IamCraig.com Rotating Header Image

hypocrisy

Late-night comedians are useful

You know, I have to admit that watching late-night comedians out of the States is actually pretty useful. I realise that every bit of “news” out of them is exaggerated somehow for effect, but I’m assuming they don’t make shit up. I mean, out of a staid, neutral news reader, the same “news” would be troubling to me, especially when presented as fact, but when it’s presented as, “Can you believe this shit?”, well, it somehow becomes more believable. When you’ve got someone like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. making the news cutting programmes like the inspection of lettuce, and the US has a resulting epidemic of explosive diarrhoea, well, it’s news, and it just makes you shake your head at how fucked the country is. I thank god every day I don’t live under their government, or lack thereof, and I’m sorry for the people that do.

In addition to the comedians, whose job it is to entertain, there are the talk shows. OK, it’s their job to entertain as well, but when they present the same, “Can you believe this shit?” as well, well, it just confirms what you saw on Jimmy Kimmel (for example) the night before! So the next day you’re not finding out that, oh, everything you watched on the comedy shows was all made-up bullshit, you’re finding out that, yes, it was all actually true!

Americans are whiners

A couple of things stood out for me in Canadian/American news today.

One is the number of high-level whiners there are in the States:

  • John Moolenaar,
  • Bill Huizenga,
  • Tim Walberg,
  • Tom Barrett,
  • donald trump,
  • Lisa McClain,
  • Bernie Moreno,
  • John James, and
  • Jack Bergman.

These are nine Republican whiners … I mean … members of the House of Representatives, a president and a senator, who have apparently complained before: “This is the third consecutive year we have had to write to Canadian officials about a crisis that Canada has the tools to prevent and has chosen not to.” Yup, we Canadians are a lazy bunch, sitting around doing nothing while our world burns around us. I mean, why interrupt our summer suntanning when the forest next to us is burning?

If you’re aghast at my question and already have a list of fifty things you can think of doing, congratulations, and welcome to the human race. We aren’t a bunch of uneducated and helpless monkeys up here, waiting for an all-knowing American white knight to show up. This is called a classic example of how the Americans politicise everything, and how they think that they can do a better job of everything, like Katie Miller, wife of Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, who is still on that tired bandwagon of making Greenland and Canada the “51st [and 52nd] state[s].” No thank you Katie, we’re good. Mr. Miller, it’s nice that you can be a good conservative husband and keep your wife at home to cook meals, but at least give her a better pastime than operating a Twitter account. You must have missed the “seen and not heard” part of your male-domination class, but I guess the class bullies had you in the toilets for your daily hairwashing … when you had hair. Better luck in your next life with a wife who is not so dense.

Actually, one of the nine is a senator from Ohio, who is going to “be introducing a bill next week to sanction Canada and the responsible Canadian government officials for this atrocity.” Wow. I’m shaking in my boots. How would you compare killing tens of thousands of your citizens (in Iran) to a couple of out of control wildfires? Are both atrocities? Have you any sense of proportion?!

I could express my outrage even further, by taking apart the petty points you and others make, but your ignorance speaks for itself. I mean, you “will look elsewhere, and act on our own”? Huh? You will look elsewhere for what? The lumber and cars and steel you don’t need from Canada? And you’ll act on your own? To extinguish the fires in your own back yard? Or are you going to fly up here and show us how the job is done? Because, by all means, head on up here and show us how it’s done, because that will leave us more money to fund the aircraft that we already use for the job we’re not doing. You and Smokey the Bear already do such an excellent job in your own back yard preventing fires from even thinking of starting. Oh, and maybe tell donny that he should consider pumping some money into one of those communist endeavors like the EPA.

The narrow-minded ignorance of some Americans is breathtaking sometimes. Manitoba premier Wab Kinew said it well last year: “These are attention-seekers who can’t come up with a good idea on health care or on making life more affordable. So they’re playing games with something that’s very serious,” also referring to their “timber tantrum”.

There’s another story I want to highlight out of the States, but this will do for now.

Adults behaving badly

What the hell has become of the world?!

On one continent we have the adult child of a monarch in a snit because daddy (or daddy’s people) won’t let him stay at the family home while he is in town because, apparently, their AirBnB is fully booked and he missed a deadline to accept an offer to stay … or something like that.

On another continent we have a man-baby who doesn’t understand the rules of football (soccer in his country) and the purpose of red cards, who has to have another man-baby fly across the world with example cards to show to him, and presumably explain their use to him.

These are examples in the dictionary under the entry, “making a mountain out of a molehill”, with the addition that, “We’re man-babies who know nothing about living in the real world and so it’s totally OK for us to pretend that we’re playing with our toys no matter how much play money we have to pay to get our way”, except that in the real world it’s not play money.

In another country on the second continent we have a fifth man-baby who has nothing good to say about anything, whose biggest contribution to the debate about a pipeline between Alberta and British Columbia is that, “It’s not along the route that I wanted.” As you read this sentence, please use the most childish, whiny voice voice you can muster.

All those man-babies are, respectively, Prince Harry, King Charles, donald trump, Gianni Infantino, and Pierre Poilievre. This is what has become of Planet Earth in the 21st century. God help us all.

Dealing with the Boys in Blue

I remember when I came to Canada how my great uncle taught me to respect the police. I don’t know what he thought, because I was not a gang member, I was doing well in school, I wasn’t a problem in school, my parents didn’t let me run amok breaking laws, and even though I had immigrated to Canada from what was ostensibly a Third World country, the strata of society in which I lived was anything but Third World.

Somewhere along the way, I had my eyes opened though.

I didn’t join any gangs, I didn’t engage in the sexual assaults some of my elementary school friends allegedly perpetrated or partake of the kinds of substances they abused, I just carried on being a “good kid”. I joined Air Cadets, excelled there, and went on to become an officer in the Canadian Armed Forces. The Forces decided I wasn’t as good as the impression I had given them in the recruitment process, and so they kicked me to the kerb. C’est la vie. A blessing in disguise, and I think if their training was half as good as they thought it was, I’d have had the full career I signed up for, and may even be a senior officer there now. Or I may not be, and I’d be a veteran with a distinguished career behind me doing what veterans do with themselves after they serve.

Instead, I’m no longer on the books of the Forces, but the books of police services around the country, in the Lower Mainland specifically.

You see, I’m known as a speeder. Yes, apparently I drive very fast in all sorts of municipalities around Greater Vancouver and southwest BC.

So what do I do? Hundreds of kilometres an hour through school zones? Stunts on the road? Come to screeching stops at traffic lights? Not quite. I’ve had a clean driving record for 20-25 years. I don’t even remember what the number is, because I don’t remember a time when I blew through a stop sign or red light and smoked that minivan full of two families heading to the beach. If that happened, I’d remember the date and time and how long it has been since then, but it never did. But despite that, you’d think that was exactly the kind of record I had judging by what ICBC and the various police forces think about me.

Photo radar

Speed and red-light camera warning sign

Speed and red-light camera warning sign.

My first reminder of Big Brother was an inconspicuous envelope in the mail. Two of them, actually. I’ve recently taken up driving my mother around because she was negatively affected by damage to one of her eyes (and her other eye sucks anyway), and I’m the only son left because one of her sons decided sometime ago to estrange himself from the family, and the other is focussed on himself and can’t help out on week days between 9 and 5. (It’s called having a job, but he and other family weren’t so supportive when I was doing what I needed to do to earn income and wasn’t doing so well, and he’s a hypocrite, so I don’t feel the need to be supportive of him now.) Those two envelopes were photo radar tickets. Yes, contrary to popular belief, we still have that here. The BC Liberal government took a hint from the public a few years ago and got rid of the old photo radar where a van sits on the side of the road and takes pictures of speeders as they go by, but the NDP got the idea to combine red-light cameras with photo-radar cameras, and now you have photo radar at multiple random locations around BC.

And how fast was I going? 150 km/h? 250 km/h? For one ticket I was going 80 km/h and the other 81 km/h. About 3 hours apart. On the same afternoon and evening when the weather was dry and the light and visibility were perfectly fine. Pretty consistent! This is at the intersection of 50 km/h and 60 km/h main roads where there are multiple lanes in either direction (plus dedicated left- and right-turn lanes) and the average vehicle is going at about 80 km/h. Average! That means some are going faster! I’ve since gone through that intersection at 50 km/h, and I don’t feel safe doing so. But that’s OK, as long as I’m not going through it at the insane speed of 80 km/h, we’re all safer.

At this point, feel free to shake your head.

And how visible is that sign above? Definitely not very.

So what lessons have I learnt? It’s not to drive at exactly the speed limit, because I tried that years ago and, as with driving through this particular intersection at 50 km/h, I didn’t feel safe. No, what I do now is take routes in that area that avoid that intersection. Yup, I’m still driving as I always have, but just through different intersections. Somehow I don’t think that’s the goal of putting robots on the side of the road that see and measure everything, but that’s why I’m stupid and am not a police commissioner or the premier of the province.

I very strongly intended to fight the tickets in court, but eventually I decided, because the tickets were only monetary penalties to the owner of the car (my mother) and didn’t also come with the added sting of penalty points, I just paid them. Considering my business just failed and I have an income right now of $0.00, $342 was difficult, but that’s what credit cards are for. I’ll get back on my feet and pay back Visa eventually.

The intractability of ICBC

So what other excitement have I had with ICBC and the boys in blue? Well, as I said, I’ve been driving my mother around recently, and my 20/25-year (if not more) clean driving record was sullied. This was completely my fault (as some accidents are) when a driver in front of me suddenly hit the brakes for a surprise pedestrian and I rear-ended him. And how fast was I going? 250 km/h? No, I was barely moving, as even speeders are wont to do occasionally, because we were slowing down in a right-turn lane. I don’t know how fast we were going as it’s not my habit to glance at the speedometer as my vehicle is about to hit something, but I’d say we were barely moving. I did no damage to the other vehicle and all I have on my vehicle is an indentation on a bumper.

I reported the accident, as I’m required by law to do (I still follow most laws) to a call-taker at ICBC whose first language was obviously not English. If you want to hire foreign call-takers at your company and all you want to do is take orders for your widgets, that’s fine, but not if you’re taking statements in legal cases. So after my call I decided to log into ICBC and provide further information. This required that I re-activated my account with Service BC to integrate with my phone. I did that, and logged into my account and found that ICBC hadn’t connected my account to the “claim” (I’ll explain why that is in quotes in a moment) that I had opened. So here we are about a month after the accident, and I’ve had three (I think, Gmail is such a shit interface) messages from “CC63” at ICBC, who also seems to be challenged by English. I get between one- and four-sentence emails, but none of them make any attempt to resolve the situation in which ICBC has put me by denying me access to provide additional information about my accident. I can’t really think of anything else to say, but you can’t pretend to “resolve” an issue in one- to four-sentence emails, most of which are boilerplate. That’s just ridiculous.

(Why do I put “claim” in quotation marks? According to my education, one only makes a claim against an insurance policy if one claims a payment for something that that is covered by the insurance policy. The cars of both parties in the accident were not damaged and neither was either party injured [and there was no third-party damage], so there is no claim. But the non-English-speaking call-taker pointed out to me that by reporting the accident I had opened a “claim”, even though she heard me state that there was no claim under the English definition of the word. So either her English wasn’t very good, or she has been brainwashed by ICBC jargon to just believe everything they tell her.)

And I haven’t even got to the point where I can complain about the fact that the non-English-speaking call-taker actually said that ICBC will find out about anything to do with my driving, even if I try to hide it. First of all, WTF?! Second of all, I’m not trying to hide anything, and for someone to suggest I am — and it’s only a matter of time before Big Brother finds out — is beyond the pale unless you have evidence that I have tried to mislead someone.

I have an expletive ready to go here, and it’s one of George Carlin’s famous “seven dirty words”, but I receive complaints occasionally.

The hypocrisy of the police

We’ve all seen the police do things they’re not supposed to do, whether it’s right in front of you or on the news. It’s the stuff of legend. We write it off because there’s nothing we can do about it, because most of it is inconsequential anyway. But try telling a cop that the 80 km/h you were doing in a 60 zone was “inconsequential”, and he (or she) will laugh at you and write you a ticket anyway, because the government is expecting that revenue. I remember obeying the law recently and I was pulled over and “talked to” (I didn’t get a ticket, because I didn’t break any laws) because the cop made the assumption that I had no idea what I was doing, or that another driver would assume I had no idea what I was doing and would then act that way and hit me. It was the other driver that should have been pulled over and talked to (or even ticketed for failing to yield), because I didn’t break any laws of even rules. But I’ve had interactions with cops in unmarked vehicles where they were obviously breaking the law, but because they had red and blue flashing lights, they just flashed them at me and I quietly went about my business. I mention this now because this just happened to me on Monday.

I was driving along Steveston Highway in Richmond and I passed an unmarked (as I found out later) police vehicle, a black pick-up truck. And no, I wasn’t doing 250 km/h; I was probably doing what everyone else was doing, about 70 km/h … yes, in a 50 km/h zone, in the same lane as others doing the same speed. I have no idea if it was a Richmond RCMP officer because I never saw him or her in the flesh and got some reasonable identification. Before he (or she) revealed himself/herself to be a cop, I noticed that one of his/her headlights was out. Then he (or she) flashed his/her red-and-blues for no apparent reason (other than to intimidate me, I assume, as other off-duty Richmond RCMP officers have done in non-driving situations) and I got ready to pull over, but he/she carried on and didn’t do anything, and I continued driving as I was. However, if that cop had pulled me over, I was going to ask him/her to write themselves a ticket as well for having one headlight out. I have no idea how that would have gone, but it was worth a shot.

Back when I was doing my darnedest to be a law-abiding citizen and drive at or slower than the speed limit (referred to above), I was passed all the time by cops … in marked cars even! That’s one of the reasons I felt unsafe obeying the speed limit, because nobody else (including the cops!) was doing the same! Why should I drive at 50 km/h when I’m being passed by a cop doing 70?! Why should I do 50 km/h when I’ve got people rushing up my ass and pressuring me to go faster? Why should I do 50 when it’s obvious I’m the slowest person on the road and holding up traffic? So many rhetorical questions, so many hypocritical cops.

Driving mentality

I don’t have any deep analysis of the psychology of driving, but one thing I have noticed, as I avoid being hit by people doing their make-up, eating hamburgers, applying mascara, brushing their hair, talking on the phone, etc., is that driving is not the priority of many people. I mean, sure, they’re in the car because they want to get from A to B, but they’ve done it so much they don’t care, and if the kids in the back seat need a swat, they need a swat! You can’t put that off until later. (That would be sarcasm.) I’m not holding myself up as the model for good drivers to emulate but, besides cars, I have learned to pilot aeroplanes, and you don’t just jump in a plane in your driveway with a couple of screaming kids and your hairbrush, and away you go. Sure, it’s much simpler to “pilot” a car (and also easier to come into contact with other cars), but if people paid as much attention to driving as is required to pilot aeroplanes, our roads would be in much better shape.

When I drive, whether I’m going 8 km/h (5 mph) in a parking lot, 30 km/h in a school zone or 120 km/h along the Coquihalla Highway, I’m driving. I’m piloting a vehicle of a tonne or two, which would hurt if it ran into someone … to put it mildly. I’m not doing one of the activities I mentioned above, I’m focussed on driving. Preferably as smoothly as possible, whether I have passengers or not, because it’s just more pleasant that way. Sometimes I’m fiddling with climate controls or radios (which is one of the reasons touch screens in cars should be banned!) but only when it’s safe to do so, such as when I’m stopped or moving in predictable traffic, such as when I’m on the freeway. I don’t know, but controlling those things is never my priority.

Making suggestions

Isn’t this the point at which I, in all my wisdom, make recommendations? Look, we can’t all be experts on every facet of life, but it’s clear to me that “the powers that be” couldn’t give a shit about us becoming better drivers. They’re just after the money that citizens apparently have stashed … who knows where? … just waiting to pay fines. As our society evolves, we’ll find more and more ways to control the population by, as I say above, installing robots at the side of the road to record and measure our every move. Some people probably want that, and will work to get it; I don’t want that. But, as I watch the news tonight, I’m reminded of the fact that I can assault an innocent person with a baseball bat and be back on the streets tomorrow, but god help me if I do 80 km/h in a 60 zone, because there’s probably a camera somewhere recording that, and hooked up to a system that will automatically churn out a speeding ticket and mail it to me.

That doesn’t improve society.

Stephen Colbert takes a final bow, as Cuba is about to do

Stephen Colbert with his 2011 Peabody

Stephen Colbert with his 2011 Peabody.

I watch very little TV (except the news), and what I do watch is because of other influence(r)s. I won’t miss Stephen Colbert‘s show one bit, but what Americans don’t realise they’ll miss is the freedom to say negative things or at least make jokes about about their leaders. How thin-skinned do you have to be, despite the fact that you are the “leader of the free world”, to use your power to make a guy (and his staff) unemployed, and then to boast about it on your Lying Social feed?!

Mark my words, Americans, you will regret this day (last Thursday). Nobody can predict what will happen tomorrow, but trump continues to chip away at freedoms you’ve taken for granted for so long, that you won’t even recognise what you’ve lost when they’re taken away because it happened to someone else, someone you don’t like. If Colbert’s mocking and calling into question certain of trump’s actions, as he did with Biden and Obama before him, don’t amount to anything in two years (November 2028), then why get so exorcised about it now? Your own constitution will achieve what all of his wannabe assassins have failed to achieve … so far. His presidency will end as scheduled and you’ll carry on.

Or will it and will you? That’s the thing we can’t predict for now. Look for action on this after your midterms, especially if they don’t go his way. You haven’t seen anything yet.

While we’re on the subject of your president’s abuses of power, I’m no supporter of Cuba. Fidel Castro’s soldiers fought against my father in Rhodesia in the 1970s. But that was half a century ago. Since then I’ve travelled to Cuba (along with a bunch of Americans on a Canadian flight), and had a long and very interesting conversation with one of those former soldiers. Despite the lies of “little” Marco Rubio, Cuba is not a “national security threat” to the US, at least, not as far as I understand that term. They possibly could be to Florida, but I’m pretty sure nobody in Washington State (or Alaska) is quaking in their boots at the very mention of the place. No, you’re very obviously going to pull a Venezuela and go in and arrest Raul Castro … because you can.

Hey, if you really have balls and want to show the American people how tough (and stupid) you are, go to Moscow and arrest vladimir putin. Piece of cake. You’ll be in and out in five minutes.


Updated, 2026-05-25: Removed someone’s name.

The impossibility of “debating” with right-wing zealots … or zealots of any kind

I’m a little depressed today. In the “old days” — I don’t even know when that was, but it was before today, before donald trump came to office — I used to have friends whose political opinions I didn’t know. I might have a general idea that Bob was a bit of a conservative and Jane leaned towards being a liberal (or vice versa) — both starting with lower-case letters you’ll note — but I didn’t know who they voted for. And it didn’t matter; Bob and Jane and I got along, laughed at each other’s jokes, partied, drank and had dinners together, liked each other’s kids, and dealt with the foibles of the day’s government, all of the things that people who like each other do together.

That seems to have changed overnight. Well, I suppose not really overnight if it can be traced back to donald trump’s presidency in 2016 (a decade ago), but it’s one of those things that you can seemingly trace back to a particular event. Maybe it goes back even farther than that to the dawn of the Internet in the late 1960s (or the dawn on the commercial Internet in the late 80’s or 90’s), or maybe to the dawn of Twitter twenty years ago, or maybe the establishment of Speakers’ Corner at Hyde Park in London in the 19th century. Those (except for the latter) were perhaps seminal moments when the vast, unwashed public suddenly gained access to a medium where they could do exactly what I’m doing now, spout(ing) their/my opinion(s).

That’s why the crazy guy you knew when you were a kid — who everybody could avoid because you all knew where his (or her) house was — now has a Twitter account and a few million “followers”, and he and they are considered a legitimate force despite the fact that they’re all just as crazy as that one guy down the street was years ago! And now, any of your friends with just slightly weak minds who are susceptible to crazy ideas because they don’t have the mental capacity think about them critically, feel emboldened enough to come out of the woodwork because, apparently, their crazy idea is shared by many others crazy people as well! I don’t blame them, because if that applied to me I’d feel empowered too, and less ashamed that, despite even our relatively small numbers, people were paying attention to us.

(As I write this, it is a nice day outside and a woman walks past my house wearing socks on her hands and a big hat. This has been happening for a few days now.)

So what does this have to do with The Donald? Why drag him into this mess? Am I not just proving that I blame everything on donald trump, even things that can’t reasonably be connected to him? Isn’t that just a little bit crazy? Maybe everyone should avoid my house too! I suffer from “good old days-ism” just as much as anybody, and I’ve only been around for about six decades, but people older than me (say, ten decades) can probably remember a time just like what I’m referring to, from which we can conclude this has happened before. So even though the dawn of donald trump is the one event of the four possibilities I’ve presented that I associate with what is happening now, I have other reasons.

I have (or had) two long-time friends who, it turns out, are supporters of donald trump. No problem; as I said earlier, I can be friends with people of different political stripes. I already complained about them (I took a break from the news) — without identifying them, of course — and disengaged from discussing politics with them. Discussions with my gay Irish friend ended on 12 November 2024 with his declaration, “Not my biggest positive statement [about how he was happy with the US’s new VP], just a bonus 😋”, and neither of us have so much as enquired about the weather in the other’s part of the world since.

On Friday, 15 November, my MAGA Canadian friend (who now lives in Texas, but grew up in Alberta) was in town and we had breakfast. When we met years ago I had no idea and didn’t need to have any idea she had conservative leanings; I have since learned that about her, but, as is usually the case, it had no bearing on our relationship until recently. Against my better judgement, I brought up politics … probably to point out that trump’s war on Iran that he declared “won” a few days later was still on and choking the world after almost three months. As was to be expected, she disagreed, and quickly pointed out that the price of gas/petrol was apparently as high under Biden as it is now under trump. (Feel free to fact-check that, but I’ve never seen prices as high as they are now in Bellingham, Washington.) Then she brought up how Fauci was a demon who created COVID, how schools are usurping parental authority, and sent me links to “support” those conclusions. However, she’s confused between “testimony” and “evidence”.

In the first case she sent me a link to an hour-and-a-half Youtube video of James Erdman III (apparently a CIA whistleblower) testifying before a Congressional hearing “alleg[ing] [a] COVID-19 coverup”. I replied, “I’m not going to watch over an hour and a half of some guy being grilled by the senate. If you have a link to a neutral website where they summarise his testimony I’ll read that.” Allegations are a dime-a-dozen, but talking about them doesn’t actually turn them into proven facts — which are much harder to come by, for obvious reasons. I explained the difference to her between “testimony” and “evidence”, and said that I was not interested in testimony, just proven evidence, if you’ll excuse my redundancy. She didn’t come up with any, or even an explanation for how the courts running a child’s life are better than a school district. I told her that what she believed in were considered to be conspiracy theories by 99% of the population. She again disagreed, and then took the opportunity to make the extraordinary claim that, “The news in Canada is so biased and censored” … ignoring the fact that I’ve lived on three continents and get my news from multiple sources in multiple countries, all of which I have sought out on the basis that they perform good journalism, which means they report facts regardless of whether their audience agrees with them or not.

Her claim that Canadian news is censored is bullshit, and comes from the fact that all she watches is Fox News, all day every day, who (when or if they even mention Canada) tell her to believe Canada censors the news. And she grew up here!

I know it’s only a sample of exactly two, but at this point I’m convinced that anybody who disagrees with my point of view, which is two MAGA supporters, are sensitive flowers who cannot and do not know how to support their points of view with fact-based arguments. While I agree with some of their conservative points of view, I definitely disagree with most of them, especially that donald trump isn’t a bad president and a is danger to world peace.

Convince me I’m wrong, but back up your allegations with evidence, not just your testimony/assertion. Comments are below.

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Right-wing conspiracy.

Right-wing conspiracy

Teksavvy, update 2

I was busy yesterday (Tuesday), so I’m late.

I woke up in the morning (again, Tuesday) to find the downstream light on my modem still flashing, which meant my Internet access was still not working. I rebooted the machine, no change.

Then I left because I had stuff to do.

I came back after 13:00, no change in the modem status. I again rebooted it, just to see if that would help. No go.

So, using my lightning fast (that’s a joke) Troublesome Mobile connection, I entered chat with a Tek-non-Savvy person. I have to admit the wait is not too long, but it ironically starts with, “We hate that you are having service issues”, and provides a link to basic troubleshooting. Nice, if it helps, which it doesn’t, because my problem isn’t basic.

The customer service person says my service has been activated, so I need to try another cable outlet. I ask her, “What if it works, but it’s not in the room where our TV will be?” I had attached it to the cable outlet (they’re using Rogers, sadly) in the living room near where the previous owners had a TV mounted on the wall. When I attached it to another outlet and I rebooted the modem, it eventually connected. Great! So I do finally have Internet access!

Oh, but wait.

Me: “OK, now it is [online]. But a wifi connection to the TV is not as good as an RJ-45 connection. Why do we not have connectivity on the one outlet where we want it?”

Her: “We have no control over which outlet the vendor activates for the modem, unfortunately.” (I’m starting to see a scam here.)

Her: “I can make some changes in the modem to improve the wifi. What would you like your network name and password to be?” Huh?

After being disconnected and reconnecting: “Why can we not get service at the cable outlet by our future TV?”

Her: “We have no control over which cable outlet the vendor activates for the modem. If you want to relocate the active jack, there is a fee to dispatch a technician. I can make a change in the modem that will help improve your wifi. What would you like your wifi network name and password to be?”

Me: “That hilarious. So you cripple a new modem? I will consult with the person bringing us our new TV on the 28th, but this might be a very short subscription. Would you rather charge us the fee, or have our subscription?”

Her: “It’s not crippling the modem. Band steering is enabled in the modem by default. Disabling it separates the two wifi networks so you can better manage your devices.”

(I looked up “band steering” on Wikipedia: “Some enterprise-grade APs [access points, I believe] use band steering to send 802.11n clients to the 5 GHz band, leaving the 2.4 GHz band for legacy clients. Band steering works by responding only to 5 GHz association requests and not the 2.4 GHz requests from dual-band clients.” Duck.ai says, “The main difference between 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz WiFi is that 5 GHz offers faster speeds but has a shorter range, while 2.4 GHz provides a longer range but slower speeds. Additionally, 2.4 GHz is more prone to interference from other devices, making 5 GHz a better choice for high-bandwidth activities in less crowded environments.” So despite the conventional wisdom that a “hard” connection (network cable) is better than a “soft” connection like wifi, she’s suggesting that I put my modem in another room (rather then right next to the TV) and connect to the modem over wifi. I don’t think so. The building is wood, but there is obviously a wall between the room with the modem and the room with the TV. By connecting the TV to the modem over wifi we’re jeopardising the quality of what the TV plays back. I have almost no experience in this area (TVs), so I have no idea what the degradation will look like; will it look like snow on a 1950’s TV, or what?)

More importantly, the “scam” I’m seeing here is that when we’ve set up Shaw (and then Rogers) cable TV and Internet in new abodes in the past, all cable outlets have been activated; we had a “main” TV in the lounge and a small TV in the bedroom. So if only one of the three outlets we have now was activated, why? Why this one instead of the one by the TV? Why this one instead of the one in the bedroom? And why hold us hostage if their random pick of outlet was wrong and we want to activate a different outlet? Why do they have to send a well-paid technician out? They can do most (if not all) things remotely, so their “claim” that they need to send someone in person sounds bogus to me, especially as what’s probably really happening is that a switch is being flipped back in the central office and the person they send just has to look busy on our premises for a few minutes.

This sounds like it’s worth bringing to the attention of the CRTC, quite frankly. This is either a scam on the part of the established players, or a reseller (TekSavvy) is rolling over. Either way, I don’t think this is playing within the spirit of the rules.

I’ll finish the conversation with Tek-non-Savvy:

Her: “The vendor charges us a fee to dispatch their techs, we have to pass this fee onto the customer.”

Me: “But why are you only activating *one* *random* outlet?”

Her: “That’s the way the vendor does it. Rogers. They own the lines”.

Her: “They complete the activation”.

Me: “I understand how the system works, but when we used to be with Rogers they activated all outlets in the suite.”

Me: “That’s how we believe it was with the previous owners.”

Her: “We have no control over this, unfortunately”.

Me: “Wow, not impressed. I will have to reconsider this whole palaver.”

Me: “I guess that’s it then.”

Her: “Have a good evening”.

Yup, TekSavvy: “We’re different. In a good way.” Depends; do you consider it good to subject your new customers to more fees rather than just providing the service and taking your fee every month? It certainly seems that this technician doesn’t give a shit and wants their mark-up on the Rogers technician’s time rather than my monthly revenue. That’s the most egregious short-term thinking I’ve ever come across.

I will have to consider my options when the Geek Squad guys show up with the new TV. But as I said above, it looks like this whole TekSavvy palaver has been a waste of time and money, so it’s fake competition.

Mark Carney is wonderful!

I filled up recently for a $1.40 something per litre! Prime Minister Mark Carney is wonderful!

This is for all those people who blame the prime minister for the cost of one single solitary item. You’re welcome.

If the government falls tonight, I’m going back to voting NDP at the next election!

The CFIA has also become the poster child for giving the middle finger to the law

Common ostrich

Common ostrich. (Cropped and reduced, Diego Delso, CC BY-SA 4.0)

All during the COVID-19 pandemic I sat and mocked the morons who were demonstrating in the streets against lock-downs and various other methods to control the population to reduce the spread of the disease, around the world, here in Canada, the United States, Australia, etc.

I watched the experts, who I will not demean by putting that word in quotation marks, speak sense to the masses. I decried the people who stalked doctors and nurses and other medical personnel, and besieged hospitals, in an attempt to intimidate them into stopping their vital work.

And now I’m watching the farce at Universal Ostrich Farms. As I said previously, I find it odd that I’m now apparently in bed with the same nut jobs I couldn’t believe were seemingly convinced the end of the world was near, who predicted I’d be dead with a year of the first COVID vaccine I took … five years ago.

I’m not a virologist; I will admit that up front. I believe I am a scientific and critical thinker. I don’t think that ostriches are magical animals, something that only occurred to me after reading the diatribes of a virologist. That virologist is Dr. Angela Rasmussen, who I recognised from her appearances on the TV news when she was explaining to Canadians (and anyone else who would listen) how COVID worked and why is was important to wear a mask and how to behave in groups of people to avoid transmission of the virus. She made sense to me then, so I am dismayed to learn that she is in favour of the “stamping out” policy of the CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) with respect to the ostriches.

As I said previously, “Would humanity have ever made its way out of the caves if we mindlessly executed every human that ever caught a cold?” That’s the crux of my argument against culling 400 ostriches. It’s not that I have a special bond with Speckles, one of the named ostriches; it’s that I have a bond with all … well, most … living creatures on this planet, especially those that are subject to the whims of authoritarian humans, who can decide with the stroke of a pen that 400 lives are meaningless and can be vapourised in the blink of an eye, or however many hours or days it takes to kill 400 animals. Why is life, human or otherwise, so disposable to us humans? That’s what I, and I’m sure many people, think and wonder about.

I’ve done some research on Dr. Rasmussen (which is a loaded assertion after the pandemic), which research I do for every blog post which is why I do so few of them. I am shocked at the extent to which some have gone to threaten and intimidate her. Those are the people I referred to above. There’s no excuse for that; I disagree with her, but I don’t think she should suffer the same fate as she thinks the ostriches should. I also realise that there is a huge difference between the “colds” that humans get, and “highly pathogenic avian influenza” (HPAI) that was diagnosed on the ostrich farm, so don’t bother disagreeing with me on that point.

Although it’s not the first time, I looked at her blog on Substack. The lead article there (as of 6 November 2025) is “Release The Ostriches’ Grippe“. I won’t focus on its title and the odd possessive of “ostriches”, and the use of the word “grippe” (which I had to look up, so I expect its context means more to some people than others), but when I opened it I found it odd that an “unbiased scientist” (she links to someone who goes by that moniker on her home page, so I assume she’s claiming to be unbiased herself) would open a supposedly scholarly article with, “I cannot believe that I have even used the word ‘ostrich’ this much in my life. I went into virology because I prefer studying microscopic parasites to vertebrates. I should have known better than to think I wouldn’t have to know about these terror birds. … Sometimes the hosts [of viruses] are incredibly annoying. Ostriches fall into this category.” OK, so Dr. Rasmussen has an emotional reaction to ostriches, but we’re still supposed to take her thousands of words about them at face value as being “unbiased”! So really, my emotional reaction to snuffing out 400 lives is just as valid. She goes on right after that to call the opposition to the cull “a radicalized absurdist yokelfest” after that, so she has even more biases than just the one against ostriches.

I was going to read her full article anyway, despite the fact that she goes on to demean those who disagree with the cull with more slurs. I chose a career in IT, where I can minimise my interaction with vertebrates, both bipedal and quadrupedal, but I still take interest in some of their blogs … the bipedal ones anyway. But ten days later work has overtaken me and the press has moved onto other shiny things. I’m not going to bother reading her full article because I’m sure it will be just a mean-spirited rant against the aforementioned “yokels” and anyone else who holds life to be sacrosanct. No thanks.


Updated, 2025-11-17: Immediately added that I understand the difference between a “cold” and HPAI. Also added the word “also” to the title.

Free speech in the United States of America

It no longer exists.

As has been predicted by just about everyone, the fascist American trump administration régime has gone after, is going after, and will go after (as trump himself has already made plainly clear) any type of disagreement with trump. It’s a playbook we saw back in the 1930s. It’s not new; it’s shocking in the 2020s, yes, but it’s not new or unexpected.

I don’t know how the American right and their apologists can do this with a straight face. The hypocrisy is galling; it’s the very “cancel culture” of which they accuse the left … or the “radical left” as trump so eloquently keeps putting it. Whether or not there are any mergers in play is irrelevant, the Federal Communications Commission should not be, in a free country, threatening anyone. It’s the very “big government” that the Republican Party claims to be against. But the Republican Party is not in control anymore, we know that. The American Republican Party party in the 2020s has become the National Socialist Party of the 1930s. And the MAGA whiners wonder why we Canadians don’t want to cross the border?!

The crackdown on free speech continues. The “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” show used to run on the ABC network, and so does “The View”. The next morning, after “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was suspended, the usually talkative current events panel just glossed over the topic as if it never even happened, as if American democracy wasn’t crumbling around their very ears. Whether they didn’t talk about it because they were self-censoring or because they received a sternly worded memo from ABC brass telling them not to, the bottom line is that they didn’t.

I don’t find Kimmel particularly funny. His disappearance from TV won’t affect my daily life one iota (and I’m in another country, thankfully), but I’m not on TV; I’m not on TV because nobody on the planet knows who I am or whether or not I’m funny. But Kimmel is on TV (or was) because he is well-known, and (apparently) some people think he’s funny. It’s called entertainment. If you don’t like the so-called entertainment on one channel, change the bloody channel! I don’t think any one person will find their life not worth living because any one entertainer disappeared from their list of choices, but that “any one person” needs to consider the bigger picture; it’s not just about any one entertainer.

Do I really need to remind everyone of the following admonition:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Apparently there are many cowards in the United States, including and especially among shareholders.


Updated, 2025-09-19: Better characterised the trump régime.