Roy Moore was running for Senate left open by Jeff Session, now the attorney General, for Alabama. Moore was in the lead until bombshell allegations arrived from “Liberal Media” that he had improper relations with under aged girls. It is the height of irony that papers like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post are called “Liberal” in anything, let alone in the smear of reporting upon such allegations. The era of Trump has made formerly conservative voices sound liberal, even dare we say it? To a thunder of squishing breaks as they hear this news… Socialist. Course the nut cases from the fringe like Alex Jones, Info Wars and Breitbart are now somehow considered to be legitimate new sources might account for the shift in media. Back to Alabama and Roy Moore. He was first accused of being a child molester by three women, now up to six and growing eventually to eight women. When I first heard their story, it sound just a little too good to be true to agree with it. In short, I was sceptical of the timing and the comments, yet awaiting further information to come. As that day wore on, Judge Moore spoke with Sean Hannity. In that interview he sunk himself by coming off as a creep and perv. His answers were evasive, all but screaming, “I did it!” or “Guilty!” He even agreed that he knew two of the girls and had dated them with their mother permission. He has since denied this and taken a polygraph to prove he did not know any of them at all. In any case, once I heard that, I was full convinced he should step down from running. Yet this fellow brings up two salient point to ponder on the wider picture.
First guns support; Roy Moore showed up on stage with a concealed handgun to show people that he was all for the NRA. This organization clearly only represents the interests of gun manufacturer and have fooled millions of Americans into joining. Their views however are ignored. They tend to run with the rest of American in wanting longer waiting period, more checks and more restrictions. All of which the NRA oppose. Yet all one has to do is walk on stage with a gun and the NRA love’s you? Very strange. Now, as more and more females are speaking, more damning information came out, such as Moore denial of having met one of his victims. She accused him of trying to rape her. He said he did not know her, did not know the diner she worked in, and never tried to rape her. She presented her year book, showing his signature and the name of the place in his handwriting. Yes very convincing. His attacks were almost laughable. The girl he almost raped? She was a behaviour challenged student. Which means you can rape her? In his mind it does. He was also banned from a shopping mall for harassing the young girls within and a local high school had a security guard follow him around on football nights as he was known to harass the cheerleaders. Yet for all these, the gun crowd still supports him? One issue voters, like gun nuts are scary like that.
The second point is the white people still support him. By that I mean white male republicans and their wives of a certain age, still support him. Why? The Liberal North cannot understand the support of this paedophile in Alabama. But here is the dirty secret you won’t hear much about. Why do people, who are white and older, support him? Because they remember a time long ago, that if they discount the rape and paedophile allegations, you are left with a man looking for a wife among the younger girls. This is in itself not a game changer. Many of their grandparents have similar stories of older men marrying younger women. And staying married all their lives. So the fact that Moore was trolling the food court at the mall looking for a teeny bopper to marry is not a disqualifier for voting for him. On the day of the vote, he lost by 1.5% but he filed legal papers to overturn the vote. He failed. Part of the reason why he failed was the experts he used. One of them was a UFO believer, easily dismissed! Another person cited in the legal case, while having a more serious issue to advocate had fundamental problems as well, but at least rationally based. His name is Richard Charnin
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/
First, they brought up his attempt to prove the assassination of JFK using math. I offer no comment, because I am not going to read that book, instead focusing on his views on the Alabama vote. He claims there are irregularities in the vote. That the way the voting pattern showed many former Clinton Supporters had to vote but a lot less of Trump supports did not. This he claims shows voter fraud. While I am not going to argue with his analysis, his math or even his statics and numbers, all because I don’t have to. In any election, past performance is not indication of future support. Just because I Vote for Trump in 2016 does not mean I will vote for Trump ever again or that I will vote for Moore now. Indeed, based on pure psychology, this voter pattern is explained. People hear tell he may be a paedophile. The liberals don’t want that so they vote in greater numbers. They have a reason to go to vote. On the other hand, republicans hear he is a paedophile and they refuse to vote for a liberal Democrat instead vote with their feet and do not go to the polls. It is usually as simple as that. Occam’s Razor. Go with the simplest explanation that explains all the facts. So sorry Judge Moore, but the people of Alabama voted you off the island. Your own supports did not vote for you so the polls switched and you lost. Now and forever, your past made you and it will always come out in the wash. People simply do not like you or trust you as much as they trust Donald Trump. May heaven help us all?

Greenbanks, West Virginia, is an unlikely place for refuges to stream into. But none the less, in they pour. More of a trickle, than a torrent; for in this city is United States National Radio Quiet Zone where in 1958 the US federal government set up a place for research into the universe using a radio telescope. Today, this quiet zone, radio noise causes interference with the telescope. Any electromagnetic wave might disrupt the ear of the researchers so to live there they have to sing away their rights to such technology. Today it is a home for people suffering from electromagnetic hypersensitivity. Basically, they can feel those invisible waves from the electromagnetic spectrum that come from Electromagnetic fields (EMFs), things like WIFI and cell phones and many other sources. Worse, for the sufferers, is that there is no way to show that their condition actually exists, let alone how it is caused or a cure, to any scientific certainty. We think this might not only be a problem for humans but for all mammals especially those who use sonar to navigate likes whales, or bats to hunt. But so far, we cannot diagnose it or treat except in the avoidance of such sources of EMF. The symptoms are things like headaches, stress, and anxiety; up to much more serious illnesses have been reported. Science, at first, dismissed this as merely hysteria. Yet more and more cases come forward with the same or similar symptoms, it was not merely so easy to dismiss. Or to claim it was “All in your head.” Nor is there any cure, the physical remove of certain EMF sources such as living in Greenbacks’ is about all they can do when they are so afflicted.

For my own experience with this began about 5 years ago with the digitally re-mastered Beatles. I love the Beatles so I thought this is going to be great. Except after listening to 3-4 song, I felt nauseated: The feelings expressed not the sickness itself. I also cannot stand modern radio or most modern songs; with few exceptions; those exceptions being the real singers like Adele whose voice will sometimes break as she sings, showing that it is indeed her doing the music not a computer. Computers do not make such mistakes. There are two types of music today, or at least for my purposes I will divide music into two groups. Those singers, who I will call analog, that people who use their own voice to make magic of music happen and those who used a computer to do so. To wit; years ago they would take 30-40 takes in order to get the singer to sing that song just that right way; the “Oh so perfect” take. Today they get them to sing it once and say next song. The music is then entered into a computer for washing to make the song hit all the right notes in perfect harmony. Except humans are not perfect. If you use a measure tool on the human voice as they sing one single note, you would see the voice of the singer wobble in the electronic display because the singer’s voice is not perfect. You would not hear a difference but there is one to the measuring tool. However, when a computer does it, sing one single note, they make the note come out perfect, same tone and pitch, for as long as they want to or need to. Watching it in the electromagnetic spectrum, you do not see peaks and valleys; you see a straight line for the music is playing the perfect note. You might think this was a good thing. It is not. Since we human, as frail creatures, such a perfect note would induce real vomit, headaches and other such reactions due to it being so unnatural when we expect to hear something that is so natural like singing. Because it is too pure, too unnatural, programs like Autotune had to be programmed their musical output to insert the final product with flaws in it so that the human ear does not reject the music but can listen without it sounding too strange. It still comes off as robotic if overly washed.

Sadly the result is some people are hyper sensitive to music, wither it be for the misophonia or phonophobia, dislike of sound in general or hypersensitive hearing (of specific frequencies) such that Autotones uses to make their music work. I know not what or how, but listening to the digital music formats of songs, drive me insane. Like the newly re-mastered Beatles, such wonderful songs turned out to be a vomit comet. Been many years and I still have not managed to listen to but a handful of the songs. I will stick with my analog copies. They do not cause me anxiety, stress, anger and headaches. I can tolerate this music to some degree, usually in the 2-3 hours range but then after like a crest that builds up it breaks over and floods the valley below. Modern music, digital music, might one day have great singers like days of yore, but sadly I will never know. For in their quest to be perfect, they have simply turned what beauty they may have had into mere painful noise that drives me up the wall. Too perfect, this frankenmusic is merely a lazy form of singing for singers who are bad. They cannot sing but fool the public into thinking they are singers. This has now spilled out of the recording studio into the concert hall. So even “Live” is not just a digital rendition of the digital rendition from a digital source. Too many digitals for me.

Signed by the man seeking refuges in his old time rock and roll, yelling at the local teens; “You kids get off my grass!”

Here are some links to articles on this subject.

https://bodyecology.com/articles/little-known-dangers-of-emf.php

https://www.emf-experts.com/emf-quiet-zones.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2010/08/31/129562500/pop-off-can-songs-be-too-fresh-too-clean

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_correction#Criticism

https://www.theverge.com/2013/2/27/3964406/seduced-by-perfect-pitch-how-auto-tune-conquered-pop-music

https://www.bphope.com/when-noise-annoys-coping-with-hypersensitive-hearing/

http://www.hyperacusis.net/what-is-it/4-types-of-sound-sensitivity/

Post script: A song was playing on the radio. Some guy was singing a Christmas song. So i asked a buddy, is that guy just singing his own song or is he singing along. Turns out he was singing the same song as on the radio. I could not hear the words and i could not recognize the song playing because all i could hear was the base and what I can only describe as noise.  Everyone else could hear music from the radio. All i heard was a pile of nothing that made any sense to me.

Recently, John Kelly, digging his own grave from what used to be a stellar reputation, opened his mouth and dug an ever increasingly large hole when he ventured into telling his Alt-right version of the cause of the Civil War. When you are so very ignorant of history, it is best to shut up and say nothing. (Which, irony of irony, I am sure some readers are saying about me.)
In order to understand the American Civil War, once must go back to ancient times. Bear with me on this journey; it will pay off in time. Slavery has been with us since time immortal. In fact the antislavery groups report that there is more slavery today, in the modern-day and age than ever before in world history. But not all slavery is the same. It is a spectrum and that distinction is important. On the one side, the main source of slaves were those people, men and women, who lost battles and wars, once captured were reduced from citizen to slave. Since their lives were forfeit, the enslaving of their labour was the price the slave paid for being allowed to live. It was brutal and could be even worse than a living death but you remained alive. On the other hand you have Aristotle speaking of people being natural slaves. I would argue that this is merely his lack of words to describe personalities such as Alpha Males to Beta males. But you can see that slavery as a concept was more than just the brutality of the institution but part of cultural and normative speech. What I am contrasting is this; the beating of a man for trying to escape is being done at the same time, in the highest salons, where men of knowledge and leisure are talking seriously about philosophy. The highest to the lowest, contained the notion of slavery. It was not a single idea.
The concept of slavery is also in the Bible. But here it is more a form of social welfare. Again we have people taken into slavery when they lose the war but they also have the rule of seven. Every seventh year slavers would release those enslaved. What this amounted to was something like this. You could not keep up with bill so you would be enslaved for up to 7 years. So for example, your sister’s husband was useless and could not support the family. He would borrow and borrow until he would be declared a slave. The wife, your sister and her kids would not just him. But you would then have to support him and your sister and her family. He would have to work or be beaten because he was a slave, but it was hoped that after seven years he would buy a clue and work harder to support his family and thus avoid going back into slavery; a sort of social welfare program in ancient Israel.
With all this in mind we turn to the USA. There are three distinctive periods. You can break this up into many more but we only need to look at three period. The first period, is the time at the start of slavery. What many people do not know is the first slaves in the USA were not black or aboriginal. They were white and many were white women from Europe. They came over as indentured servants but women being in high demand would escape and moving only a few miles away they could be married and raise their children as free women. Clearly that would not work out. Next they tried aboriginals. They too could escape into the aboriginal underground railway and escape back to their own people. So plan number 2 failed. Last, they tried the Africans, but not the ones from Africa, not yet any ways. They took Africans from the Islands where they had been enslaved there for a few hundred years by the British and Spanish. They would become the house Negros. The problem was that the USA was growing so fast they could not get enough slaves from the Caribbean’s to satisfy the demand. So they returned to the source Africa. Thus the second era of American slavery where the people brought were chattel. You could buy and sell people in the market. A ship would come in and the product would be made to dance for the potential new master. The humiliation and degradation of their humanity can clearly be seen. These were not humans they were animals. By the last stage, the importation and sale of blacks had been stopped. But the ideology of the situation had ingrained itself. Before, you lost a war or could not pay your debts, which made you a slave under those conditions. You were not merely born a slave, inferior to all of the master class. Except, remember Aristotle? Yes the part about some people being born with a bent to being slaves? Mix that in with them being property. Add in a douse of the Bible permitting slavery and you have the American South and their treatment of slaves. (I would also like to note there is more than a hint of rape when the master or over seer would take what they wanted from the lady in question, who as a slave cannot say “No”. No matter what she wants to do.)
Turning to the Civil War, why was it fought? The obvious answer is to end slavery. The counter example as John Kelly tried to argue is “State’s Rights.” The problem is that both answers are the same thing. The argument is void. Taste great or less filling? States rights for what? States right to own slavery. It is the same issue with a different heading. And in fact, either side, state right or slavery is not a cause of the Civil War. What you have is a country divided over ideology. Not over the law or the constitution. In fact, state’s right were best preserved within the framework established. Dred Scott V Sanford ruled on by Roger Tawny was the law of the land. The white man had to respect no right that a black man might want to claim. He was not even a man, but constitutionally 2/3 of one who was born white, as written in the compromise of the Founding Fathers. The limitation on slavery was also tossed out by Tawny at the same time. So in point of fact, there would be no Amendment to the constitution or limitation on the westward expansion of slavery within the bounds of the USA as written in the constitution. So what state right were they fighting for? What end to slavery was going to happen? The south had already won the legal war, the constitutional war and they could keep growing within the existing governmental framework. So we ask again why? Why did the South rebel? The answer is Hubris or arrogance. Because they could lord it over their sub-human property, their mindset was able to lord it over the also inferior northern and abolitionists. They were also inferior. The South were not going to war, they were going to humiliate the North to surrender talks. They were going to whip them on the battlefield with ease because they, the white were the ones who were truly the lords own. As shown by their power over blacks. This arrogance when put to the test would be the cause of the Civil War. They need not compromise; they need not try to find a middle ground. They need not do anything but be lord and master and all of God’s grace would fall upon them as it has always been.
So when Lincoln was elected, he was not a human. He was a gorilla or a monkey. Heck he might even be the product of a half-breed animal experiment. He was not, however, human. He was not equal to a Southern Gentlemen. He was a northerner and inferior, as all Northerner were, to Southerners. So there was no need to wait for his arrival in Washington to take over as President. We shall end this union, they call we shall depart and when they try, let them try to come and get us, for the South shall rise up and smite the aggressive northerners who being inferior could only think in violence. Hence started the myth of and known today as the War of Northern Aggression.
Both Grant and Lincoln understood what had to happen, and why. Grant by his constant worrying of the South. (Word usage, to worry a knot is to play with it until it worked loose to be untied.) This is how he overcame on the Mississippi. This is how he broke army after army of the Southern Rebels. And this is why he let Sherman take his march to the sea. Not for mere vengeance. It was a raid that was designed to humiliate the people and oppress the whites. To hammer home they were losers, they were weak, and they were not gods, god like or godly. They were now the inferior humans fit only to be enslaved. Remember when you lose a war, you forfeit your life but the winner could enslave you as the price to allow you to keep on living. Every Southerner who traces lineage to the south in that war has the heritage of being descended of white slaves that the Yankees could have shackled at any time under the ancient laws of slavery. Even under the bible and biblical law. Hence the need for the “Lost Cause Myth.” It was something to save the southern mindset from the disaster they had wrought upon themselves in this war.
The thing is this. The trip to history is always nice but we must understand the lesson is still applicable to today’s America, Trump’s America. The Alt right is showing the same ignorance and acting as if they were, themselves, gods today in their manner, their actions and their speeches. As if somehow Donald Trump winning the Electoral College was a victory of the popular vote. Well he lost that vote. So instead of accepting his election as being less than perfect, he called those extra votes, illegal. His inauguration had to be the biggest event, ever. When clearly seen in pictures and attendance it was not. This is not a question of fact but one of Ideological confirmation of their bias. They were godlike; therefore all must be inferior to their actions. This is not a denial of reality for its own sake. It is a denial that we can use to establish their mind-set and ideology. As much as it was in 1860, the mindset of the modern Alt Right is in the same denial of reality. It can be seen in the notion of gun control. How dare you try to take away my guns? As if you needed to have 30 guns. The whole gun ownership argument is like a man who has 999 toilets in his back yard. Why 999? Because only a fool has 1000 toilets in his backyard. Same for the amount of guns people have, but similarly the mindset. Look at the power of life and death I have over the beast in the woods. I can kill it with but a pull of my finger. What power I have to do the same in streets of Vegas or in Texas or any other place where mass slaughter has happened. It is not the work of a madman. It is the work of Mad Men who allowed the state to create the opportunity for slaughter. Look at abortion. The lordly males must protect their offspring and force the slave called women to carry their child to term, for in their ideology, the man is lord and master and the women is the beast of burden to carry the water and the child. This is why the ideology is to close down the access to abortion as fast as they can put out new laws repressing women, as if the point had anything to do with the unborn child. The state could bring up progressive policies like paid maternity leave, socialized day care, tax breaks and incentives. All of which are an affront to their ideology, to hand out things to people, lower people, inferior people? How dare they even ask for such things? The whole abortion debate having nothing to do with the child, but everything to controlling the women and enslaving her. When you look where the fight for abortion rights is happening, it is mostly in the states that used to be in the Southern Confederacy.
Lastly, the newest victim, transgender and their washroom bills limiting access to certain people. Make the Trans person go to a bathroom they were born with, not what they identify as. Why? What purpose? There is no purpose other than to enslave, humiliate and depreciate the Trans person into be under the foot of their new master, the bathroom bill itself.
The cause of the civil war is born in ideology of slavery, the hubris of arrogance to control others. It has not left us and we are not cure from it. But just like the Civil War, were countless men and women died to resist the enslaver, so too, today we resist and fight back. Trump having one his victory a year ago, has made no legislation, passed no tax reform, or abolished Obama care, the Affordable Health Care act. Law enforcement is closing in on him. The legal noose is tightening around the necks of his allies and slowly will they be arrested, tried and condemned to serve long prison sentence. If they had instead flown under the radar as private citizens, it might have never come to light what crimes they have done. But they too have shown their hubris and arrogance and thus beware of their pre ordained fate. The gods hold onto their power dearly and share it with no one. As the slavers found out, the wage of their sins was death, destruction and failure. Today, so too shall be the end result for the Alt right, Trump and his cronies and the people who supported them. Judgement day is coming and payback it’s a bitch. The Karma will soon run over their dogma.

That time has come again, just in time for Christmas, a new volume compilation of my articles. There is no better way to support this site and keep the writing coming then to purchase a copy of this book Volume 2 and Volume 1. Thanks for reading and thanks for any and all support you may be able to afford! Click to buy!!!!

It’s the story de jure. Who is who in Hollywood and politics, that they can hold their power over someone else and use it to demean and control another person. The problem is on the flip side, that now everything is sexual harassment. This is not the case. What is sexual harassment is very serious and should not be cheapened by the ill informed and misunderstanding that is out in the mean stream of society today.
To begin with, what is not sexual harassment? It is not, in the eyes of the court (SCOTUS) designed to “stop the procreation of the species.” It is design to stop harassment of a special sort, along the lines of sexuality in nature. The first question must not be is this sexual in nature? So statements of “You look pretty, nice dress, looking good there.” Such statements while sexual in nature are not the first stop in the discovery process. If someone were to ask another person out and be refused one of twice, again would not considered sexual harassment. You need to establish a case for harassment first then that the harassment is of a sexual nature. So first, one text, one call, one ask for a date is not harassment. 1000 is clearly is. The ground only gets murky in the harasser’s mind. Next and this is equally important, if not essential. If the behavior is making you feel uncomfortable, you need to say the magic word. “Stop.” or “leave me alone or even go away.” Remember without saying this, the job of proving harassment become infinitely harder to prove. If the behavior is merely causing discomfort, without some clear statement to this effect to cease the action, a reasonable person might be confused at the reason why their behavior is causing discomfort. Lastly, does the behavior come into a form of sexuality? Mere harassment is a wider net whereas sexual harassment is very specific.
Just saying to someone, “You look pretty!” is not harassment. Saying it daily, or multiple times a day can be seen as bothersome especially if you have been told to stop. So yes, you can ask someone out, offer compliments and even go on dates without crossing the line into harassment or worse sexual harassment.

In Virginia, Bob Marshal, the anti LBGTQ republican who wrote the states horrible bathroom bill against trans people, self described as the homophobe in chief, has been defeated in his re-election bid by Danica Roem, a Trans MTF, in the state’s election this week. How sweet it is to see justice arrive in its glorious poetic fashion. Bye bye Bob, see if Trump will hire you for some job that needs another hatemonger in his cabinet. Roem, for her part, refused to attack, belittle or even be condescending to Marshal, saying he was now one of the citizens she represents and she will do so for all the people in her district to the best of her ability.
In other news, Roy Moore, running for Senate in Alabama, has been accused of being a pedophile. Him and Milo can chat? Kevin Spacey is accused of hitting on a 14 year old boy, who was out at a late night party but no more than that. Roy is accused of sexual touching and ejaculation. Spacey is disgraced, losing his reputation; his hit TV series and is publicly shunned by the media and Hollywood, as he should be for his actions. Milo Yiannopoulos, for seemingly to support such behavior, lost his job as an editor. Lost his book deal, speaking tours and finally, even Robert Mercer could not handle the stench around him. But again, at no point has anyone accused either Spacey or Yiannopoulos of doing the “deed.” Roy Moore? Did and done as it were. GOP State Rep. Ed Henry calls for “legal action should be taken against the women who accused Roy Moore of sexual misconduct with a minor… “If they believe this man is predatory, they are guilty of allowing him to exist for 40 years,” Henry said. “I think someone should prosecute and go after them. You can’t be a victim 40 years later, in my opinion.” (The Hill) Moore a bible thumping, Holier than thou, type hypercritic has called the report “fake news” and is ignore any and all calls for his resignation from the election.
So the tally for the Grand Old Party is: Tiki Torch Neo Nazis, not all bad. Racists, well some are good people, Steve Bannon, Roy Moore, numerous traitors like Trump et family, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn along with his son, John Kelly, Sean Spicer and Sarah Huckabee Sanders. And the list grows longer every day. The alt right is big on the bible, “What will you do on the day of reckoning, when disaster comes from afar? To whom will you run for help? Where will you leave your riches?” Isaiah 10:3
Judgement day is coming and soon: first, by the courts then for the rest, not indicted, at the ballot box. How many more people must the Republicans scrap the bottom of the barrel to find before they start to think about what they are doing and for whom they lend support. Can they not find a man or a woman who is not a traitor? Racist? Pedophile? They stopped being options, and now are features.
Wake up people. You would not elect a pedophile as dog catcher. Don’t elect one as Senator.

On Wednesday, October 18, 2017, the provincial government of Quebec passed a law entitled “Bill n°62: An Act to foster adherence to State religious neutrality.” The Law can be read here.

Within contained the opening salvo against the state’s fiercest enemy, people wearing sunglasses who board buses… (Insert shock music, “Dun, dun, dun dah.”) Or perhaps the government is really trying to get you to take off that face mask as you get on the bus in the frigid depth of a Quebec winter where – 40 is the day’s highest temperature. Both of which are proposed reasons for this bill. Wink wink, nudge nudge. In fact, only someone in a coma would miss that this neutrality bill is anything but. It is aimed squarely at the Muslim women wearing the Burqa or the Niqab; the burqa is the full face covering allowing the women a small grill in which to see out of.  The Niqab is a veil where the eyes can be seen. News reports have spoken of this law applying to the Hijab which is the headscarf alone. This is not the case as the law refers to covering up of the face.

This law was rushed into place by the government to shore up its falling numbers among soft nationalists. It’s a win-win for the government. It gains them needed votes among the soft nationalist province wide. It also gains them votes in the lily white communities around Quebec City and it hurts them not at all among the minorities in Montreal. The government recently lost a by-election in Louis-Hébert, a riding outside of Quebec City. It was a wake-up call. So to cater to the islamophobic nature of isolated white communities they passed this law that can only be seen as an attack on the Muslim minority, which is a growing concern among the people who live in Quebec City. Meanwhile in Montreal, a cosmopolitan city of minorities and immigrants, the lack of a political opposition that can take up the slack of the voters who do not want to vote for the liberals, makes the whole island one collective hostage to the liberals. They have nowhere else to go, no one to vote for except the liberals because all other parties, the CAQ, PQ or Quebec Solidaire are all even more offensive to these ethnic groups.

Now if you thought that this was cynical, hold on to your hat!

Just how many people does this law apply to? Millions of Muslims? Thousands perhaps?

“Frédéric Castel, a researcher at Université du Québec à Montréal, estimates there are between 50 and 100 women — out of some 150,000 Muslim women in the province — who wear the veil. The Muslim Council of Montreal believes there are fewer, telling BuzzFeed Canada in a statement that there are “no more than 50 women in Quebec.'”

Quote found here.

So for all the drama of passing this law, the payoff is in the strengthening of the liberal bond with the soft nationalist, white, Islamophobic vote, not alienating the minority vote in Montreal, even if they are nominally the target, but in fact, the real target is 50 to 100 women. These women, by what they wear alone, make them targets for insult and attacks, “Halloween is next week… (Insert cuss word for female gentiles or female dog.)” They are further isolated from their own religion, as this is not a tenant  of the Qur’an but an imposed law made by males in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia to further control and demean their women into servitude and subservience. Thus deprived of public services like riding a bus, women will only be allowed to drive next year in Saudi Arabia, so most do not have any training on how to drive cars. So they are forced to take public transport, only now they are not allowed to do so. The Bus Drivers unions are all saying they will not be the ones enforcing this law. Women in such conditions who try to better themselves by getting an education are also not allowed into class or even onto the school grounds covered up. In theory, they cannot take this government service of being educated while wearing the Burqa or the Niqab, University professors are also coming out and refusing to do anything about this new law. Worse yet, the government has not even come up with any sort of guidelines for drivers or teachers on what to do if any of those 50-100 women do show up asking for service. Now how cynical is that?

You just have to guess that it can even get worse. And it does.

6 legal cases for Niqab In Canada

This matter has been tested in court and without even referring to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; the courts have ruled such laws to be unenforceable to illegal. This law will surely be declared unconstitutional in three to five years, long after the next election to be held October 2019. Talk about cynical and why politicians are held in such low respect? Need I say more upon this subject?

One last comment from Justine Trudeau, at least he got this right; “We shall defend the rights of ALL Canadians.” And rightly so.

 
Continue reading →

The city of Montreal has a service where you can rent a bike for a while, be it an hour or a day. The question is should we keep it or let it blow away with the wind. Why? Because it is costing Montreal money to subsidies this service. Here is how the argument works outs. By any legal sense, accounting sense and or professional sense Bixi made a profit. This is certified by the General Accountant of Montreal under the rules of accounting in both Provincial and Federal law covering these matters. However, having said that, we then enter the details of the financial statement and see where some doubt comes from. In it, we see the city has paid some 3 million dollars to the company, counted as part of its revenue, as a donation, thus not repayable. This is clearly greater than the profit made some 1 million dollars rounded up. So therefore Bixi, without such aid did not make a profit. Please note, we have shifted the question from being one of profitability to that of long term sustainability without such assistance or taking thus public cooperation, not for profit and turning the rules of a private For Profit Company which does not get help from the government. This however is an unfair turn. The part of Bixi, the international arm of it, that is paid royalties from places like New York and London for the Bixi idea, is making vast profits. The city had to sell this part of the program as it is incompatible with the city’s charter to make a private sector profit or enter into a business arrangement. So if the two, which were once the same company, were again merged, there would be no need for the city to give a subsidy to Bixi, as it would be making a profit on its own terms, without subsidies. So there you go, half full or half empty. I leave the question to you. However, I repeat by all that is considered to be the legal standard of accounting principles, Bixi did indeed make a profit and is making a profit as certified by the Auditor General of Montreal, and would be the acceptable as a professional opinion in any Canadian court of law where their opinion asked. Changing the nature of the question then allows for the answer to be that Bixi did not make a profit. However, if we allow the change to our primary question, we must return the public and the private together, in order to make the comparison. For it is only because of the nature of the city, not allowed to own the For Profit part of Bixi that the profitable side was sold.  In other words, you cannot have it both ways; either we treat Bixi as a fully private or fully public corporation.  In the fully public side, we see now, it is profitable by the rules set up by accounting. If we turn to the private side, we cannot fight with one arm ties behind our back, or sold off to ensure that Bixi remains true to being a public trust and not making a private profit. So rejoining the two parts seem to be only fair to see if they make a profit and they do. So in either case, when regarding this question, we must look to both sides of the issue and see what is to be seen. Not merely make an assertion of no viability on financial grounds, when the ground work and history is completely ignored.

Simply put, if I cannot make the claim that yesterday was warmer than today, therefore global cooling, you cannot take one hurricane, no matter how bad and say climate change. Similarly, I cannot take one Earthquake and say the end is nigh. One event does not a pattern make. In all honesty, and that is what is lacking from both sides from the idiots in the Republican Party and the alt right, to the left wing lunatics, the bottom line is that we simply do not know very much about what is going on, if anything is going on. The world temperature seems to be heating up. But it has been doing so for 10 000 years since the last ice age. So? Is this a bad thing? Maybe? Does carbon released cause weather change? The short answer is yes. Look to weather graphs from world war one and two and you will see the winters were more extreme. Even on to The Great Smog of London in 1952, was a severe weather event that affected the British capital in December 1952. Was it part of climate change? And early warning? Today, we blame it on a host of issues from the use of coal burning to other smog related issues.  Was this a sign of things to come? The real answer is, we don’t know. Having said that, does that mean we are unable to agree on anything?

Here are some things I think both the denier and climate change people might agree on. First the use of pipelines to move oil; this is opposed by environmental group, native groups and a host of other people based on climate change related arguments. Can I deny their arguments yet still oppose the pipeline? The reason is this, the oil is sent to the Houston area for processing for economy of scale. But when the last severe weather event took out that area. We lost 25% of the refining power of North America. Not just Texas but the whole continent. We lose good engineering jobs across North America to relocate them to Texas where those jobs are simply not replaced. More cost savings for big oil but fewer jobs for other regions and other people. Frankly, what idiot allowed for the concentration of refineries in a single location that is prone to sever weather in the first place?

On that topic of oil, what about cleaner cars? In fact, California leads the way on reducing air pollution. We can agree on that, reducing air pollution is a good thing. Again, in their tiresome way, the other side make climate change arguments. I have a really simple one. Cars pollute. I can smell it standing next to a car that is running.  Lots of cars mean lots of smog, means lots of pollution in the air. I don’t need to go to 20 years from now, when it makes my eyes burn and my throat close right now. And I don’t even need to go any farther than that in order to support more environmental friendly cars. Not to mention the skyline of LA has improved by reducing the smog so much over the last 50 years such that you can see the difference in a before and after picture.

Last thing, Solar panels: by increase research on them and production to lower costs and increase their efficiency such that we can generate whole cities that are energy neutral, we are saving people money, we are saving ourselves one less bill to pay each month and we have it for free. Just like geothermal energy, wind turbines, (sorry birds!) and even the use of incoming waves energy can all be of use to increase our ability to not use coal or oil to power our society. I think this is a good in itself, but geopolitical reasons, it will reduce the power of the Gulf States and then reduce their footprint in world affairs by way of terrorism. Not surprising that the Gulf States and oil money are linked to so many different terrorist factions and groups. They have all that oil money, and nowhere to spend it. The ability to deny them our money that they in turn use to hurt us is always a good thing. I don’t even have to glance at the two word answer of climate change.

My other point, no necessarily on topic, but related. Have you ever noticed the voice of true believer; Allah wills it, In God’s time? The reliance upon the will of god to answer all questions; “Why did this happen? God made it so.” It’s a one word answer. Blame it on god. The climate change side tends to do the same thing and blame everything on climate change. Showing, yet again, they are simply a religion and not science at all.