There's nothing in what I write on this page today that is intentional code by me.
April 2, 2011 @ 11:51 p.m.
Unless I have made an error and put my bank card, my drivers' license, a phone card with a lot of minutes left on it, and some other cards that I would have preferred not to lose somewhere unhelpful to me, it would appear that all of those cards plus the few dollars I had left have been stolen.
Is it "Ever After?" in which the evil step-mother hilariously said "No matter how bad things are, they can always get worse."
Ha ha ha ha ha. Really; I always thought that was a funny line.
There were a lot of things I was planning to do and write about today, and it's likely that I'll need to put at least some of them on hold.
"No matter how bad things are.." ha ha ha ha.
L. Kochman, April 2, 2011 @ 11:55 a.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011
It's not going to be possible for me to get everything done that I'd like to get done in 2 half-hour segments of time, Monday-Saturday. For example, I will need larger blocks of time in order to find the page that has pictures of what the Colchester Sun looked like soon after I got a "no-trespass" order from the Colchester School Districk; it is in this blog, but it will take hours for me to find it.
It will take time for me to go back and look through pages to erase my yelling at FNL.
It will take time for me to go back and remove my discussion of why I thought that maybe India wasn't ready to have a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Maybe I was completely correct, but I don't think I have the world knowledge and political experience to have written what I did.
If I went through all of my blog from the beginning, I'd probably find more things to take out.
1) It's too bad that the harassers persist in relating my love life to world events. I don't think that's fair to anyone, including to the people involved in those world events who are directly affected by distorted reporting. The tendency for the harassers to do that is one of the reasons why I tried to address some of those issues before I did other things, but it's certainly not my decision how the media and others distort things that I say or do.
2) I NEVER, EVER told the New York Times that I was against unions; I said exactly the opposite to that. What other lies did that newspaper tell about things I said to them during the months that I was in the hospital and had no Internet access?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011 @ 1:18 p.m.
I don't understand why a lot of the media seem to be against the democratization of places such as Libya. Every recent issue of the New York Times and other newspapers that I have seen placed stories about Libya across from more images meant as sexual harassment. Today the NYT has page A6 with pictures of people in Japan with masks over their faces, some of them wading through water, across from page A7 which is about Libya. What is the investment that the media has in keeping dictators in power?
I also think that the idea that training and arming rebel forces could result in the U.S. inadvertently training and arming terrorists. I think that's an excuse not to get involved. Anyone could be a terrorist; your neighbor could be a terrrorist.
Whether the U.S. trains and arms the rebels or not, what we need to do is to put as much of the U.S. military into Libya as is necessary to help the rebels win, to depose Qaddafi, and to establish democracy in that country. That's what all of the other countries who have been involved in that situation need to do, too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011 @ 1:23 p.m.
The April 2011 edition of "Psychology Today" has a caption on the cover that says "Smashing a Taboo: Does Porn Protect Kids?"
The article starts on page 10. It's called "Sex Post Facto: Does the easy reach of porn protect kids against sex crimes?" I'm not going to try to analyze the article above it; I just saw it today and, while it seems as mean as everything else, it's not relevant to what I'm going to discuss.
The article about child sex abuse has an ad for "Kyo-Dophilus" pills along its left side and is also opposite a full-page ad for Kyo-Dophilus pills. The article tries to indicate both that the increase of the use of anti-depressants by the general population and the legalization of child porn can lead to a decrease in child sex abuse. It uses a supposed decrease in child sex abuse of 5 percent between 2008 and 2009. First of all, it's 2011, and I doubt very much that anything that's happened over the past year contributed to a decrease in child sex abuse, although I bet it contributed to a large increase in the police refusing to investigate reporst of child sex abuse that people tried to tell them about; the police refusing to call crime crime will always result in crime statistics not reflecting how much crime occurs.
The article also says "Sexual abuse of kids...is often engaged in by those with psychiatric problems; they may be using kids as an outlet." I doubt it's a coincidence that as the magazine was getting ready to publish this article I'd been in a mental hospital for a while; while Psychology Today is promoting child sex abuse, it's trying to insinuate that I'm a pedophile, even though I've done nothing but decry pedophilia for almost a year.
Child pornography IS child sex abuse; it's abuse of the children in the pictures and the films, and even if the porn is created digitally, there shouldn't be anything in the world that encourages people to think of children as sex objects.
When child porn is illegal, it means that possessing child porn is a crime; isn't it possible that "cases of child sex abuse immediately markedly" after the Czech Republic legalized child porn because the criminal justice system both stopped prosecuting people for possession of child porn and also started to investigate fewer reports of direct child sex abuse because the criminal justice system took its cue from the government's deteriorated attitude toward child porn?
The article also says "sex crimes against children were declining in the Czech Republic before porn legalization." There's nothing in the article that proves any of what it wants to say.
Below that article is a large dollar sign; it's part of an article about how corporate donations to campaign funding is good for business.
To the left and on the entire opposite page is an ad for "The Chicago School of Professional Psychology." It says, in large captions: "Find your passion. Make your difference."
L. Kochman 1:39 p.m. April 2, 2011
April 2, 2011 @ 11:51 p.m.
Unless I have made an error and put my bank card, my drivers' license, a phone card with a lot of minutes left on it, and some other cards that I would have preferred not to lose somewhere unhelpful to me, it would appear that all of those cards plus the few dollars I had left have been stolen.
Is it "Ever After?" in which the evil step-mother hilariously said "No matter how bad things are, they can always get worse."
Ha ha ha ha ha. Really; I always thought that was a funny line.
There were a lot of things I was planning to do and write about today, and it's likely that I'll need to put at least some of them on hold.
"No matter how bad things are.." ha ha ha ha.
L. Kochman, April 2, 2011 @ 11:55 a.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011
It's not going to be possible for me to get everything done that I'd like to get done in 2 half-hour segments of time, Monday-Saturday. For example, I will need larger blocks of time in order to find the page that has pictures of what the Colchester Sun looked like soon after I got a "no-trespass" order from the Colchester School Districk; it is in this blog, but it will take hours for me to find it.
It will take time for me to go back and look through pages to erase my yelling at FNL.
It will take time for me to go back and remove my discussion of why I thought that maybe India wasn't ready to have a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Maybe I was completely correct, but I don't think I have the world knowledge and political experience to have written what I did.
If I went through all of my blog from the beginning, I'd probably find more things to take out.
1) It's too bad that the harassers persist in relating my love life to world events. I don't think that's fair to anyone, including to the people involved in those world events who are directly affected by distorted reporting. The tendency for the harassers to do that is one of the reasons why I tried to address some of those issues before I did other things, but it's certainly not my decision how the media and others distort things that I say or do.
2) I NEVER, EVER told the New York Times that I was against unions; I said exactly the opposite to that. What other lies did that newspaper tell about things I said to them during the months that I was in the hospital and had no Internet access?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011 @ 1:18 p.m.
I don't understand why a lot of the media seem to be against the democratization of places such as Libya. Every recent issue of the New York Times and other newspapers that I have seen placed stories about Libya across from more images meant as sexual harassment. Today the NYT has page A6 with pictures of people in Japan with masks over their faces, some of them wading through water, across from page A7 which is about Libya. What is the investment that the media has in keeping dictators in power?
I also think that the idea that training and arming rebel forces could result in the U.S. inadvertently training and arming terrorists. I think that's an excuse not to get involved. Anyone could be a terrorist; your neighbor could be a terrrorist.
Whether the U.S. trains and arms the rebels or not, what we need to do is to put as much of the U.S. military into Libya as is necessary to help the rebels win, to depose Qaddafi, and to establish democracy in that country. That's what all of the other countries who have been involved in that situation need to do, too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2, 2011 @ 1:23 p.m.
The April 2011 edition of "Psychology Today" has a caption on the cover that says "Smashing a Taboo: Does Porn Protect Kids?"
The article starts on page 10. It's called "Sex Post Facto: Does the easy reach of porn protect kids against sex crimes?" I'm not going to try to analyze the article above it; I just saw it today and, while it seems as mean as everything else, it's not relevant to what I'm going to discuss.
The article about child sex abuse has an ad for "Kyo-Dophilus" pills along its left side and is also opposite a full-page ad for Kyo-Dophilus pills. The article tries to indicate both that the increase of the use of anti-depressants by the general population and the legalization of child porn can lead to a decrease in child sex abuse. It uses a supposed decrease in child sex abuse of 5 percent between 2008 and 2009. First of all, it's 2011, and I doubt very much that anything that's happened over the past year contributed to a decrease in child sex abuse, although I bet it contributed to a large increase in the police refusing to investigate reporst of child sex abuse that people tried to tell them about; the police refusing to call crime crime will always result in crime statistics not reflecting how much crime occurs.
The article also says "Sexual abuse of kids...is often engaged in by those with psychiatric problems; they may be using kids as an outlet." I doubt it's a coincidence that as the magazine was getting ready to publish this article I'd been in a mental hospital for a while; while Psychology Today is promoting child sex abuse, it's trying to insinuate that I'm a pedophile, even though I've done nothing but decry pedophilia for almost a year.
Child pornography IS child sex abuse; it's abuse of the children in the pictures and the films, and even if the porn is created digitally, there shouldn't be anything in the world that encourages people to think of children as sex objects.
When child porn is illegal, it means that possessing child porn is a crime; isn't it possible that "cases of child sex abuse immediately markedly" after the Czech Republic legalized child porn because the criminal justice system both stopped prosecuting people for possession of child porn and also started to investigate fewer reports of direct child sex abuse because the criminal justice system took its cue from the government's deteriorated attitude toward child porn?
The article also says "sex crimes against children were declining in the Czech Republic before porn legalization." There's nothing in the article that proves any of what it wants to say.
Below that article is a large dollar sign; it's part of an article about how corporate donations to campaign funding is good for business.
To the left and on the entire opposite page is an ad for "The Chicago School of Professional Psychology." It says, in large captions: "Find your passion. Make your difference."
L. Kochman 1:39 p.m. April 2, 2011