Boozhoo (hello), my name is Ken, I am a disabled Ojibwe artist from northern Wisconsin. I am writing this post because I am having a hard time making ends meet and any donations I could possibly receive at this time would be greatly appreciated. Recent events have left my bank account depleted and my cupboards bare, I have some food but it will not last and I still do not know how I will cover all the utility bills.

I do have PayPal, that is really the best way to donate at this time, the email I use for that is:, or you can click here.

British army targeted “stressed” 16-year-olds on exam-results day with Facebook recruitment ads


Every August, British 16-year-olds get their marks from the GCSE exams, a
high-stakes test that has an enormous impact on their future
educational and earnings prospects; on results day 2015, the British
Army used Facebook targeting to reach these 16-year-olds with messages
like “No matter what your results will be, you can still improve
yourself in the army.”

The campaign has been condemned by Child Soldiers International. The UK
is the only EU member-state where 16 year olds can join the army. A leaked Army document
published in 2017 found that the army was targeting the poorest
children in the UK for recruitment, focusing on those coming from
families with annual incomes below £10,000.

The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone


…Even in places far removed from the border, deep into the interior
of the country, immigration officials enjoy broad—though not
limitless—powers. Specifically, federal regulations give U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) authority to operate within 100 miles of any
U.S. “external boundary.”

In this 100-mile zone, Border Patrol
agents have certain additional authorities. For instance, Border Patrol
can operate immigration checkpoints.

Border Patrol,
nevertheless, cannot pull anyone over without “reasonable suspicion” of
an immigration violation or crime (reasonable suspicion is more than
just a “hunch”). Similarly, Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the
100-mile zone without a warrant or “probable cause” (a reasonable
belief, based on the circumstances, that an immigration violation or
crime has likely occurred).

In practice, Border Patrol agents
routinely ignore or misunderstand the limits of their legal authority in
the course of individual stops, resulting in violations of the
constitutional rights of innocent people. These problems are compounded
by inadequate training for Border Patrol agents, a lack of oversight by
CBP and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the consistent
failure of CBP to hold agents accountable for abuse. No matter what CBP
officers and Border Patrol agents think, our Constitution applies
throughout the United States, including within this “100-mile border

The spread of border-related powers inland is inseparable from the
broader expansion of government intrusion in the lives of ordinary
Americans. For example, CBP claims the authority to conduct
suspicionless searches of travelers’ electronic devices—such as laptops
and cell phones—at ports of entry, including international arrivals at
airports. These searches are particularly invasive as a result of the
wealth of personal information stored on such devices. At least one
circuit court has held that federal officers must have at least
“reasonable suspicion” prior to conducting such searches and recent
Supreme Court precedent seems to support that view…

The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone



This person is my new best friend

Farming systems need to fit into their natural and social environment. Sometimes we describe this as a socio-ecological niche.


In a minute.

So, taking it that you said you live in
Arizona and “your family has a farm in Chihuahua,” A quick
congratulations are in order. You’re an absentee landowner! You’re
right at the peak of farming’s social pyramid. Living the dream.

So you probably don’t participate in
the day-to-day management, you just collect checks. Pretty common
situation for absentee landlords. From that distance, it’s
understandable that you have a poor grasp on water, land, and how
they play out in various types of agriculture.

But let’s take a step back.

Lots of cultures have used low or no
meat diets. The Ganges valley, ancient Egypt, China, much of early
Europe, ect.

Notice anything in common there?

They’re all very, very wet. Plants that
are edible for humans grow readily.

They also had intense hierarchies where
elites could just tell the lower classes they weren’t allowed to eat
meat-whether via religious teachings, custom, or just straight-up
economic exploitation to where animal protein was unattainable. But
that’s a whole different discussion.

On the other hand, lots of cultures
have used mostly or all animal diets.

E.G. The Bedouin, Mongols, Maasai,
Inuit, ect.

What do these have in common? They’re
in places that are either very dry or very cold. Either the plants
that grow are very sparse & tough, or none at all.

Humans can only digest specific types
of plant matter. We need tender stems, leaves & fruit; enlarged
seeds, or energy storing roots.

The entire rest of the plant is
inedible for us. Stalk, branch, dry leaves, ect.

And without intense irrigation, the
only plants that grow in dry areas are entirely made of things
that humans can’t digest. They’re almost entirely cellulose. Tough
stalks, fibrous leaves covered in wax and hair, thorns, ect.

That’s why we call these areas ‘scrub’.
The only use humans can make of the natural vegetation is to scrub

But…cows, sheep, goats, horses,
bison, deer, camels & other ruminants can digest all of it.

That’s what those 3 and 4 chambered
stomachs are for. These animals GI tracts are fermentation chambers
full of microflora that break long, tough cellulose molecules down
into sugars and fatty acids that the cow can use.

We can’t do that. We eat straw, we just
poop out straw.

That’s why people living in deserts,
scrub & dry grasslands aren’t vegetarian. They’d starve. They
kept close to the animals that can digest what grows there;

(The oceanic food chain that Inuit &
other maritime peoples are looped into is a whole ‘nother

Failure to recognize the role of local
environment in diet is a major oversight in the vegetarian community
at large, so again, no personal blame here.

Traditional vegetarian societies are
trotted out to showcase that low/no meat diets are possible. But it’s
done w/o recognition as to why ‘those particular’ societies did it,
and others did not.

Paying attention to local environment
is a huge part of sustainability, and yet sustainability movements
don’t always do so well at that.

We can also fall short by failing to
recognize that for dry regions, the bottleneck in productivity isn’t
land, it’s water.

As an absentee landowner, you may or
may not be aware of how much irrigation water it takes to grow
vegetables in a desert. Math time.

Let’s start w. cows. Best figures for
cow carrying capacity in landscape similar to Chihuahua are for dry
part of CO. Double that for Chihuahua’s longer growing season, and 10
cows would need about 73 acres to live on (wild scrub w no

Cool, so we don’t have to irrigate to
feed those cows. All we have to do is give them drinking water. How
much? A cow needs about 18.5 gal/day, so 10 of them for a year would
need about 67,000 gallons.

67,000 gallons is a decent amount of

Now let’s look at how much it takes to
grow vegetables on that same land.

Most plant crops need about an
acre-inch of water per week.

For the non-farmers and absentee
landlords following along, an acre-inch is just how much water it
takes to cover an acre of land 1” deep.

It’s about 27,000 gallons.

An acre of crops needs that every
single week.

Chihuahua’s got this amazing long
growing season. So let’s say a veggie, grain, soybean or other plant
protein farm in Chihuahua’s got crops in the ground 40 weeks out of
the year.

73 acres x 40 weeks x 27,000
gallons/week = 79 MILLION gallons of water.

That’s a thousand times more water.

It takes a thousand times more water to
grow an acre of crops for human consumption, than it takes to grow an
acre of cow on wild range.

Again, as an absentee farm owner you
may or may not be aware already. But for audience at home, most of
Chihuahua’s irrigation water comes from the Rio Conchos.

The river’s drying up so hard that it’s
the subject of a dedicated WWF preservation project.

“But that’s not a fair comparison. An
acre of crops can feed 10x as many people as an acre of cattle.”

Exactly. A crop-only diet can feed 10x
as many people. But it takes 1000x as much water.

In places where there’s limited land
and a surplus of water, it makes a lot of sense to optimize for land,
so there, grow & eat crops.

And in places where there’s a lot of
land and limited water, it makes sense to optimize for water, So
there, grow & eat ruminants.

It’s really interesting to me that the
conversation around vegetarianism & the environment is so
strongly centered on assumptions that every place in the world is on
the limited land/surplus plan.

You know what region that describes
really well? Northwestern Europe.

In many ways, viewing low/no meat diets
as the One True Sustainable Way is very much a vestige of
colonialism. It found a farmway that works really well in NW Europe,
assumed it must be universal, and tries to apply it to places where
it absolutely does not pencil out.