcestrershire replacement
- 1 cup of soy milk (no added sugar)  <----- base of sauce replacement
- two slices of whole wheat bread (with germ) <---crouton replacement
- 1 tsp olive oil margarine  <---olive oil replacement
- 40 g cheddar cheese  <---parmesan replacement
- a swirl of store bought caesar dressing  <----for the hint of anchovies
- *1 tbsp cayenne pepper  <---spicy
- *2 scotch bonnet peppers  <----spicy 
- *1 tbsp oregano  <----this is really meant as a source of iron
- 1 tbsp hemp seeds  <-----minerals & omega-3
- 1 tbsp paprika  <-----vitamin a & iron
- 1 tbsp sunflower seeds <---vitamin e

i did not include mustard powder or yogurt [intended as a thickener to replace the eggs] in this meal because i'm suspecting them as the culprit, but they are a part of the recipe. the items with a * are the items that have not yet been declared "safe", due to years of use or having already consumed them recently and not reacted to them.

not that i am not reacting to wheat. i am not reacting to the bread with my eggs (which is my base case. i never react to the eggs; they always pass cleanly) and i am not reacting to my very gluten-heavy cereal, which includes all bran + added raw wheat bran. whatever i am allergic to is not gluten.

after eating this meal, i slept for a short period of time and woke up to the urge for an imminent large bowel movement, which ejected what i had eaten less than three hours earlier. now, you might claim this is unlikely, but i must assure you that the food remnants were clearly what i just ate, including bits of kale (which is expected.) and visible signs of scotch bonnet peppers. i had not eaten this meal in several weeks because i wasn't able to find kale at the store the last time i was out. there is no way that this kale was from three weeks ago.

the ejected material is best described as half-digested rather than as loose or watery. it was very much a steaming pile - neither your healthy sausage (which is what i'd been passing the last few weeks) nor your violent explosion of liquid fire, but more like a clump of decomposing leaves, which is what it actually very much literally was. more concerning is the transit time, and the obvious truth that my body forcibly ejected this meal before digesting it. this meal was outright rejected by my intestines.

the suspects are: kale, lime, scotch bonnets, cayenne pepper or oregano. i think it's highly likely that i'm having a bad reaction to the very large amounts of capsicum in this meal, but i want to be certain about this. i have been eating bell peppers and hot sauce for years without consequence, and i'm not reacting to the paprika in my other meals, but the scotch bonnets, on top of it, may be past a tolerance level, for me. i may be functionally overdosing on capsicum.

three hours is a very short transit time, though, and i'm wondering if it's related to the pancreas issues.

i need to experiment with this. if i can stabilize this by altering my diet, that's fine; maybe my pancreas is mildly malfunctioning, but i can hardly just go buy a new pancreas. yet. soon, hopefully. for now, i need a workaround.

so, i'll need to take the last three out the next time around and see what happens.

this very fast transit time is something i've been suspecting for a while, but i wasn't able to prove it until now.
4:21
at
Location: