to be clear: i don't in any way at all, not in any shape or in any implication, not in the slightest suggestion, deny being somebody that greatly enjoys inebriation and intoxication, and even profoundly suggests it as a life choice for others.

i'm trying to avoid calling myself a drunk, because it's just not true. i enjoy being drunk. you may very well bump into me when i'm drunk. but, i'm not an alcoholic. nor am i a pothead. and, i will go through weeks and sometimes months at a time without the use of intoxicants.

but, i do not reject them, or have any affinity or solidarity with those that would. i would rather advocate them as a great thing to enjoy. and, i'm a little put off by anybody, in 2017, that is suggesting that drugs are anything other than great fun*; chances are that i'm not going to get along with somebody like that.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

* does not include opiates. opiates are not fun. opiates are fucking retarded.

this is two conceptually linked outtakes from mid 2002 that document an event that i'm going to be vague and obscure about.

written in august, 2002. track one was mildly remixed on dec 12, 2014; two and three were uploaded unmodified. final completion date is dec 12, 2014. as always, please use headphones.

the lead track appears without vocals on my seventh record:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ftaa

this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).

credits

released August 31, 2002

j - guitar, effects, bass, drum sampling, drum and other programming, digital wave editing, vocals 

 

 

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

republishing inri059

something like this would have been the demo brought along on an acoustic tour that never happened. tracks 1-4 would have represented a live set over the summer of 2002, while tracks five and six are otherwise stranded acoustic demos (and may have been played as encores, where possible). the style could be broadly categorized as folk punk, but it also leans heavily towards the emo of the period.

written and recorded in late 2001 and the first half of 2002. mildly remixed in november, 2014 to make the tracks more presentable; nothing substantial was altered, and no new sound was recorded. final mixes were on november 19, 2014. disc released on physical media and finalized as inri059 on nov 14, 2017. as always, please use headphones.

this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).

credits

released August 1, 2002

j - acoustic guitar, voice (3)
sean - vocals, lyrics 

 

 

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

europe really needs a moderate party to acknowledge that these people have legitimate concerns and that you don't have to reduce the spectrum to making a choice between wide open neo-liberalism and totally insular fascism - that there are places on the spectrum, in between.

i'm not going to pick a side in a fight between christians and muslims, i'm going to go have a beer and let them kill each other.

but, immigration to europe is not the same thing as immigration to north america. our indigenous peoples are largely dead. but, europe has a strong indigenous population that has a right to maintain it's own culture in the face of waves of unwanted immigration.

pluralism is a choice, and the principles of democracy mean that if the people don't want it then the state should reject it. and, at the end of the day, i'm in favour of self-determination.

it was in the mid thirteenth century that the polish took the brunt of the damage in stopping the mongol invasion of europe. they lost the first two fights, but they slowed them down enough. they won the third battle. this is an area that has known invasion and that has suffered from it. their reaction should not be dismissed out of hand.

https://www.indy100.com/article/60000-people-far-right-wing-fascist-march-poland-white-europe-independence-day-islamophobia-tommy-8051011?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

what?

you don't think rapists would fit right in, if we punished them via conscription?

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

"pure islam" is an intriguing term, and is going to have two almost diametrically opposed meanings, depending on who is using it: it is either going to be a rallying cry for the most barbaric extremists you could imagine, or it's going to be an attempt for non-religious people with arab cultural backgrounds to essentially appropriate a jewish or christian identity as muslim.

the jewish scriptures are historically useless - which is to say that they aren't even necessarily wrong. this was such a long time ago, and the sources are so terrible, that you can't even prove them wrong, except through common sense. i don't need an argument to debunk the parting of the red sea. but, we'll never know whether or not there was a slave revolt, or whether or not people named moses or aaron had prominent roles in it. we can say that there appears to be archaeological continuity in the near east - that there isn't any sign of an invasion - but that's not really a proof that it didn't happen. good skeptics need to throw away the obvious nonsense and remain agnostic as to the general plot line. but, nonetheless, the jewish scriptures tell a story of a people that escaped from slavery with the help of divine intervention - and is then sent into slavery again, in repentance for their sins. a true judaism is consequently a kind of liberation theology. these are a people that identify as escaped slaves, and attach their ability to be free to upholding their pious behaviour: god gives them freedom in exchange for good behaviour.

the christian sources are only mildly better, but they hint at what is by far the most attractive society of the three. what we can piece together about these gnostic sects is that they were not much different than the mystery cults of the day - that they engaged in wild sexual practices under the influence of gratuitous drug and alcohol consumption deep in caves and other hidden places. a pure christianity is consequently a kind of pagan sex cult - but one that is built on egalitarian values and a crude understanding of socialism. then, power corrupts. remember: the office of the pope is actually the same thing as that of the high priest of rome. these conservative christian values only came in after the fact: christianity was initially pretty wild, and is on the very far left in it's most pure form.

but, islam doesn't have a history of this sort. mohammad was a warrior king, and these rules are designed to aid conquest. what islam is is a reflection of the christianity that existed in the period of heraclius. here's some history you don't know: jihad was invented by a roman emperor, who launched a holy war against the persians to recover the true cross and return it to jerusalem, then still a roman city. and, the crusades were more of a war against persia than a war against islam, the muslims merely taking the place of the iranians (and, the franks of the romans). pure islam is imperialism and colonization. it's ethnic nationalism. it's a set of rules to organize conquest with. and, it's a system of laws to decree in an empire, from the top down. this is inherently different.

so, the argument of "pure islam" comes from either direction. the truthful argument of pure islam attaches it to the ideology of isis, while the revisionist take tries to appropriate the christian heritage for itself, out of no legitimate history or actual tradition.

islam was more moderate in later stages. and, those seeking a moderate islam should be speaking of reformation, not of purity.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

and, i have now printed.

that should ship tomorrow....

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i haven't printed yet. there's a stench in the other room. i'm hoping it's gone by the time i wake up.

instead, i finished all of the facebook stuff up to inri063 - and i don't expect to add anything to any of these, but we'll see how it unfolds.

this should be a quick run through over the next week or two. and, then i'm caught up.

i'll get back at it when i wake up.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

why is facebook so insistent that i "may know" people in their 20s?

i'm almost 40.

i don't know anybody in their 20s...

for a site that prides itself on it's algorithms, you'd think they wouldn't make such an obvious error.

i don't know anybody. but, can you at least throw people my own age at me, guys? yeesh.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

from the communists at the world economic forum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCdruGsI1fw

don't let them tell you it's about a rising middle class.

they're looking to exploit the cheap labour.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

so, i'm finally done typing up the liner notes on this thing. i did a lot of second guessing, but i'm done with it.

i'm going to need to eat, first.

after that, i'll distribute it over facebook, do the actual liner notes and print it.

it's a civic holiday here tomorrow, so i'll have to wait until tuesday to ship. but it should be ready to go, a least.

tuesday should be a busy day, as i'll need to get groceries & get my bike fixed & call around about utilities & odsp, as well.

59 & 60 will be fast, but it looks like i'm going to have to do an aleph run after 60 so i probably won't get the next package done by tuesday. the next package will be 60 & 62 when it's ready to go, maybe by friday.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

sure, it's an encylopedia entry.

but, sadly, that's maybe where so many people need to start on the topic. canadians seem strangely ignorant of our own history.

canada was an extremely important player in the cold war. it wasn't by repeating everything that america said, and following it's every command, but rather by proposing an alternative path towards dispute resolution. we played an integral part in the disarmament treaties. this carried forward into a number of other conflicts, including the hostage situation in iran.

when i hear "canada is back", that means, to me, that it is back to the historical role that it played as a mediator. but, it isn't back. it is, in truth, further from it's historic place than it's ever been.

the reason canada will not get a security council seat is that most of the world does not see it as having an independent foreign policy. it is not much different than giving poland a seat in 1960. this is a travesty, for a country that has historically been such an important foil to the dominant narrative of east v west, and that has one of the largest economies in the world.

the person to blame is stephen harper. i don't recognize my liberal party. but, of all of the ways that this government has carried on with the previous one's policies, it's in the realm of foreign policy that it's most disappointing.

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/middle-power/#h3_jump_0

i would like to see the ndp put a strong emphasis on defeating chrystia freeland in the next election.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i opposed the invasion of iraq, because saddam hussein was not a pillaging barbarian in any meaningful sense of the term. you could at worst accuse him of engaging in a type of hostile corporate takeover. it was more like he stormed the board of the corporation of kuwait.

and, kuwait is quiet nowadays, isn't it? you never hear anything about kuwait at all, any more.

but, isis are a group that is actually composed of pillaging barbarians, and they really do want to rape and enslave you and your family. whatever the reasons for their existence - and american imperialism is certainly at the core of it - they need to be destroyed. this is the reason we have a military: to attack targets like isis, before they come and get us.

we can't be looking at war as though it's a moral question, it just leads to appeasement. sometimes, you have to eat or be eaten. sometimes, you have to do horrible things and then justify it after the fact - and reasonable people will understand that. this is reality. and, reality is not built on idealism.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i will reiterate that there are a couple of things a civilized country needs a military for. they are:

1) defence against pillaging barbarians that want to rape and enslave you and your family.
2) that would include defence against nazis, especially if your existing society is pluralistic.
3) that would also include defence against religious fundamentalists, especially if your existing society is secular.

i'm sorry if you're too stupid to see the reality in front of you.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

republishing inri058

there are a few ideas in my discography that i've explored from multiple angles, but nothing else at all like this track, which has been through multiple complete rethinks involving multiple people over the course of sixteen years. as the revisions are so diverse, i think that a comprehensive collection of interpretations is a proper entry within my discography.

in the end, this emerges as my seventh symphony.

the collection is to be arranged chronologically in four discs consisting of two 2xcd sets, with the first two discs consisting of mixes that were meant for inclusion in band projects and the third and fourth consisting of mixes that were created after the track was moved into my own various one-person projects. i've placed the third disc at the front of the sequence to stress the july, 2002 release date.

further discussions of the various incarnations of the tracks appear on the track pages, or are linked out from the track pages. please click through.

written over 2001 and rethought repeatedly over 2002, again in 2007, a third time in 2009 and one last time in late 2014. final mixes were completed over the last week of november and the first week of december, 2014. the concept was rethought on nov 3, 2017, which led to the inclusion of five more mixes and an expansion from two cds to four cds. as always, please use headphones.

the album version of the track (track 9), reconstructed in 2014, appears on my seventh record:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ftaa

the 2002 vocal mix appears on the rabit is wolf demo:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/rabit-is-wolf

this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2014, 2017). 

credits

released july 4, 2002

j - electric & acoustic & classical guitars, analog & digital effects & processing, electric bass guitar, synthesizers, drum programming, orchestral sequencing (12), drum manipulation, vocal manipulation, voice (9), digital wave editing, loops, equalizers, soundscaping, sampling, composition, production, cover art

sean - vocals/lyrics (2,5,7), ring modulator (7-9, 11, 13-14, 16)

greg - drum performance sample source (4, 6-9, 11, 13)

bob - hammering (3)

the rendered electronic orchestra on track 12 includes tuba, saxophone, flute, clarinet, orchestra hit, piano, violin, viola, cello, contrabass and various full string sections.

numbers refer to the physical tracklisting, rather than the bandcamp ordering.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

regarding the vlogs...

yes, i'm still vlogging. the major purpose was to document the music, remember. the rest of it is just incidental.

if we assume that i get my keys on nov 29th, and everything works out properly, i should be done finalizing the discography up until about 2004, by then. i'm going to push through until i get to a point where i need to actually do some more recording. that's about that point - maybe a little later, maybe more like mid 2005. things start to get less linear around 2003 until about 2011. this is periods 3 (trivial group) & 4 (proverbs).

the next thing to do is to catch up on the alter-reality, which is getting a little bit urgent.

in order to get back to editing the hundreds of gigabytes of files i have to edit, i have to fix my main laptop, which fried in an electrical storm at the end of august. that is going to be my editing machine. and, i won't get back to doing that until i've caught up on the discography to a proper point.

i'm also going to be moving, now, so it makes sense to tie the apartment upgrades i was doing to setting up the new apartment. and, this won't be the first thing i do, either. i need bookshelves first, probably.

it probably won't be by january 1st. but it will happen, eventually. and, i might even decide to stagger it a year, in the end. it might be kind of intriguing: alter-reality by 20, vlogs by 1.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

listen, i don't know how many times i have to say it, but the reason i don't make any sense to you is that i'm so much older than you.

it's called a generation gap. and, it's mutual. and, it's not my fault that you see me as your age, when i keep telling you that i'm not of your age group - that i'm very firmly in the centre of gen x.

but, i mean, they told me this would happen. when i was your age, i mean. they said we'd get squeezed out - that nobody would acknowledge we even exist. that we'd get passed over by people older than us that don't understand us, and get ignored by people younger than us that don't understand us. we were warned. we knew this was coming.

but, stop pretending there's something else underlying it. it's a generation gap. that's all.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

so, the next thing i have to ship is a four cd set and you can imagine that it's not obvious how to do this.

i actually looked at quad cases, but they don't make sense from a booklet perspective. i don't like the slim doubles, because you end up with a flimsy back in the cover art. and, while the sturdier doubles might be a nice way to professionally manufacture these, it would be kind of lame to drop a printer-paper booklet in.

i've decided i'm going to ship these in single cases for now. if i ever get them printed professionally, i'll revisit that. this particular release would make sense as two doubles.

so, i've updated the cover art on my previous two doubles, as well, and will need to make sure i'm creating the right kind of packaging in the future.

inri043:



inri047



jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i was looking for anything substantive that he had to say about the tpp...

...but the reality is that the only way he knows how to win an election is via the sikh community. but, this is another litmus test: can he win an actual election in an open riding by winning the support of a broader-based coalition? because he's not an ethnic candidate anymore, he's representing a national party. he'd better be able to do it.

clearly, he doesn't think he can.

and, he might be right.

i have an idea that would help...

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/11/08/jagmeet-singh-says-he-has-no-plans-to-run-in-upcoming-federal-byelections_a_23271040/

ok.

so, there was supposed to be a signing, but it didn't happen.

it seems like the media leaked - maybe from some party insiders - a little ahead of the gun. maybe part overly eager, and part manufacturing reality. but, in the end, it didn't work.

they can agree in principle all they want, what's important is what gets signed.

so, i guess that's a good thing, for now.

but, this government needs to avoid this like the plague. and, let the anzac countries have their own backlash to massive outsourcing to malaysian child labour - maybe they'll come back to us, one-on-one.

a free trade agreement with japan - even if it ends up as auto parts for beef - would be fine with me. it would probably just bring the japanese manufacturers more thoroughly over the border, from detroit. they're not going to make parts in japan and ship them here; what we want to stop them from doing is making parts in malaysia and shipping them here.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/11/11/canadas-decision-to-decline-tpp-agreement-shouldnt-have-been-a-surprise-trudeau.html

is there or is there not a tpp agreement?

there was an agreement in principle, but not an actual agreement? is that right?

i understand that the tory media is supporting this, and that it likes to manufacture reality, but can we get a straight answer?

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

is it possible that burial is actually an act of defiance?

"that fucking lion's been eyeing my wife for months, and she might have died of plague, *cough*, but there's no damned way i'm letting that lion get to her, now. not after all the trouble i went through in evolving bipedalism. not after i've started eating protein. no fucking way. so, i'll tell you: if i can't have her, no other species can, either. *cough*."

because, it's kind of an anti-social act, in a broader food web kind of way, right? every other species gets eaten by scavengers. and, all carnivores and omnivores are opportunistic scavengers. we give the rest of the animals a really dramatic "fuck you" by leaving ours underground, where only the worms can get to them.

maybe our ancestors actually thought that through. maybe it's intentional - maybe we're really just assholes.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

nov 9-10, 2017 vlog, where i get a new apartment and follow through on serving the old landlord.

actually, i don't think that the bible gives the jews any special right to any holy lands in the first place.

so, i don't need to pull out the khazar theory to deny any concept of a jewish right of return; the religious basis is bullshit to begin with.

it's worse than bullshit. it's insane.

think about what you're saying: you're claiming that it's ok to displace a population of people based on a promise handed down by god to somebody that walked across a desert at 120 years old in the iron age, only to collapse before he saw a "promised land".

there is no such goddamned thing as a motherfucking "promised land". alright? got it? yeesh.

how can serious people make serious policy based on such absurd idiocy? how did we let powerful institutions get taken over by such stupidity? and how did we allow this to actually happen?

i will always defer to the science, and the science says it is dubious, but i must admit that i do find the khazarian theory of ashkenazi origins as a plausible explanation of the origin of white jews. but, it has no effect on how i view israel because i don't think that brown jews have a right to a "promised land", either - because i think the idea of a "promised land" is completely fucking insane.

are there holes in the arguments detracting from the theory? well, i'm not going to do a systemic review. but if what you're doing is taking dna from some existing georgians and comparing it with dna from white jews and pointing out that they don't match, you're not really testing what you think you're testing. you could just as well deduce that the georgians aren't khazars, right? and, does anybody actually think that they are?

i've seen studies that suggest some genetic affinity between white jews and iranians, and it's maybe a little closer to the point.

but, i will defer. i must.

and, jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

remembering the mass murder and highly discriminate slaughter that our government inflicted on successive generations of conscripted soldiers is not the same thing as mindlessly waving a flag and chanting jingoistic slogans, to cheer on this elite over that one, on the basis of language or religion or whatever other anachronism you want to pull out of the unmarked shallow grave.

this is a meaningful holiday, if you understand it properly.

don't let the bastards fuck with your head.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

mr. trudeau,

you have an election in less than two years. re-election campaigns are invariably a referendum on a prime minister's record. and, what is your record to this date?

1) carry on with the policies of the existing government.
2) legalize marijuana.
3)?
4) profit.

while i recognize that there is a subset of voters that voted for the legalization of marijuana, there is not any reason to think they will vote for you as a thank you gesture.

there were lots of good ideas in your platform. you're going to have to actually carry through with a couple of them if you want people to vote for you again.

regards,
deathtokoalas

ps: jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

The chapter relating to intellectual property has been "suspended," which means, in plain terms, that it will no longer be part of a renegotiated TPP, a victory for Canada as many companies — as well as Blackberry's former CEO, Jim Balsillie — were worried about those provisions. The intellectual property chapter, which essentially applied U.S. patent laws to other member countries, was originally demanded by the former Obama administration.

that was, indeed, one of the major problems, and it's good to see it gone. but, it's just one.

i would have greatly preferred bilateral deals that take into account the specifics of each situation. these one size fits all solutions just don't fit anybody.

well, hopefully it becomes an election issue. but, can we count on the ndp to oppose it?

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

Champagne said if a country does not adhere to these requirements as called for in the agreement, any country could haul another offending partner in front of a trade tribunal, and they would be subject to the dispute resolution process.

that's never going to happen.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

there are parts of ceta i don't like, but i'm in favour of trading with europe.

i'm in favour of open trading with australia and new zealand and japan, and with slightly more restricted trading with chile and peru. and, we need some kind of agreement with china, who i know is not in the tpp.

but, a tpp that includes countries like vietnam, brunei, malaysia and mexico is just going to recreate all of the problems that we created with nafta, and for this reason canada should avoid signing on to it.

the chretien liberals had an impossible choice with nafta: they were screwed either way. and i do think they made the right choice, as difficult as it was.

but, trudeau is being given a golden opportunity to correct the errors of the 80s, and instead he's intent on repeating them. he doesn't have the situational problems that chretien had; he doesn't have the pressure from the americans to sign on.

this isn't a difficult choice, it's a foolhardy decision that will lead to a further hollowing out of the canadian economy in favour of a continued redistribution of wealth to the investor class. and, signing this will do the kind of long term damage to the liberal party of canada that clinton's championing of nafta has done to the democratic party.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

but, this is not our self-interest.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-tpp-nafta-talks-1.4398049

jagmeet singh must cut his beard

deathtokoalas

i don't tend to have a lot of empathy for soldiers. sorry.

they sold their soul to the devil, and they got burned.

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas

it's not hard to figure out that killing people is evil.

so, i don't really buy that defence.

that's basically "just following orders".

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas

that is not what these trained killers do at all - what they do is protect and uphold american corporate interests at the expense of anything and everything else. the only thing they are servants of is capital.

and, there are certain sorts of criminals that should actually probably be sent to combat instead of to jail.

send the rapists to iraq to fight isis....

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas

suggesting that criminals aren't a good fit for the military is a category error, a contradiction in terms, as one becomes a criminal as soon as they join the military.

we should neither have a standing army nor should we have conscription; we should rely on the ability to spontaneously come together in mass movements of popular solidarity, when we need to.

once in a while, the united states military will do something good - like help the soviets defeat the nazis, or not get too much in the way of the russians defeating isis. isis is the kind of thing that we ought to come together to fight. but, that doesn't change anything, or make the army's existence any less egregious.

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas

what i actually said is that certain kinds of criminals should be forced (conscripted) to serve a military term as part of their sentence. "allowed" implies some kind of privilege; the idea is that this is a punishment.

rich stoner

We are trained to handle situations and be efficient in what we do. We don't go around just killing. We detain if we can but like any criminal trying to get away it's either fight or flight and I'm not going to stand there and get shot. Also the reasons so many Innocents died kids included Muslims/foreign fighters love making vehicles into bombs, setting out landmines and other explosives, mortar rounds, shooting wildly into crowds knowing we won't fire back with bystanders around and most importantly strapping bombs to their own kids. I didn't sell my soul to the devil. So when you are sick, dying, alone and scared I will have no empathy for you. Much love

deathtokoalas

your personal anecdotes deeply belie the evidence released by sources like wikileaks, which present modern warfare rather as something not much different than playing a video game, and with not much more concern for lost life than the average gamer would demonstrate.

rich stoner

hahahaha that's too funny

deathtokoalas

well, it's the truth. you've got what amounts to naive kids playing rpgs, in the military nowadays. the work on the ground is done by local forces, and their lives aren't particularly important, either.

rich stoner

I'm 32 and I'm laughing because you act like you've been there. I know you get all your facts from reading internet garbage and watching the news. So you obviously know they didn't have police over there. We trained and setup an entire police force so they could take care of their own city. We gave people food and water, played soccer with kids. Ate meals with families, pulled tower guard. It's not just guns blazing and killing everything. Its boring about half the time, just gathering Intel so we could figure out where the insurgents were hiding at. I think you watch too many movies little girl.

deathtokoalas

i think perhaps i don't watch enough of them, and if i did i might be more inclined to accept the sanitized, hollywood presentation you're presenting. but, i do know better. sorry.

ps - there were police in iraq before you arrested, tortured and/or executed them all.

so, i'm in for the weekend. i need to recuperate. my legs are still bad. and it's cold out.

the landlord is illegally coming by on a saturday. she claims she's bringing "the new tenant". well, we'll have to film this. if it's not her mom, i could get this process rolling early.

it's actually the end of a long day for me, right now. i think i'm going to eat and shower and go to sleep. but, that means i'll get tomorrow and sunday for music, and could even ship on monday.

i'll need to call both disability and the electric company on monday. i'll need to put up an ad on kijiji for the fridge, too - but pick-up after the 29th, if i get the keys. that's another $100, hopefully. well, it's what i paid for it. and it works. i checked briefly and it seems right for a functional, if old, fridge.

arranging the move will take priority. but, i expect to get caught up by the 29th, at the very latest.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

nov 9th: served at 7:00 am.  saw apartment at 11:00 am.
10th:  signed lease at 11:30 am. mailed documents around 1:30 pm.

nov 11th & nov 12th & nov 13th: holidays

14: first day after mail
15: second day after mail
16: third day after mail
17: fourth day after mail

18th & 19th: holidays

20th: fifth day after mail. service effective.
21st: first day after service
22nd: second day after service
23rd: third day after service
24th: fourth day after service

25th & 26th: holidays

27th: fifth day after service
28th: sixth day after service
29th: seventh day after service. date of keys pickup. date of first & last drop-off. potential end of process.
30th: eight day after service.
dec 1st: ninth day after service. date of eviction notice. date landlord can call sheriff. date i will need to file on if i have to file.
file: 61a, 61b, 61c, request for hearing audio, form to wave fees
receive: stay. bring to sheriff.

2nd & 3rd: holidays

4th: 1st day after filing
5th: 2nd
6th: 3rd
7th: 4th
8th: 5th

9th & 10th: holidays

11th: 6th
12th: 7th
13th: 8th
14th: 9th
15th: 10th

16th & 17th: holidays

18th: 11th
19th: 12th
20th: 13th
21st: 14th
22nd: 15th

23rd & 24th & 25th & 26th: holidays

27th: 16th
28th 17th
29th: 18th

30th & 31st & jan 1st: holidays

2nd: 19th
3rd: 20th
4th: 21st
5th: 22nd

6th & 7th: holidays

8th: 23rd
9th: 24th
10th: 25th
11th: 26th
12th: 27th

13th  & 14th: holidays

15th: 28th
16th: 29th. order hearing transcript & file proof of order.
17th: 30th day after filing. 1st day after ordering hearing transcript.
18th: 2nd day after ordering hearing transcript.
19th: 3rd day.

20th & 21st: holidays

22nd: 4th day
23rd: 5th day
24th 6th day
25th: 7th day
26th: 8th day

27th & 28th: holidays

29th: 9th
30th: 10th
31st: 11th
feb 1st: 12th.
2nd:  13th

3rd & 4th: holidays

5th: 14th
6th: 15th
7th: 16th
8th: 17th
9th: 18th

10th & 11th: holidays

12th: 19th
13th: 20th
14th: 21st
15th: 22nd
16th: 23rd

17th & 18th & 19th: holidays

20th:  24th
21st: 25th
22nd: 26th
23rd: 27th

24th & 25th: holidays

26th: 28th
27th: 29th.
28th: 30th
mar 1st: 31st
mar 2nd: 32nd

3rd & 4th: holidays

5th: 33rd day after filing notice of transcript. begin perfection of appeal.  see rule 61.09(3).
6th: 34th
7th: 35th
8th: 36th
9th: 37th

10th & 11th: holidays

12th: 38th
13th: 39th
14th: 40th
15th: 41st
16th: 42nd

17th & 18th: holidays

19th: 43rd
20th: 44th
21st: 45th
22nd: 46th
23rd: 47th

24th & 25th: holidays

26th: 48th
27th: 49th
28th: 50th
29th: 51st

30th & april 1st & 2nd & 3rd: holidays

4th: 52nd. serve perfection documents.
5th: 53rd. mail perfection documents..
6th: 54th. 1st day after.
7th: 55th. 2nd.
8th: 56th. 3rd.

9th & 10th: holidays

9th: 57th. 4th.
10th: 58th. 5th day after.
11th: 59th day after filing notice of transcript. file notice of perfection.
12th: 60th day after filing notice of transcript.

hearing date set for june, maybe? july?

“It was an Iranian missile, launched by Hizballah from territory occupied by the Houthis in Yemen"

this isn't even worth debunking.

"it was a russian missile, launched by bolivarians from territory occupied by the zapatistas in mexico."

but, this is all just an excuse.

if saudi arabia wanted to outlaw orange juice, it would claim there was an iranian plot, carried out by agents of assad, to poison it with anthrax. and, if it wanted to enforce a mandatory style of under garments, it would claim there were iranian spies peering at saudi citizens through an elaborate system of telescopes and satellites, designed by heretic shia scientists.

they're a permanent scapegoat. a bad guy. and, ultimately, a distraction.

what the saudis really want is to expand their control over the region. and, while it is true that iran is both in the way of this and in fact actually a useful foil to spur on these ambitions, they would be doing all of the same things whether iran was there or not.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i really think that if you want to understand the destruction horizons in pre-historic greece, you should look primarily at the slavic invasions into the balkans. that's the model. it was no doubt a very similar event.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

also: i don't think that evidence, or lack there-of, of pottery is as convincing as you do. because trade. and diversity. sorry.

anything involving pottery should be seen as a supporting argument, at best - and any theories built solely around pottery, or an absence of it, should be discarded as nonsense.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

challenge: without using historical sources - written histories - convincingly prove to me that there were celtic, gothic, slavic and then turkish migrations into the balkans and greece via the north - and, even some low level movement of wayward iranians over this path, too.

i wish you luck.

but, we know it's true.

i think you need to explain to me why there weren't invasions into the balkans from the north during immediate pre-history, given that it was a constant throughout the historical period until the russians put an end to it via just existing in between - which was like the year 1500.

when something is a fixture of history for 2000 years, you need to explain why it didn't exist in pre-history, not why it did.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard

this morning has been a wash because my legs are so sore. it's the calves. it's what happens when you walk 30 km over 12 hours.

i do have important things to do today, but i needed to let them rest. i basically had to sit and read and watch the news.

and i might need to take a nap, now.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

this is the current furthest extent of the montreal transit system - one ride in during the day, one ride home at night.

there isn't a way to make this work, yet.

but give it another ten years and it might make some sense.

i would really like to see the montreal urban sprawl spill over into ontario....

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

the reality is that human rights watch is basically an arm of the cia and quite often propagates dubious information that is transparently designed to further pro-american propaganda to bolter geostrategic positions that benefit nato.

it's not to say that everything they do is false. it's to say that this should not be treated as an ngo, and that it's reports should be taken extremely critically and extremely carefully.

https://www.alternet.org/world/nobel-peace-laureates-human-rights-watch-close-your-revolving-door-us-government?paging=off 

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

well, then.

that was an ordeal.

as of approximately 7:00 am this morning, my existing landlord is served with an appeal via giving the documents to her husband via police mediation. the plan was to fix the flat on my bike on the way there, but i couldn't get the right kind of tube and had to leave it locked at a canadian tire overnight. i thought it was a short walk from there; it wasn't. so, i had to stay up all night in a tim horton's and knock on the door repeatedly in the morning.

the walk to the landlord's place to personally serve the originating documents required multiple detours around highways and nature reserves in order to ensure an experience of unbroken suburbia - and minimal threat of attack by coyotes or cougars. or bears, for that matter.

this city is bigger than i thought it was. but, like detroit, it's mostly due to sprawl.

my feet are literally bleeding.

and, as of approximately 6:00 pm this evening, it seems as though i've found a place around the corner from here.

is it better? absolutely.

1) steam heat. so, not as dry.
2) it's $700 + hydro. if i stay here, i'll be paying $680 all inclusive as of april 1st. and the hydro should balance out with the oesp - i don't have or want an a/c and i'll conserve the juice if it's my purse. i don't know if i should expect yearly increases at the next place. if i don't get an increase until early 2019, which i think is likely because they can't increase for a year, it will likely literally balance out - because if i stay here i'll be paying very close to $700 on april 1, 2019. the difference may end up little more than a few months ahead on the inflation.
3) 4th floor means fresh air. no smokers through the windows. no cat shit on the window sill. it's not on a main street. it also probably means no roaches, so i should be able to keep the lights off most of the time. and, it means i'll get the heat rising from the units underneath me, rather than the freon pushing down rom upstairs.
4) it's about the same size, footage wise. the kitchen is smaller, but that doesn't mean anything to me. the stove works, which does. the bedroom is a bit bigger. there's storage space in the walls, which i'm keen on. i'll have to set the space up so the studio merges with the living room, which is a more normal arrangement for me, anyways. it's clear at this point that i won't be having anybody over, anyways.
5) tub, not a shower. better for shaving.
6) a block closer to the tunnel. same distance to convenience stores.

we negotiated a deposit over the phone; i'm going to sign a lease tomorrow. but, i'm going to post-date the check anyways, right? so, i'm thinking that if i can just give her the full first & last post-dated to the 30th then maybe she'll give me the keys early and i can start slowly walking things over. ideally, i'd be able to clear this place out in the next few days and then get some student movers to quickly take the rest out around the 1st. and, then, i don't need to carry through with this.

until i have the keys in my hands, i need to carry on with this process - which means mailing the letter tomorrow afternoon and setting myself up a flow chart of timelines, tonight.

i'm going to need to get to odsp, as well, and figure out what they'll pay for.

and i need to eat.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

this is the vlog for nov 8, 2017, where i go to lasalle to serve my landlord, run into problems with my bicycle on the way there and don't actually get back until the next morning.

there are a couple of static entries. it is possible that i may have thought the device was running when it wasn't, but i find the situation curious, yet again. the first static entry - 1354 - was recorded walking between grand marais and cabana, through what was a school yard. i didn't know where i was or what i was walking into, and the commentary was actually somewhat comical. i am disappointed in not having that recorded, whatever the reason. the second static entry - 1356 - was recorded at the intersection of cabana & the 401, and i was trying to figure the area out. i had not yet been to this part of windsor.

again - i don't know what happened, but it is at least consistent with the idea that i did not turn the camera on before i started talking into it, turned the camera on when i stopped talking, pulled it up to look at it and turned it off. i might have done that if i wasn't paying attention.

the other explanation is that somebody deleted the files.

i also have a clear recollection of filming quite a few more segments than appear and these segments would certainly appear to have been deleted at some point. again: i don't believe they would be recoverable at this point, and that's disappointing to me.

well, what i warned you about was the inevitability that christians and muslims would gang up on leftists, atheists, secularists, poor people and other marginalized groups and enforce their right-wing value systems, and what's happening in front of you?

if you're a christian, i was never on your side. you know that. and, i spoke out against this because i knew this would strengthen your power at my expense.

you must admit i was absolutely right.

and, my only recourse of defence is through court.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

no. i need to serve personally.

they have kids. somebody will be home at 7:00. i presume that mom is living there, right now.

if i can't get it to the landlord, i can give it to an adult member (it might be mom. maybe the husband.) and then mail a second copy of it the next day.

and, i have a week to keep trying...


it's a decent bike ride. nice nights. i'll enjoy it.

showing at 4:00. then, this gets done.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

no, i should sleep, and get back to it when i'm fresh.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

that wasn't as hard as i thought, after all. i just had to get my head around what i was actually doing, first. it developed quite quickly, after that.

i have my two documents done. now, i  need to get them into the hands of my landlord. i just need to make sure i understand those rules.

i'm also going to need to get some documents down to city hall, including a request for a transcript of the audio from the last court date.

i'm still awake, so i'm going to keep going. first showing today is at 4:00.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

step one.

done.

next, i need to get a list of the evidence. then i can serve. tomorrow, maybe...

i was going to drop it off, but i want to double check the rules around mailing. here's the thing: i fully expect them to lie and say they never got it. so, does that matter, really, if i mail it?

what if i use registered mail, or something? a tracking number...

i'll look into it.

Divisional Court, SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N :

TA

Applicant

(Respondent in Appeal)

and

Jason Parent

Respondent

  (Appellant)

Proceeding under the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.

 NOTICE OF APPEAL

                THE APPELLANT, JASON PARENT, APPEALS to the Divisional Court from the order of Lorraine Mathers (Landlord and Tenant Board) dated Oct 23, 2017 made at London, Ontario.

                THE APPELLANT ASKS that the order be set aside and an order be granted dismissing the application dated Aug 30, 2017 brought by  to terminate the tenancy for landlord’s own use (the n12).

                THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL are as follows: 

                Main Grounds under s. 83(3)

1.        Mandatory refusal applies to situations which the RTA provides are serious enough to justify refusal - regardless of any other circumstances. If a tenant raises circumstances which might fall into subsection 83(3), the Member must decide whether it applies (Forgie v. Widdicombe Place [2002] O.J. No. 2956 (Div. Ct.)). Further, once it is found that subsection (3) applies, the Member must refuse the eviction (Chin v. Hunt (1986), 17 O.A.C. 267 (Divisional Court)).

2.        Several pieces of evidence were presented to the board that raised circumstances which might fall into subsection 83(3) (see audio), and yet the board did not decide whether it applies, and did not refuse eviction. The board did not even analyze this evidence at all. Instead, it made it’s decision based entirely on other pieces of evidence and entirely on the question of good faith. This is an error in law, as the board decided not to address a question it was legally required to address, according to Forgie v. Widdicombe Place.

3.        Upon review, the reviewing member (Elizabeth Usprich) claimed that the board had broad discretion, implicitly citing the reasonableness standard of review. However, this is an error in law as the case law suggests that the board does not actually have broad discretion, must rule on the evidence when presented with it and must refuse eviction if necessary. In not upholding the existing precedent, the adjudicator exceeded her bounds and did not respect her jurisdiction.

4.        And, as the board does not have broad discretion under the case law, and the adjudicator must follow the existing precedent, this outcome does not fall into a range of acceptable outcomes. The adjudicator erred in not analyzing the evidence, at least. The question of the applicability of 83(3) should consequently be examined on a reasonableness standard of review: the divisional court must do the proper evidentiary analysis that the adjudicator failed to do.

5.        Further, given once again that the board does not have broad discretion under case law, and must follow the existing precedent, the outcome is also simply incorrect, and should be overturned on the correctness standard, as well. The adjudicator erred in not analyzing the evidence correctly, or even at all, and as a result of this came to the incorrect legal conclusion.

Specific Errors That Affected the Decision

6.        The adjudicator erred in claiming that “the tenant did not relate the particulars of what happened but only mentioned that she was verbally threatened with eviction”. An analysis of the audio will indicate that the tenant was in fact explicit about the particulars, and related it clearly to the previous case, SWT-01670-17, which was the primary basis of the defence under s. 83. The adjudicator could not have analyzed the relevant evidence under s. 83(3) if she claims it was never presented.

7.        The adjudicator erred in not drawing the obvious inference between the warning left on March 31^st and the previous case, SWT-01670-17. This was necessary in order to come to the proper conclusion. The adjudicator simply ignored the context around this evidence, then claimed the tenant never presented it.

8.        The adjudicator erred in deducing that a “written warning and final notice” is not a threat of imminent action, or indicative of an intent to evict.

9.        The adjudicator erred in not properly interpreting the letter left on April 1^st as an obvious set-up attempt.

10.     The adjudicator erred in claiming that “I note that there was no evidence in the Tenant’s email describing the events that suggested the Landlord threatened eviction”.

11.     The adjudicator erred in not properly interpreting the emails around the claimed difficulties in electronic payment on august 1^st as a clear documentation of a second obvious set-up attempt.

12.     The adjudicator erred in failing to note that the eviction notice presented on August 10^th was without cause (for being off of the property), and was a third clear obvious set-up attempt.

13.     The adjudicator erred in failing to note that the eviction notice presented on august 11^th was also without cause, and an actual clear admission of retaliatory action – a fourth obvious (if strange.) set-up attempt.

14.     The adjudicator erred in failing to deduce the obvious truth that re-serving already voided n4s is a clear indication of a desire to terminate the tenancy.

15.     The adjudicator erred in stating “Further the two letters the Tenant received gave no indication that the Landlords were seeking termination of the tenancy.”

16.     On review, the member (Elizabeth Usprich) erred in stating “First, if the Tenant did not raise that specific argument at the hearing it should have and could have been and therefore is not properly considered on review”. Forgie provides a clear precedent otherwise: that the adjudicator must interpret any evidence of this nature that exists. Yet, the fact is that the tenant did raise this argument, which can and will be demonstrated via the court audio.

17.     On review, the member (Elizabeth Usprich) erred in stating “The hearing member has broad discretion in issuing her order.”. Again, the precedent in Fergie and Chin is that the refusal is mandatory upon the existence of the relevant evidence

18.     On review, the member (Elizabeth Usprich) erred in stating “Rather it seems that the Tenant is attempting to re-argue his (sic) own position.”. Rather, it seems that the member is unaware of the proper precedent, in context.

General Error

19.     The board also made repeated errors in terms of the concept of a burden of proof, suggesting that it is the tenant’s responsibility to prove that the landlord is not in good faith. This is just a basic error of law as the burden of proof always lies with the party presenting the argument. We can’t have a system where landlords are free to make whatever claim they want, and just dare the tenants to prove them wrong, if they can. That’s really absolutely ridiculous: of course the burden of proof was with the applicant. These strange arguments may indicate a bias on behalf of this adjudicator towards property in general.

                THE BASIS OF THE APPELLATE COURT’S JURISDICTION IS: The appeal is from a final order of an adjudicator of an administrative tribunal, namely the Landlord and Tenant Board of Ontario.

                The appellant requests that this appeal be heard at 245 Windsor Ave, Windsor, Ontario.

 jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

getting there...

THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL are as follows: 

                Main Grounds under s. 83(3)

1.        Mandatory refusal applies to situations which the RTA provides are serious enough to justify refusal - regardless of any other circumstances. If a tenant raises circumstances which might fall into subsection 83(3), the Member must decide whether it applies (Forgie v. Widdicombe Place [2002] O.J. No. 2956 (Div. Ct.)). Further, once it is found that subsection (3) applies, the Member must refuse the eviction (Chin v. Hunt (1986), 17 O.A.C. 267 (Divisional Court)).

2.        Several pieces of evidence were presented to the court that raised circumstances which might fall into subsection 83(3) (see audio), and yet the court did not decide whether it applies, and did not refuse eviction. The court did not even admit this evidence at all. Instead, it made it’s decision based entirely on other pieces of evidence and entirely on the question of good faith. This is an error in law, as the court decided not to address a question it was legally required to address.

3.        Upon review, the reviewing member claimed that the court had broad discretion, implicitly citing the reasonableness case of review. However, this is an error in law as the case law suggests that the court does not actually have broad discretion, must rule on the evidence and must refuse eviction if necessary.

4.        And, as the court does not have broad discretion under the case law, this outcome does not fall into a range of acceptable outcomes. The adjudicator erred in not analyzing the evidence, at least. This consequently should be re-examined on a reasonableness standard of review.

5.        Further, given once again that the court does not have discretion under case law, the outcome is also simply incorrect, and should be overturned on the correctness standard, as well. The adjudicator erred in not analyzing the evidence correctly, or even at all, and as a result of this came to the incorrect legal conclusion.

this is the meat and potatoes. i'll nitpick a few other things, because i can't bring anything new up after the fact, but this is what i'm focusing on.

i can't challenge the faith ruling. that's up to to the adjudicator - i have to wait until after the fact and sue, then. and had she examined the evidence, i'd have a hard time filling this out. but she was hasty. and maybe didn't take me seriously. and i have a good case for review, i really do.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

if i move, it will almost certainly be to toronto.

i have better access to trans doctors, there.

and i have no interest at all in moving back to ottawa.

i'd say 90% likelihood to toronto, vs. 10% likelihood to waterloo. those are the only two serious options, right now.

but, i'm going to need to exhaust my options on appeal, first. that will likely take a long time. i guess if it happens i'll have to put my things in storage and hitchhike down there and live in shelters until i find something.... then i'll have to ship my things from windsor to toronto....

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

yeah.

seems like that's right.

well, here's the thing - i came here because it was cheap. and, it was cheap because nobody wanted to live here because there aren't any job opportunities.

if the housing situation in windsor is going to stay like this because it's become a magnet for migrants, i might have to migrate somewhere else.

http://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/a-year-later-almost-1000-syrians-at-home-in-windsor

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

you know, i have to wonder if the low vacancy rate here is a consequence of the high number of refugees that were settled here. it's less that prices have gone up and more that vacancy rates have gone down.

i was actually hoping that an influx of refugees would lead to an increase in public housing, but that hasn't happened; instead, vacancy rates have just decreased.

nor, did i expect windsor - which has the highest unemployment rate in the country - to be a prime destination for settlement. why would you put refugees in an area of high unemployment?

well, unless you want to increase rent. but, that's market theory. and, market theory is bullshit. again: the prices really aren't higher, there's just nowhere to move to.

but, these people don't want what i want. they want to generate income. they want fancy houses. they want to send their kids to school. so, they're apparently moving west in large numbers - where they're told there's more economic opportunity.

again: i don't really think that increasing immigration is going to solve the country's economic problems. but, at the least, let's bring in wealthy immigrants. bringing in refugees is just always going to be a net drain.

and, no, it's not their fault. they took an opportunity. blame the government, not the refugees. and, don't even blame the government for bringing them here - blame the government for not investing in them properly, once they did.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

you know, i might be able to win a case on reasonableness, anyways.

i would rather have the court consider correctness.

but, i guess the truth is that they're going to make that choice based on existing case law, and i don't even really get the benefit of a presentation. i'm going to throw all this shit down on the table, and they're the ones that are going to determine the correct standard of review.

reasonableness is supposed to provide for a lot of deference. but, it's not total. it needs to look at whether the ruling falls into a reasonable set of possible outcomes. the idea is that the court can set up a kind of multivalued function, but it's not supposed to pass judgement on the outcome, so long as it falls into the correct range it's defined in the mapping. but, it has to define the mapping, first. and, if i can convince the judge that the legislation is such that this outcome is outside of the proper mapping - because the adjudicator misinterpreted the evidence - then i could conceivably get the court to rule the outcome is unreasonable.

i should make both arguments.

1) the outcome is unreasonable, because the statue provides for minimal discretion.
2) the outcome is incorrect, because the statute provides for minimal discretion.

i guess the point is that the statute provides for minimal discretion, and she misinterpreted the evidence, producing a result that is both incorrect and unreasonable.

yeah.

ok.

i think i've got that clear in my head, now.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

this day was less productive than i wanted, but i feel like i'll be awake for a while still.

i did see one place. it was a basement, not an apartment. i need an apartment. i left some messages. i have some showings tomorrow.

i'm hoping to serve on thursday, if i can get the documents in line.

i have 30 business days to serve from the 27th, but i need to get it done with enough time to get the stay to the sheriff.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

"so, what work did you produce on your shift this afternoon?"

"seventeen hamburgers, thirteen fries and twelve milkshakes."

no. that's not work!

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i abuse the language like everybody else, but virtually every job in this economy is neither a job, nor is it work. it is a slave relation that prevents an individual from carrying out meaningful labour, or doing meaningful work. for, every moment that is spent doing forced labour is a moment that is lost in free labour.

and, what drives all of this slavery is the market, under the tyranny of the necessity of rent.

in a capitalist economy, nobody chooses to work to pay rent. rather, we are enslaved to produce a surplus value for the rentier class. we are all prostitutes, so why punish prostitutes? and, that endemic slavery - which most of us don't even acknowledge - prevents us from working on meaningful projects like science, literature and art.

the market allows the ownership class to discard labour it does not feel is valuable. this surplus labour is then left to starve. this is the category i exist within, largely by choice. because i want to spend my time on meaningful work, not on the forced labour that defines our economy.

but, in enlightened societies, the state steps in to stop nature from running it's course.

we need more subsidized housing. that's where i should be. that's what i need. that's what i want.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

it wouldn't make any sense for me to go out in a murder-suicide until i'm done my discography - and, even then, i've still got a lot of writing to do.

see, this is the point you're missing: my rejection of capitalism is not a reflection of my disinterest in meaningful work, but of the wasteful non-work that it forces almost everybody to engage in. capitalism is not work. capitalism is pointless labour, in the absence of meaningful work.

and, i have no interest in family or status; if i had a family (and i did...), i'd reject it (and i did...).

might i kill you all in the end? well, there's some logic in it. but, it's going to be a long time before this presents itself to me as a serious option.

right now, i need to find some place to exist to finish my discography in. i thought it was here. it should have been. but, i can't control who buys the building.

i'm not done here, yet, either. i'm making a good faith effort to find something. but, i'll probably be in this building for another five or six months, at least.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

see, i'm vocal about a hands-off non-issue type approach - but that means allowing volunteer sites like this to operate.

you can be certain that it was shut down by local property owners concerned about resale values. and, i might suggest that they try some place a little more secluded.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/overdose-prevention-ottawa-closes-1.4391753

fwiw, i acknowledge that there are some fraying edges around the park that could just as well be developed than not, but i actually rather like the lebreton flats the way they are.

it's a very nice place to ride a bicycle.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

look up some pictures of the pontiac silverdome..

this arena isn't likely to find an alternate use. it's too big. and, there isn't anything else in ottawa. unless they plan to get a basketball team. and, of course, they don't.

i saw a few concerts there in '96 and '97. i don't think i've been there since.

the stadium is very far out of town, and surrounded by wealthy suburbs. and i understand that it's privately owned. but you'd hope people would see the value of the space as emergency shelter before they allow it to fall apart altogether.

it could solve the homeless problem in ottawa overnight.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/senators-canadian-tire-centre-lebreton-1.4390956

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

"but the saudis tried to take the syrians out via isis and failed."

yeah.

that's why they just spent trillions of dollars on arms purchases: covert action was a disaster.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard

this century's sickman of europe is russia.

obama made some major tactical errors, right when putin was about to be check mated. but it just let him play the game out.

the chinese are still ultimately a terrible ally, and still ultimately keen on taking control of the eastern part of asia for themselves.

expect an eventual russian dismemberment. the western preoccupation in doing so may, in the end, be the factor that allows the chinese to win, outright.

in the long run, a united asia under state socialism will be good for prosperity and peace. but, it will require a struggle for civil rights.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

trump's reaction that bin salman is just draining the swamp is so outrageous that it can't be ignorance: this is calculated.

the arguments that bin salman are using are the same arguments that every dictator uses to purge power. they're the arguments that mussolini used, that stalin used, that hitler used - and that countless strong men before them used. and, there's a reason that they all used the same arguments: because they all took them out of the same books, from the renaissance, and largely italian.

listen: this isn't some kind of surprise. why do you think that people have been freaking out over saudi arms sales for so long? because it's been obvious for years that saudi arabia is on the brink of collapse into fascism.

so, it finally happened. and, the media, so much of it bought, will feign denials, and ignorance, and surprise.

the serious analysis is that you should have seen this coming from the 90s.

and, now we're going to have to sleep in this bed.

world war three, here we come: and history will record it as a struggle to stop the saudis, with the victors being on the side that succeeds.

america may very well be on the side that loses.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

like, maybe you're unclear on the point, but i don't have the experience to apply to any job besides a fast food restaurant.

and, even if i were to get that job, and work overtime, and somehow avoid burning the place down in the first week, or at least pissing in the food supply, i still wouldn't be able to make a monthly payment.

the only way out is for me to somehow become something that i've never imagined myself as and don't even really understand the existence of.

excluding my father & step-mother, i've never even known anybody with an actual job. everybody i've ever known has either worked minimum wage, or not worked at all. it's a culture that i have no understanding of, and that i don't have the slightest concept of how to get into.

my bargain with capitalism was always this: i'll promise not to procreate, if you let me just exist. i mean, i didn't choose any of this. and, i don't want anything to do with it. my offering to you is that i won't create more mouths to feed. that's both the most and the least that i'm capable of doing. maybe my mother should have done that, herself, but she didn't, and here i am, and i can't turn back time.

i'm supposed to be writing this stupid fucking goddamned piece of shit appeal, but i'm just too fucking angry and depressed to even focus.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

it's a non-issue, because i can't work, and i'll never work again.

but, i'm sorry: i don't have the slightest idea how to generate $40,000 a year. i can't think of anything at all that would be likely to get me anywhere close to that. it's not even in the realm of something i could imagine being able to accomplish.

it's a complete impossibility.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

the last job i had was in 2008.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

i just want you to understand how ridiculous my student loan is.

this is my income on odsp: $1151 + tax credits. it's about $1200. it could be higher if i end up paying hydro - $1250 or so.

my minimum payment is $1372.

and, what kind of money would i need to be making to pay down $1372/month?

well, my expenses are currently $1000/month. if i had a job, i'd have to get a phone, so that's an extra $100. i'd need to spend at least $100 on transportation. and, i'd need spending money for coffee and food while i'm out. i'd also need a clothes budget, which i currently don't have. i think an extra $500/month in expenses is reasonable. so, my expenses would then be $1500/month instead of $1000/month.

that would mean i'd need to be making $2872/month, after taxes. those numbers are beyond anything i've ever contemplated - i've never even applied for a job with that kind of salary. that's, $34464 after taxes. so, i guess i'm looking at higher than $40,000/yr.

i don't even know what kind of job offers that kind of money. the only jobs i've ever worked are in fast food and call centres, and nobody at these places makes that kind of money. i applied for some government jobs a few years ago, and i couldn't pass the behavioural exam. what else is there, even? i don't even know.

these are just numbers that are daunting to me. i can't even comprehend them, really.

the idea that i'd ever be making as much as $40,000/yr never even crossed my mind. i've planned my whole life around making minimum wage or lower....

so, this is crazy to me. the reality is that i'm never going to make anything close to that, and that it's never going to get paid down.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.