If this man is innocent, we all need to be verrry afraid. Seriously, be afraid:
Who is Ayad Mejid?
Authorities have investigated him for terrorist connections and labelled him a pedophile and, although a court hasn’t determined his guilt or innocence, he says those stigmas have already ruined his life.
The Comments below contain the rest of this story.
This clip says it all. Of course, if you want to see more of the person in the clip, you can check out my other blogs on her here and in this link.
And this video is more recent, with Octocreep explaining why she fired her free help. And this is the other side. This “woman” really is in the running for Asshole of the Year…
Well, not much has changed in the year since I wrote this blog about the pathetic back-slapping that went on re. Earth Hour. Remember, many of these people who make the ultimate sacrifice of turning out their lights for an hour are the same ones who idle their cars for long periods of time, leave lights and appliances on all the time, use their air conditioners as soon as the weather gets mild, etc etc…
And ask yourself: Have we had more than one Earth Hour per week in the past year? No. Why not? Bah…..
Or so they pretend. In the Comments section below, you’ll see two recent stories on what certain politicians are doing re. the nanny problem reported on in this blog numerous times. As I’ve always said, most politicians will not do the right thing unless they are embarrassed into doing it by the media–thank you Dale Brazao (and Robert Cribb) for your tireless efforts!–or unless it serves their own needs. Ineffective assholes….
This nominee for asshole of the year is more in line with what we expect sociopaths to look/act like, as opposed to the young girls we’ve been reading about recently:
Ralph Scala was the neighbour from hell. For years, the 37-year-old man terrorized nearby residents and businesses, slashing tires, breaking windows and in one case, had a rag soaked with accelerant pushed through a door. Usually, he would hire local youths to do the deeds after he came into conflict with neighbours in the Dundas St. W. and Quebec Ave. area, escalating the slightest misunderstanding into a major dispute. Yesterday, the former food delivery man pleaded guilty to 49 charges, including mischief, criminal harassment and threatening
“An entire community was terrorized,” Crown prosecutor Jody Milstein told provincial court Justice Kathleen Caldwell. Victims included an 86-year-old woman and a 3-year-old girl.
The level of concern about Scala was so great that neighbours gathered 119 signatures on a petition for “immediate action to help save the neighbourhood,” the prosecutor said. Finally, after a lengthy police investigation, father and son were arrested last July.
Dressed in an orange jail-issued jumpsuit, his dark hair combed back, Scala calmly listened as the prosecutor detailed a litany of his crimes. He nodded politely when asked if he agreed.
Scala had rocks thrown through the windows and door of Free Times Donuts on Dundas St. W. after its owner asked him never to return. “Hey, you bitch, your place will shut down,” he told her. A resident on Quebec Ave., where Scala and his parents lived, was harassed over many months and repeatedly had her car keyed and tires slashed. In March 2008, Scala threatened a former friend, saying, “You better watch your back.” The man’s car tires were slashed several times.
James Yeoman reported Scala’s harassment of his family started in 2003 when Scala’s pit bull attacked his dog. As Yeoman tried to pull Scala’s dog away, Scala attacked, beating the smaller man in front of his wife and then 3-year-old daughter, the prosecutor said. Scala would later stand under Yeoman’s daughter’s bedroom window and brag about the beating.Last April, Scala yelled to him as he drove by, “So that’s the car you drive,” then took down the licence plate number. The family car was then repeatedly keyed and slashed.
Scala was fired from the Lotus Inn restaurant after being charged with threatening two employees and damaging two vehicles. Last April, the eatery’s front windows were smashed on three occasions. A rag soaked with an accelerant was also stuffed in the front door.
One night last July, a youth hired by Scala used a slingshot to fire a rock through the window of an 86-year-old woman’s house on Quebec Ave. Scala twice flooded her lawn with a garden hose. “This particular vulnerable elderly victim was quite fearful,” Milstein said. She alleged Scala trained his dog to be aggressive, leaving him unmuzzled and off the leash to frighten passersby. Defence lawyer Gordon Goldman said there is no evidence the dog hurt anyone.
Scala’s father, Felice Scala, 62, who is alleged to have partnered with his son in some of the mayhem, watched in court. On bail, he faces a separate trial on four charges.
There is no nomination process for this group of pigs who every day line up at the public trough, basking in their sense of entitlement. Of course, I’m talking about the those assholes on Toronto City Council who treat the city as their little fiefdoms. If you spent one day at City Hall as I have done, to watch them in “action,” you would be very discouraged. Toronto Star writer, Royson James, provides another excellent column on the topic in the Comments below.
To follow up on what has been discussed in the Comments for this thread, I wanted to repeat or stress a few key points.
1) All the research shows that physical discipline almost always has bad consequences, especially since it’s nearly always done when the parent is angry and frustrated, rather than calm and in control. Moreover, it does not teach the child why the actions were wrong and the only three things the kid learns are 1) my caregiver (or all big people) is scary, 2) I’d better get better at hiding my bad behaviour or lying about it, and 3) “might makes right”–when I get bigger, I’ll be able to take my anger and frustration out physically on others (usually smaller than I).
2) Even when the child is very young and cannot speak, the parent should get in the habit of communicating to the child why something is inappropriate, NEVER using any phrase that implies the CHILD is bad, e.g., “bad boy,” or “if you’re a good girl…” No, I’m not one of those people who gets caught up in semantics, but I do know that (young) children internalize things, so they already infer that they are “bad” when their parents are upset; using language that says they are bad re-inforces this notion beyond the parent’s emotional reaction. Discipline, instilling fear, punishment, etc. will not help the child develop or internalize the proper messages if there is no message to go along with the discipline.
3) In short, the child needs to hear 1) why what they did was inappropriate/unacceptable, 2) what they should be doing instead, 3) what the consequences will be if they don’t stop doing the inappropriate/unacceptable thing or do it again, and 4) why there are such consequences. And they need to be reminded of this over and over.
4) Most parents fail to follow through on discipline. For instance, I was at the park last week and a mother was there with her kids. One of them (about 4) smacked his younger brother (about 2) and his mother yelled, “Robert, come here!” The older kid (Robert) said “NO!” She repeated it, he repeated his answer and she got sidetracked tending to the other kid and nothing happened to Robert at all.
I guarantee that if you asked every parent/neighbour/friend who knows this mother and father–he was there too and did nothing, as he was with another kid but did see what happened–what they think of them, they’ll praise them for being great parents. They have money, send the kids to a great school, dress them well, go out together to the park, etc. But I have higher standards than most people and to me, that mother failed miserably. And I can guarantee you that she will manifest the same type of failure in many different ways. And virtually no one would pick up on her failings. Yet, when Robert starts doing bad things at school, people will wonder how that could be. They’ll say this is one more example of a kid just “turning out bad” without any blame found in the parent, since these are two “great” parents. Bullshit.
You may think I’m being harsh or have overly high standards, but I do not. I just happen to know how children develop into the types of teens and adults they end up becoming. And I can see the signs in the kids and the parents that most other people miss. I may seem arrogant for saying this but I’m just reporting facts (yes, even that sentence may seem arrogant…).
By the way, there were other minor incidents with both the mother and father that clearly showed that they do have good intentions but are not nearly as competent as they need to be, especially with FOUR very young children. As I’ve done many times in the past, I’ve laid bets on how these kids will turn out in a few years and beyond. My significant other hates when I do that because in the many years I’ve been doing this, I haven’t been wrong once…
5) raleighdiver wrote:
When your kid is throwing food and misbehaving and you’re doing all you can to get him to stop but he thinks it’s funny. You put him in timeout and he does it again, do you just keep repeating the process? I’ve never hit my 2 year old child but I wonder if he won’t learn faster. Now, we just put him in timeout for a few minutes, he wails, timeout is done, rinse and repeat for a few cycles until we just let him get out of the situation and we just deal with the thrown food, etc. We’ve tried multiple times to get him to eat his veggies from begging to bribery to hiding it in various foodstuffs.
We try not to go out too much since he’s unpredictable. Any advice as to how to do this better? I feel that guiding and teaching only goes so far as if you have someone willing to listen. Of course, maybe this just applies to older kids? But I’m afraid we’re setting a bad precedent when he gets older. any advice would be appreciated.
My response is that he’s unpredictable because his parents’ response is unpredictable. Sometimes it’s begging, sometimes it’s bribery, sometimes it’s subterfuge. Most important, no matter what you do, in the end you give up. You’ve basically conditioned him to believe that, all he has to do is keep trying hard enough and he’ll eventually win. You and your wife have taught him that, just as you could have taught him that throwing food will end up with a smack.
Remember, he’s two years old and isn’t that smart. But he’s about as smart as a dog and dogs can be trained. People hate when I use that analogy but it’s true. Apparently time-outs haven’t worked with him, so you have to try something different and you have to be consistent.
One important thing is to make sure he never gets a chance to throw his veggies. YOU feed them to him with one hand ready to grab his hands as soon as he tries to swat the spoon out of your hand. Have both parents do this if necessary. Once you’ve mastered feeding him, you give him the chance to eat himself, once again with your hands close by to stop him as soon as he even thinks of doing something wrong. You have to be smarter and faster and think more ahead than him. He’s two years old.
No, it’s not easy, but no adult should ever lose to a child. Worst-case scenario, don’t feed him. He won’t starve but he’ll definitely get hungry after and will have to eat. Now, his reaction when he sees the veggies at this point will be to resist them as always. Be insistent. If he doesn’t eat, put him back down and say something like, “Okay, no food for you.” He’ll cry. He may throw a tantrum. Before he does cry (or after), explain that if he wants to eat, he has to eat veggies too. And make sure he eats his veggies first.
You can even tell him that if he eats part of his veggies first, he gets something else he likes. Some “experts” argue against this because it’s a kind of association where the veggies are now seen as the bad guy, but those “experts” are idiots because if the kid already hates the veggies, there’s nothing wrong with acting accordingly–treating the veggies as something he likes, when he doesn’t, won’t make him change magically. And this notion of going through unpleasant things (e.g., veggies) to get to the fun stuff (e.g., dessert) is something that is with us our entire lives (e.g., finish homework before going out to play, or finish a report before going out for drinks), so why not condition the kid early on?
Anyway, you have to keep repeating this and it may seem hard and stressful but in the end it works, it doesn’t take that many tries, and and it’s more effective than a time-out because there’s a much more direct link between the kid’s actions and the consequences. “You don’t want to eat, fine. Go down. Buh-bye” (without making him think he’s being abandoned, of course). But the key is persistence. Most parents lack this trait, as in the example above.
But be prepared to compromise. If he eats only 1/2 of what you want, fine. If you have other food that meets his nutrition needs (e.g., fruits), you’re okay. It’s a matter of picking battles. Of course, the other related option is to give alternatives, with the other alternative being something the kid doesn’t want.
I’ve fallen behind on my Nominations for Asshole of the Year (you can see a few nominees through this link), but here are a few from yesterday (the Comments section below contains the entire story):
(I love how none of the hosts or panelists has ever been in the military. Assholes. One of them was apparently forced to cancel his gig in Edmonton. Karma’s a bitch, baby. And how does the host get away with claiming that he was “MISUNDERSTOOD”? Watch the video. Read the transcript. I’m not a jingoist but fuck you Gutfeld for saying shit about people who are fighting your country’s war for you and dying every day for their efforts!)
(Yet the mayor and councillors will accept their pay hike, of course. Hypocritical assholes)
(Okay, no matter how much of their bonuses they give back, these assholes deserve a category of their own)
(Other articles include a few other examples of the council’s “entitled spending” or wasting of our tax dollars…I know it pales in comparison with what has happened in the US, but these are perennial assholes; the worst part is that virtually none of these assholes ever apologizes for wasting money for their own self-promotion)
In this previous thread, I wrote about the recent case of the sociopath, M.T., who compelled her idiot, ball-less, hapless (and not likely to be a sociopath) boyfriend to murder the innocent Stephanie Rengel. The story has caused some commotion in the Comments section, which I greatly appreciate. However, there may be some new readers to this site and I wanted to make sure certain facts were stated explicitly.
1) I do not subscribe to any doctrine and do not support any political group blindly. Although I have often voted for the NDP, I have spoiled my ballot on a number of occasions when I disagreed with the NDP candidate or the party. I am not a Socialist, Marxist, or even Liberal. I do hold “liberal” views, but only in the sense that my thinking is flexible and open-minded, rather than rigid and dogmatic.
2) I support complete rights for gays re. marriage, adoption, etc., not out of doctrine or guilt or some other idiotic reason. I support such rights because I am a humanist and I am extremely well-read on the issue of sexual orientation. I do not go for false modesty, so I do not mind stating that I know more about sexual orientation than most “experts” and lay-people alike because I am not driven to find support for one “side” or the other. I want to know the entire picture (or as much knowledge/information as is attainable). So, after critically analyzing thousands of relevant documents and knowing very many gays and lesbians quite personally, I am content in my position on the issue.
3) I know the original article had nothing to do with sexual orientation, but one of the comments did refer to the issue. And nothing is more controversial than homosexuality, so I chose that as a good example of my thought processes and perspectives.
4) I support gun owners’ rights and think the gun registry in Ontario (Canada?) is a joke and a cash grab. I similarly am offended by the Toronto Mayor/Coucil’s plans to shut down shooting ranges, which are run and attended by some of the most responsible people you can find. At the same time, I think the National Rifle Association is a very bad organization and has contributed to far too many deaths through their unethical and immoral actions. I also think that the selling and licensing of guns has to be regulated far more tightly in the US than it currently is, and that parents who teach their kids to handle guns from a young age are doing them a disservice, when you look at the stats involving these kids and accidental or intentional deaths by firearms. I similarly think that all gun owners need more stringent rules on the storage of firearms, since far too many deaths have resulted from kids and criminals getting legally owned guns. Finally, I am opposed to hunting and think it is barbaric and inhumane the way it is done by most people. All the apologists who claim that hunting is a noble cause, or it’s no worse than what is done in the meat processing industry, or teaches about conservation and nature, etc., are simply rationalizing their actions and pretending that the tiny minority of hunters who do hold such ideals are more common than the many hunters who see hunting as a great way to get away from the family, to get drunk, to bond with other men, to expend some testosterone, and to prove their “manood” by slaughtering defenseless animals who are often lured to small places where they are docilely eating before being blown away by some crazy big-ass weapon that could take down an elephant.
5) I know, I know. Stephanie Rengel wasn’t killed by a gun. I bring up guns to show that, if one employs critical thinking, one can hold one particular view and see the merits or problems with a simiar or opposing view. One need not think in simplistic “black and white” terms, which is what far too many people do because they do not have the mental, psychological or emotional capacity to think more adaptively. Pigeon-holing is usually a reflection of black and white thinking. And before anyone accuses me of pigeon-holing in my previous point re. hunters, I’m not saying that all hunters are like that. But many are. And to pretend otherwise would be dishonest and foolish.
6) I am not religious but am not so arrogant to mock people for their faith. However, if someone uses their faith to harm others, I will call them on it. I will similarly point out if someone treats faith as fact, which I consider unacceptable. If your faith forces you to discriminate against certain people, actions or ideas, at least be honest enough to say, “I have no scientific or empiricial reason to think, act and feel as I do. I am instead driven to these thoughts, feelings and behaviours by something I was told by my parents, school, government, religious organization, etc. I choose to (blindly) follow these beliefs rather than try to challenge them through reasoned and rational investigation of the facts and open-minded experiences (rather than selectively attending to or recalling certain experiences that conform to my pre-formed beliefs).” Of course, very few people are honest or brave enough to make such admissions.
7) As a follow-up to 6), I do not believe that one needs religion in order to be moral. As has been mentioned, morals based on religion were written by man. You can believe it was the hand of God, Allah or whoever else, or that the people who wrote these words were spoken to by some higher power. But there is absolutely no evidence for that. There is a lot of evidence that humans have distorted even the most beautiful or admirable messages contained in religious texts. We have many examples of people using religion to perform the most immoral of acts, despite what blind and scared apologists might deny or claim. Some of the “holiest” people in every country also perform some of the heinous acts possible. Apologists and fools can deny this all they want, despite all the evidence.
8 ) Notwithstanding 7), I do believe that many people are too simple and weak of spirit or mind or character to function properly without “the fear of god” keeping them righteous. That’s not praise for religion but a sad indictment against the “average” person. At the same time, many such weak people have also been so easily fooled, manipulated, corrupted, taken advantage of, ruined etc. by religion. To be clear, I’m not saying all religious people are weak of spirit/mind/character, only that many people–religious or not–are. For such people, religion can keep them in line. However, they are also the first people to blindly allow themselves to be screwed over by their religious leaders.
9) As a humanist, I do not believe in “absolute morals,” but I’m also not some wishy-washy idiot who can be persuaded to think that anything can be justified, as many moral relativists do. Despite some limitations with the model and research around it, I adhere to Kholberg’s theory of moral stages. (Or you can go here to see a pretty long document on the issue.)
10) I strongly believe that everything written above begins at home. Parents who take the time to instil in their children respect for themselves, for others, for the weakest in society, for the planet, etc., will raise good, moral children. These children will have strong characters, will have critical and flexible thinking, and will be productive members of society. They will have judgment and be able to decide if an action is moral/proper/just/necessary or not. Unfortunately, most people were not raised this way, hence my pessimistic views on much of humanity.
11) Fortunately, humans are quite strong, thus many people who were not raised properly can still turn out pretty well. I have been fortunate to have met many such people, thus my pessimism is not directed blindly toward people in general or particular groups. Instead, I apply my critical thinking to each case and hope others do the same.
12) Before anyone takes offence to anything I’ve written, please read it carefully. I may make “provocative” statements but they are (usually) written carefully, so please do not mistakenly infer something I have not conveyed or intended to convey. And there is nothing wrong with making potentially “offensive” statements, as long as one can back them up with proper reasoning; and I never write something I cannot back up appropriately.
13) Okay, I’m getting dizzy from standing on this high horse, so I think I’ll give my verbosity and fingers (and your eyes) a rest. But for anyone who is new to this site, I hope you can see where I am coming from. I will never censor anyone and strongly encourage opposing views. But you’d better be prepared to back up your views and be able to do so without resorting to personal attacks on anyone in this forum. I really look forward to reading more people’s opinions.
I’ve said it many times: Aside from the rare cases where biology is the main factor, monsters such as M.T. become that way because of their parents/caregivers. The past few generations have seen a dramatic increase in the number of parents who follow this mantra: “I gave my child life, but I didn’t give him/her MY life.”
What I mean is, they don’t realize that it’s the parent’s RESPONSIBILITY to put the child’s needs first. Yes, many families need both parents to work, or the children are raised by a single parent who needs to work. However, there are many parents who CHOOSE to work when they don’t really need to, or work more than they need t. Or, most important, they don’t balance their work with enough time spent on loving and GUIDING their child; that is, they don’t instill proper STRUCTURE and don’t ensure that the child INTERNALIZES certain values.
Too many parents idiotically truly believe that they have to give in to their child and not discipline them properly; discipline doesn’t mean hit or necessarily punish the child, but to GUIDE and TEACH them—which sometimes includes punishment, but should never be physical. Or they feel guilty for not spending enough time with the child so they spoil them to compensate for their deficiencies as parents. And all the research shows that spoiled kids end up turning out as badly as abused kids.
In short, too many parents are failing in their duty to instill in their kids a sense of self-respect, self-esteem, and respect for others. Idiot media types claim garbage such as “This generation of young people is the most self-confident and self-assured ever.”
No, many people in the past two generations have been more coddled and spolied than any other generation and thus have no concept of reality. Their parents have not done their job properly and have thus failed to teach them how society operates. That is why M.T. was so rude to Stephanie’s mother when she first confronted her about the serious death threat. M.T.’s parents are so pathetic that they did not realize that their daughter’s horrible attitude was a warning sign that she was not the “sweet little kid” they thought she was.
On a related note, when M.T. was found guilty, she never once looked at her family, like a normal person would. Some people will claim that she may have been in shock, or that many people in her unimaginable situation would have done the same thing. As someone who understands human functioning very well, I can tell you that her failure to even once look at her family was a sign of her lack of true connection to them. Her parents have deluded themselves into thinking that she was this loving daughter, but like most parents these days, they have no clue what she’s really like. She has no remorse and no true capacity for empathy. Those are traits of a sociopath, which she is. Only a sociopath can plan and carry out the murder the way she did; yes, she did carry it out in my books. And only a sociopath reacts the way she did upon her arrest and questioning.
Anyone who feels sorry for her parents is a naive fool. We should be angry at her parents for failing society as they did. Trust me, monsters such as M.T. don’t come from nowhere. Not only did the product of their complete incompetence as parents cost a poor, innocent girl her life. This little animal has also cost taxpayers such as you and I millions of dollars through her arrest, trial, incarcertaion, etc., and will continue to suck us dry until the day she finally dies. So please do not feel sorry for M.T.’s parents. Feel anger and disgust toward them. Only her poor little brother deserves any pity.