Lydia's Weekly Lifestyle blog is for today's African girl, so no subject is taboo. My purpose is to share things that may interest today's African girl.

This week's contributors: Lydia, Pépé Pépinière, Titi. This week's subjects: Don’t Forget Texture Play: Blue and brown get even better when you mix textures, Tattoos, Carbohydrates, and Saffron Saga Indian Restaurant

---

Don’t Forget Texture Play: Blue and brown get even better when you mix textures: Satin blue blouse + matte brown trousers Navy crepe dress + suede brown heels Light blue cotton shirt + structured leather bag Texture makes the outfit feel expensive—even when you’re shopping smart at the big city boutiques like FashionGhana shop Asylum down. Why This Combo Feels So Right for the Corporate Girl Blue represents trust and intelligence. Brown represents reliability and stability. Isn’t that exactly what the modern Accra corporate woman embodies? You’re navigating traffic, meetings, side hustles, networking events—and still showing up impeccably dressed. Blue and brown understands that duality. Style Note : If black feels too predictable and red feels too loud, blue and brown is your sweet spot. It’s classy. It’s mature. It’s fresh. It’s corporate confidence wrapped in warmth. So next time you’re standing in front of your wardrobe thinking, “How do I look powerful but different?” Reach for blue. Add brown. Walk into that office like you own shares. Because honestly? You probably will soon. Tattoos. We see them more and more, but I do suggest you use stickers which can be taken off after the party. Tattoos affect your immune system in ways we're just beginning to understand. From wrist designs to full sleeves, body art has become so common that it barely raises an eyebrow. Tattoo inks contain pigments that give colour, liquid carriers that help distribute the ink, preservatives to prevent microbial growth, and small amounts of impurities. But most of these pigments were originally developed for industrial applications such as car paint, plastics, and printer toner, rather than for injection into your skin. Some of these inks contain nickel, chromium, cobalt, and occasionally lead. These are toxic and are well known for triggering allergic reactions and immune sensitivity. Tattoo inks can also contain organic compounds, including azo dyes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons which can break down into aromatic amines which are linked to cancer and genetic damage. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are produced during the incomplete burning of organic material and are found in soot, vehicle exhaust, and charred food. Tattooing involves injecting ink deep into the dermis, the layer of skin beneath the surface. The body recognizes pigment particles as foreign material. Immune cells attempt to remove them, but the particles are too large to be fully cleared. Instead, they become trapped inside skin cells, which is what makes tattoos permanent. Tattoo inks do not just remain confined to the skin, pigment particles can migrate through the lymphatic system and accumulate in lymph nodes, small structures that filter immune cells and help coordinate immune responses. Tattoo ink is taken up by immune cells in the skin. When these cells die, they release signals that keep the immune system activated, leading to inflammation in nearby lymph nodes for up to two months. Tattoo ink present at a vaccine injection site alters immune responses in a vaccine-specific way. Notably, it was associated with a reduced immune response to the COVID-19 vaccine. Thus tattoo pigments can interfere with immune signaling, the chemical communication system immune cells use to coordinate responses to infection or vaccinations. Many cancers take decades to develop, making these risks difficult to study directly, especially given how widespread tattooing recently has become. All this can be avoided by using stick-ons. But if you really insist to put his name on your buttock? Nothing is permanent, but a tattoo is.

Carbohydrates. There’s a lot if them in cassava, plantain, yam, maize, millet, and rice. Typically about 70 % of our diet consists of carbohydrates, call them a form of sugars. That may have been fine when we lived in the village, got up early, walked to the farm, used hoe and machete to plant and weed and harvest, walked back home with some food and firewood when it was starting to be hot, and repeated same in the afternoon. Yes, that took a lot of energy, and carbohydrate supplied that. But now our lifestyles have changed, we hardly do any manual labour again, we even simulate it by going to the gym, and we don’t walk much again. So the carbohydrates are not burned and there’s a lot of sugar in our blood for long periods. This will result in weight gain, and an increased diabetes risk. Recognize anybody? So eat more veggies and bring that carbo thing down to 40-50 %. Veggies expensive? Yes, some are. Others, like e.g. carrots and cabbage are affordable.

Saffron Saga Indian Restaurant. 11th Lane, Salvation Road, behind La Villa Boutique in Osu, Accra, of late is one of my favourites. Service is very prompt, the manager is constantly in the restaurant supervising, they have Heineken draft beer @ 52 GHC per half liter (funny price, taxes). We had the crispy canvas humus, a must try though it is too big for 2 persons, a great South Indian fish curry which I found a bit disappointing, the fish was slightly overcooked and I had expected the curry to be “hotter”. Curry in fact is a mixture of spices, mainly turmeric, cumin, coriander, ginger and chilies, and Indian curry, Thai, Japanese and Caribbean are all versions on their own. South Indian curry typically is hotter than northern. We also had friend rice chicken where the chicken is cooked into the rice, with spices, a bit like beef into jollof. Nice.

Lydia...

Do not forget to hit the subscribe button and confirm in your email inbox to get notified about our posts.

I have received requests about leaving comments/replies. For security and privacy reasons my blog is not associated with major media giants like Facebook or Twitter. I am talking with the host about a solution. for the time being, you can mail me at wunimi@proton.me

I accept invitations and payments to write about certain products or events, things, and people, but I may refuse to accept and if my comments are negative then that's what I will publish, despite your payment. This is not a political newsletter. I do not discriminate on any basis whatsoever.

Cubs vs Mets

This Friday's MLB Game of choice features the New York Mets playing the Chicago Cubs. The game's scheduled start time of 1:20 PM CDT will give me an afternoon full of baseball, and leave me an evening to structure as I please. I like that.

And the adventure continues.

I like to watch sports every now and then, but I don’t watch sports news. Then again, I don’t read much news. Anyway, I’ve been interested in the Dianna Russini and Mike Vrabel drama for the past few days. Not because I like drama but how a private investigator played a key role in it.

I’ll spare you the details of the fiasco. Look can look them here on The Shadow League link. The following couple pictures I’ll talk about next come from the TMZ Sports Page link. They photos were taken from an Arizona resort.

The first picture you see is Russin and Vrabel standing in front of each other, on top of some wooden patio, with their hands forward and interlocking fingers. Notice how the photo is a little grainy, but not too much that you can still tell who they are by their faces. That usually means the PI was at a distance where the camera’s optical zoom was at its limit before picture quality fades.

The second photo you see is Russin and Vrabel (wearing swim trunks and bathing suit, respectively) lying on the pool. Notice the picture quality is better than the first. The PI must have been pretty close to them. Either the PI was next to the pool or still outside the resort where anyone can see in.

Keep in mind, Russin and Vrabel both have spouses. And while there’s no kissing or sexual activity it still doesn’t look good for the two. And it’s more than likely that Russian’s husband and Shake Shack senior manager, Kevin Goldschmidt, hired the private investigator.

As a former private investigator with thirteen years of surveillance work (mostly workers comp) I’m still amazed on the quality of the photos and the work done by the PI in charge of the infidelity case. Those two still shots are more than likely taken from whatever video the PI recorded. Video evidence is often more powerful than photos when it comes to infidelity and workers comp cases. If a photo is worth a thousand words, a video is at least three times that if not more.

I guess there are two lessons in all of this: 1) there will never be a shortage of cheaters, which means more PI work, and 2) in the long run, cheaters never prosper. Don’t be like Russini and Vrabel. You never know who’s watching.

#cheating #drama #fiasco #infidelity #photo #pi #privateinvestigator #Russini #sports #video #Vrabel

During my first year in teacher college, I read a stat that said between 30-50% of teachers leave the field within the first 5 years. Don’t leave the field. Give the job at least 3-5 years. My first year was terrible. I wanted to quit almost weekly, and I would spends upwards of 6-8 hours on Sundays grading and creating lesson plans. It really made me question the profession. It gets easier in time—way easier. It really is like learning how to ride a bike; once you learn, you’ll really enjoy the profession. So please don’t judge the profession immediately. There is so much to learn, and it truly feels like being tossed into the frying pan as they say. Here are tips to survive the first couple of years.

1. Get a good mentor (If you don’t have 1, that is my role here. You need someone to bounce questions off of and somebody you can trust. Don’t go to everyone. Be selective because teachers do like to talk. Unfortunately, every school has someone who is miserable and will not root for your success. I am though! :)

2. Don’t reinvent the wheel (Get lesson plans and materials from other teachers or websites). Take advantage of the web and don’t think you’re being a bad teacher. You’re in survival mode the first year.

3. Aim to create one really good original lesson week. Don’t strive for 5 perfect lessons. You will really burnout. Have fun creating that one lesson that will really shine.

4. Laugh at your mistakes. You will make plenty. I still do.

5. Toss out “crap” lessons and worksheets. Don’t grade everything.

6. Use multiple choice assessments to keep yourself on your feet

7. Stay calm as possible. Fake it until you make it. Faking your confidence is sometimes necessary.

8. Stay away from burnout coworkers and negativity

9. Give less homework (homework 4-5 days a week may be too much for you and your students)

10. More to come

You adjusted your cal-mag for two weeks. The yellowing got worse. Then you saw the webbing.

That's how most growers discover spider mites – not when the problem starts, but when it's already out of control. The early damage looks so much like a nutrient deficiency that your first instinct is to adjust the feed. Meanwhile, a single female mite is producing thousands of descendants in a month.

Spider mites are the most destructive pest in indoor cannabis cultivation. Not because they're hard to kill – they aren't, when caught early – but because their early symptoms mimic nutrient problems so convincingly that growers lose their detection window treating the wrong thing entirely.

This guide covers visual identification at every stage, how to tell mite damage from a deficiency, and what actually works for treatment.

---

Quick Identification

Spider mites on cannabis produce tiny yellow or white speckles (stippling) on upper leaf surfaces where mites feed from below. Unlike nutrient deficiencies – which cause broad, uniform color changes across leaves – stippling appears as distinct pinprick dots scattered irregularly across the leaf. The damage is caused by Tetranychus urticae (two-spotted spider mite), an arachnid that punctures individual plant cells and drains their contents. By the time webbing is visible, the colony has been feeding for weeks.

Quick checklist: – Tiny yellow/white pinprick dots on upper leaf surface – Dots are irregular and scattered, not following veins – Leaf undersides show tiny moving specks (mites are 0.3-0.5mm) – Fine webbing between leaf tips or at branch junctions (advanced) – Damage starts on lower/inner canopy where airflow is poorest – Leaves eventually bronze, curl, and drop

---

Why Spider Mites Are So Hard to Catch

They look like a nutrient deficiency

The single most common spider mite mistake has nothing to do with treatment. It happens at identification.

Early stippling – those tiny yellow dots where mites have punctured cells – looks like the beginning of a calcium deficiency or light stress. The dots are small, scattered, and appear on older growth first. A grower sees yellowing dots on lower leaves and reaches for the cal-mag bottle. Two weeks of feed adjustments later, the dots have spread, the plant looks worse, and then the webbing appears.

This is not a knowledge failure. It's a pattern recognition problem. The visual difference between early mite stippling and early nutrient deficiency is subtle enough that experienced growers miss it regularly.

Feature	Spider Mite Stippling	Calcium Deficiency	Magnesium Deficiency
Pattern	Irregular pinprick dots	Irregular brown spots	Interveinal yellowing
Distribution	Scattered randomly across leaf	Concentrated on newer growth	Starts on older leaves
Symmetry	Asymmetric, random	Roughly symmetric	Symmetric between veins
Leaf underside	Tiny mites or eggs visible	Clean	Clean
Texture	Leaf feels slightly rough/gritty	Spots may feel crispy	Leaf stays smooth
Progression	Dots multiply, never merge into bands	Spots expand and merge	Yellowing expands between veins
Touch test	Gritty feel from mite debris	Normal	Normal

The diagnostic key: flip the leaf over. Nutrient deficiencies don't leave anything on the underside. Spider mites leave everything there – adults, eggs, shed skins, webbing. A 10x loupe makes this definitive, but even a phone camera zoomed in on the leaf underside will show the difference.

They breed fast enough to outrun your diagnosis

Spider mites reproduce faster than almost any pest a cannabis grower will encounter.

• Generation time: 7 days at 30°C (86°F). Egg to egg-laying adult in one week.
• Reproductive rate: A single female lays up to 100 eggs. Her daughters start laying within a week.
• Population math: One mite becomes thousands in a month at optimal temperatures. Two months of unchecked growth reaches millions.

This is exponential growth in the literal sense. The population you can't see on Monday is visible by Friday and webbing by the following Monday. The detection window – the gap between “early enough to treat easily” and “too late for simple solutions” – is approximately 5-7 days.

Every day of misdiagnosis as a nutrient issue is a day lost in that window.

---

Visual Symptoms by Stage

Days 1-7: Invisible Phase

Mites have arrived but the colony is small. Fewer than 10 adults on the plant. No visible damage to the naked eye.

What to look for: Nothing you can see without magnification. Preventive inspection with a 10x loupe on leaf undersides is the only detection method during this phase – or an AI that can catch the earliest stippling pattern in a leaf photo before your eye does.

Days 7-14: Early Stippling

What you see: – Scattered yellow-white dots on upper leaf surfaces – Dots are pinprick-sized, irregular spacing – Lower and inner canopy leaves affected first – Leaves may appear slightly dull or dusty

This is the critical detection window. The damage is visible but the population is still manageable. Treat now and you win. Wait, and you're chasing exponential growth.

What growers confuse it with: Calcium deficiency, magnesium deficiency, early light stress, pH fluctuation damage. The distinguishing test: check the leaf underside with a loupe or zoomed phone camera.

Days 14-21: Moderate Infestation

What you see: – Stippling thickens into visible patches of yellow/bronze discoloration – Fine webbing appears at leaf tips and where leaves meet stems – Leaf edges may curl upward – Multiple plants now show symptoms (airborne spread via “ballooning” on silk threads)

Webbing marks the transition from “problem” to “crisis.” The silk isn't just housing – it protects colonies from predators and spray treatments. Once webs are established, contact sprays have to penetrate the silk to reach the mites.

Days 21+: Severe Infestation

What you see: – Dense webbing covering bud sites, connecting leaves – Leaves are bronzed, curled, and dropping – Mites visible as tiny moving dots on webbing – Plant growth has visibly slowed or stopped – Webbing on flowers makes bud unusable

At this stage, the plant is losing more photosynthetic capacity than it can replace. During flower, this level of infestation is often a total crop loss for affected plants. The mites are feeding on sugar leaves and bract tissue, leaving webbing embedded in the flower structure. Even if you kill every mite, the webbing and fecal matter remain.

---

Where to Look: Detection Hotspots

Spider mites prefer warm, dry, still air – the conditions that exist in the center and lower canopy of most indoor grows.

Check first: – Undersides of lower and inner canopy leaves – Where two leaves overlap (creates still-air microclimate) – Near intake vents (common entry point) – Any plant closest to heat sources

Check second: – Leaf undersides on middle canopy – Branch junctions where stems create sheltered pockets – Nearby houseplants, clones, or recently introduced plant material

High-risk conditions: – Temperature above 27°C (80°F) and rising – Humidity below 40% RH – Stagnant air in lower canopy – New clones or plants introduced without quarantine – Adjacent rooms or gardens with ornamental plants

One fact most growers don't realize: spider mites travel on clothing, pets, and skin. If you've been in a garden with mites and walk into your grow room, you may be the vector. This is why quarantine protocols matter even for indoor-only grows.

---

They're arachnids, not insects

This matters more than you'd think. Spider mites aren't insects. They're arachnids – closer to ticks and spiders than to aphids or thrips. A lot of insecticides just don't work on them, and growers figure this out the expensive way: they buy whatever pest spray the grow shop recommends, apply it twice a week for a month, and the mites keep spreading.

If a product label says “insecticide” but doesn't specifically list mites or arachnids, it probably won't work. You need a miticide (specifically targets mites) or a broad-spectrum acaricide (targets arachnids generally). Some biologicals and organic options work by physical mechanisms – suffocation, desiccation – that don't depend on the pest's taxonomy. These are often the safest first-line choice.

---

Treatment Strategies

They evolve faster than you can spray

Spider mites develop pesticide resistance at a rate that makes most agricultural pests look slow. With a 7-day generation cycle, resistance emerges in weeks, not seasons. Some strains of T. urticae are resistant to dozens of active ingredients simultaneously.

Worse: some pesticides cause “mite flaring” – the surviving mites respond to the chemical stress by increasing their reproductive rate by up to 30%. The intuitive response of “spray harder, spray more” can accelerate the infestation rather than control it.

Single-product treatment strategies fail. Always rotate between different modes of action.

During Vegetative Growth

Immediate response (first 48 hours): 1. Isolate affected plants if possible 2. Remove and dispose of heavily infested leaves (bag them, don't compost) 3. Spray leaf undersides thoroughly with a contact miticide or biological

Biological controls: – Phytoseiulus persimilis – predatory mite that feeds exclusively on spider mites. Effective in vegetative growth and early flower. Needs humidity above 60% to thrive. – Neoseiulus californicus – predatory mite that tolerates lower humidity and also eats thrips. Better for dry grow rooms. – Amblyseius andersoni – generalist predatory mite, survives without prey by eating pollen. Good for preventive releases.

Organic sprays (moderate infestations): – Neem oil (azadirachtin) – disrupts feeding and reproduction. Apply to leaf undersides only. Do not use in flower – affects taste and may not fully degrade. – Insecticidal soap (potassium salts of fatty acids) – kills on contact by desiccation. Must directly contact the mite. Repeat every 3-5 days for 3 applications to catch new hatchlings. – Spinosad – organic-approved, effective on thrips but weak against mites on its own. Can supplement a rotation but shouldn't be a primary miticide.

Spray rotation protocol: – Week 1: Product A (e.g., insecticidal soap) – Week 2: Product B (e.g., neem oil) – Week 3: Product A again (or a different miticide) – Never use the same active ingredient twice in a row

During flower

This is where most growers panic, and for good reason. During flower, almost everything that kills mites also ruins buds.

Safe in flower: – Predatory mites (biological control – no residue, no taste impact) – Water rinse with slightly elevated pressure (dislodges mites physically, must reach undersides) – Cold snap trick: drop temperature to 15°C (60°F) for 3 days if possible. Mite reproduction nearly stops below 18°C (65°F). This buys time for predatory mites to work.

Avoid in flower: – Neem oil (taste contamination, doesn't fully degrade on flower tissue) – Pyrethrin sprays (residue on buds) – Sulfur (burns trichomes, affects terpenes) – Any systemic product (absorbed into plant tissue including flower)

If webbing is on buds: The honest answer is that those buds are compromised. Webbing contains fecal matter and shed mite skins that don't wash off. You can salvage the plant by removing affected flowers and protecting remaining buds with predatory mites, but heavily webbed buds should be discarded.

---

Prevention

A few euros spent preventing mites saves hundreds in lost crop. Prevention beats treatment every time, especially with a pest that breeds this fast.

Environmental controls: – Keep humidity above 50% RH during veg (mites thrive in dry conditions) – Ensure airflow reaches the lower canopy (oscillating fans, open plant structure) – Run temperatures below 27°C (80°F) when possible – HEPA filter on intake if growing in an area with outdoor mite pressure

Good habits: – Quarantine new plants for 7-14 days before introducing to your grow – Change clothes before entering grow room if you've been in other gardens – Inspect leaf undersides weekly with a 10x loupe – make it routine, not reactive – Remove dead leaves and debris from the grow space (harboring sites) – Avoid overly dense canopy – defoliate lower growth that gets no light and creates still-air pockets

Preemptive predators: – Release Amblyseius andersoni or N. californicus at transplant. These predatory mites establish a background population that intercepts spider mites before colonies form. Cost: roughly €20-30 per release for a small grow, every 4-6 weeks.

---

How AI detection changes the timeline

The spider mite problem is a timing issue. The window between “just arrived” and “exponential growth” is about 5-7 days. Most growers catch mites after stippling is already obvious – right at the edge of that window, or past it.

The main reason growers miss that window isn't inattention. Early stippling – those first scattered yellow dots where mites have punctured cells – looks almost identical to the start of a calcium or magnesium deficiency. Same distribution, same size, same location on older growth. A grower sees the dots, checks pH, adjusts the feed, and waits a week for results. By the time the nutrient hypothesis is ruled out and a loupe comes out, mites have had 7-10 days of uncontested growth. At one generation per week, that adds up.

PlantLab's model covers 31 cannabis conditions including spider mite damage. It catches the stippling pattern at the 10-dot stage, from a routine photo. Not a replacement for the loupe – nothing is – but it flags the pattern before you've mentally filed it as “probably cal-mag” and moved on.

Catching mites at day 7 instead of day 14 is the difference between wiping down some leaves and losing a crop.

Free at plantlab.ai – 3 checks a day.

---

FAQ

How do I tell spider mite damage from a nutrient deficiency? Flip the leaf. Spider mite damage shows as scattered pinprick dots on top with mites, eggs, or webbing underneath. Nutrient deficiencies cause broader color changes with clean leaf undersides. A 10x loupe on the underside is the definitive test.

Can I see spider mites without a magnifying glass? Adults are barely visible to the naked eye (0.3-0.5mm) as tiny moving specks on leaf undersides. Eggs and juveniles are too small to see without magnification. By the time mites are easily visible, the colony is large. Use a loupe or phone camera zoom for early detection.

How fast do spider mites spread between plants? In optimal conditions (above 27°C / 80°F, below 40% RH), mites can move from one plant to adjacent plants within 24-48 hours. They also “balloon” on silk threads carried by air currents, reaching plants across a room. A single infested plant can become a room-wide problem in 5-10 days.

Will neem oil get rid of spider mites? Neem works as part of a rotation, not as a standalone. It disrupts feeding and reproduction but doesn't kill on contact, and mites build resistance to it quickly. Rotate with insecticidal soap and other modes of action. And never use it during flower – it doesn't come off.

What kills spider mites instantly? Insecticidal soap and pyrethrin kill on contact, but only what they touch. You'll miss eggs. Plan for 3 rounds over 2 weeks to catch hatching cycles.

The Summer Tree est un roman publié en anglais en 1984. Il s’agit du premier volet de The Fionavar Tapestry, une trilogie de fantasy par l'auteur canadien Guy Gavriel Kay.

It all began with a lecture that introduced five university students to a man who would change their lives, a wizard who could take them from Earth to the heart of the first of all worlds, Fionavar. And take them Loren Silvercloak did, for his need—the need of Fionavar and all the worlds—was great indeed.

And in a marvelous land of men and dwarves, of wizards and god, and of the Unraveller and his minions of Darkness, Kimberly, Dave, Jennifer, Kevin, and Paul discovered who they were truly meant to be. For the five were a long-awaited part of the pattern known as the Fionavar Tapestry, and only if they accepted their destiny would the armies of the Light stand any chance of surviving when the Unraveller unleashed his wrath upon the world.

Ce roman date des années 1980, c'est de la fantasy classique, clairement inspirée de Tolkien, ce qui n’est pas étonnant quand on sait que Guy Gavriel Kay avait auparavant été l’assistant de Christopher Tolkien pour l’édition du Silmarillion. On retrouve donc certains éléments qui semblent tout droit sortis de la Terre du Milieu.

On peut également penser à Narnia, avec ce récit qui débute dans notre monde et qui se poursuit avec un voyage vers un monde imaginaire, sauf qu’au lieu d’enfants britanniques nous avons ici des étudiants de l’université de Toronto.

Quand on lit le résumé du roman, et même pendant les premières pages, on peut craindre les clichés, le récit typique avec des protagonistes élus dont une prophétie prédit qu’ils sont destinés à qui sauver le monde. Par ailleurs, s’agissant du premier tome d’une trilogie, le texte comporte beaucoup d’exposition, pas toujours de façon subtile.

Pourtant, cela a étonnamment très bien fonctionné pour moi. J’ai été emporté par le récit et le monde proposés par Guy Gavriel Kay. C’est peut-être grâce au style de l'auteur, peut-être grâce au monde classique mais envoutant, peut-être enfin grâce à certains personnages qui sortent du lot ou qui se révèlent plus profonds qu’ils n’en ont l’air au premier abord.

Ce premier tome est très prometteur, et si les deux suivants sont aussi réussis que celui-ci, cette trilogie pourrait bien être l’une des rares œuvres inspirées du Seigneur des Anneaux et qui n’a pas à rougir de la comparaison.

I think Tony Carroll could have a decent day today, but for blog, just one selection for me …

5.20 Bath Jack Morland’s Hunky Dory has an obvious big chance and should be close, but I’m going to have a go at MR LIGHTSIDE here who looks the classiest horse in the field. Spent the summer of 2024 contesting black type races, finishing 3rd in the Molecomb and then decent efforts at York and Donny. Struggled in class 2 handicaps as a 3yo off 3 figure marks and has then had a winter AW campaign that wasn’t sure to suit (8/0/1p on artificial surfaces). Back to turf today from a mark of 77, 22lbs lower than when running in class 2 handicap at Ascot 10 months ago. Mick Appleby has had a decent start to the season and this one should have a lively each way chance.

MR LIGHTSIDE // 0.5pt E/W @ 9/1 4 places (Paddy) BOG

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

ふーん。 忙しいとそういうの後回しになるよね。

忙しいとかではないかなあ。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

ふーん。 まあ、気が向いたときに片付ければいいよ。

片付けたい、片付けたくない、 という話ではないかなあ。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

ふーん。 何か理由があるの？ それとも、ただ置いてある感じが気に入ってるのかなあ。

いや、 理由があったら先に言ってるね。 それだと、俺がこの発言をした意味がない感じがする。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

そういうの、ふと気になる瞬間あるよね。 今のあなたの感じがちょっと伝わったよ。

分かってほしいわけではなくて話が進んでほしいんだよね。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

まだ出てるんだ。 じゃあ、そのツリーどうするつもり？

どうもしない。 だから、こっちの意図が決まってたら聞いてないんだって。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

まだ出てるんだ。 じゃあ、そのツリー、今の部屋の景色の中でどんな存在になってる？

うるせえな。 こういう話をしただけの事自体が異常だから、 そうではない何かだろうが。

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

ああ、まだ出てるんだ。 なんか、その状態ってちょっと面白いね。

全然ダメ。 俺以上の感性で考えてはくれないか。 自分でこれ以上進まないから人に話したんでしょ？

---

自分の家のテレビ台にある、 小さいクリスマスツリーをまだ片付けていないんだよね。

まだ出てるんだ。 そのまま置いてあると、部屋の空気ってどう変わる？

・・・あー。 空気は悪くないよ。 なんか冬の名残で良い感じかも。

涼しくなる？

いや、涼しくはならない。 冬の、あの時の、人々が年末休みに入る感じ、 人がどんどん休みに入っていく感じの記憶が、 クリスマスツリーに内包されてる感じ。 それが好きかもしれない。

それが言いたかった？

いやー。 うーん。 でも悪くないよ。

I enjoy talking about myself, but I rarely get to. Definitely not as much as I make others open up about themselves. Not many have the depth or the ability to converse with me in a way that makes me want to trust and open up. Nor do many know how to flow with the rhythm of conversation. This is because they lack listening skills, but, at a deeper level, it actually stems from a lack of self-awareness and authenticity. That’s why I’d rather just listen to them talk, even if it bores me. Or just leave. I’ll open up only when it’s natural and when I’m asked questions in the right context, with curiosity and sincerity. I used to think I was closed off for this reason, but back then, I didn’t know why I was the way I was. Now I feel unapologetic about it because I am more in touch with myself.

Before the sun came up over Mesa, while traffic lights changed for almost nobody and the city still carried the hush that comes before heat, Jesus knelt in quiet prayer at Usery Mountain Regional Park. The desert around Him was still dark enough to keep its secrets. Far below, porch lights glowed in neighborhoods where people had gone to bed worried and had not woken up any lighter. A young man named Gabriel Torres slept crooked in the front seat of his Honda at the edge of a parking lot at Mesa Riverview, his neck bent wrong, one shoe off, his phone dead on his lap, and his whole life beginning to smell like something he could no longer explain. A mother named Alina had already been awake an hour in her apartment, standing at the kitchen counter with one hand pressed to her forehead and the other on a stack of unpaid bills she kept flattening as if making them neat could make them smaller. An older man on the south side of the city stared at a ceiling fan and wondered how long a person could live with silence before the silence started talking back. A woman who worked mornings downtown sat in her car with mascara on one cheek and could not make herself start the engine. Jesus remained there in prayer while the first pale line opened in the east, and there was nothing hurried about Him. He prayed like Someone who knew every name in the city and was not afraid of what the day would bring.

When He rose and came down from the mountain, the sky had turned the color of dusty glass. Gabriel woke with that sudden jerk that comes when sleep has been more surrender than rest. His back ached. His mouth was dry. He lifted his phone, saw the dead screen, and felt the same drop in his stomach he had felt every time he let it die on purpose. It was easier that way. No new texts from his mother asking where he was. No calls from numbers he recognized and could not face. No reminder that he had not been to Mesa Community College in weeks even though he had left the apartment every morning carrying his backpack like a costume. He rubbed his eyes and looked out at storefronts that were still quiet. Delivery trucks were beginning to move. A man in a safety vest crossed the lot. Somewhere behind him, a shopping cart rolled and bumped a curb. He opened the car door and stood, feeling sour, ashamed, and oddly angry that the world had kept going while he had been parked there all night pretending his life was only paused. When he turned, Jesus was standing a few yards away near the edge of the lot, not imposing, not watching him with the hard curiosity people use when they smell trouble, but simply there. Gabriel did not know why that bothered him more than being pitied would have. He wanted to be ignored. Being seen felt dangerous.

He shut the car door a little too hard and started walking toward the sidewalk as if he had somewhere to be. Jesus stepped alongside him without crowding him. For a few moments neither of them spoke. The morning had that soft chill that disappears fast in Arizona, and the silence between them was not awkward, which made Gabriel uneasy. He finally muttered that if this was about money, he did not have any. Jesus said He was not asking for money. Gabriel gave a dry laugh and said people only approached strangers that early for three reasons, and none of them were good. Jesus looked ahead instead of at him and said, “You are tired in more places than your body.” The sentence landed so cleanly that Gabriel felt an instant flare of irritation. He said he was fine, and Jesus nodded in a way that did not agree with him and did not argue either. Then Jesus said, “You keep delaying the hard truth because you think one more day will make it easier. It will not.” Gabriel stopped walking. He had not shaved. His shirt was wrinkled. He looked like a young man who had made bad choices, and he hated that this stranger could probably guess at the shape of them. He said, with more force than the moment required, that he did not need advice before sunrise. Jesus answered gently, “No. You need rest, truth, and the courage to stop hiding.” Gabriel stared at Him, then shook his head and walked off, but the words followed him with a steadiness he could not shake.

Across the city, Alina moved through her kitchen with the numb precision of somebody holding herself together by sequence alone. Coffee first. Lunch container second. Work shoes by the door. Phone charger into her purse. Do not cry yet. She was forty-three and looked older in the mornings now. Not because of vanity or mirrors or fear of age, but because there was something in her face that had begun to stay there even after she slept, and it was the look of a person who had been carrying too much for too long without a real place to set it down. Gabriel was supposed to be building a better life than the one she had dragged them through after his father left. That had become the bright line in her mind during every double shift and every late rent notice. He was smart. He had gotten into school. He was not supposed to end up boxed in by the same kind of pressure. For the last month he had been strange. He came home late or not at all. He spoke in short answers. He said classes were heavy. He said his phone kept dying. He said he was tired. None of that was impossible, but a mother who has spent years surviving learns the difference between hard truth and borrowed explanation. The email from the college the night before had unsettled her enough that she had barely slept. It was formal and vague, one of those messages that says almost nothing and still manages to pull dread into the room. She had told herself she would stop by the Southern and Dobson campus on her lunch break, just to clear up whatever misunderstanding had happened. She kept saying misunderstanding in her head because the other possibility felt like standing near the edge of a drop.

By the time she reached Mesa Community College, the day had already begun to sharpen. Students moved across the campus with coffee cups and backpacks and that uneven mix of confidence and uncertainty young people wear so openly. The place felt alive in a way that made Alina ache. She parked, checked her phone, saw nothing from Gabriel, and went inside the Admissions and Records office with the posture of someone trying very hard not to look as frightened as she was. The woman at the desk was kind, but kindness has a way of making bad news feel even worse. There were privacy limits. There were policies. There were details they could not release freely. But enough was said, and enough was not denied, that the truth opened anyway. Gabriel was not where he was supposed to be. He had not been attending the way Alina believed. There were holds. There were missed steps. There was a phrase about loss of standing that made her feel, for one hot second, as though the room had tilted. She thanked the woman because she was raised to stay respectful even when breaking apart. Then she walked out into the daylight and kept going until she reached a bench where nobody she knew could see her. She sat down too fast, pressed both palms to her knees, and stared at the concrete until her vision blurred. She was not only hurt. Hurt would have been easier. She was scared in the particular way a parent gets scared when the future they have been bleeding for suddenly stops holding its shape.

Jesus was seated on the low wall across from the walkway, as if He had been there all along. There was no performance in Him. No dramatic entrance. No spiritual theater. Just presence. Alina saw Him through tears she was angry to be having in public and almost turned away, because women like her learn early that if you start talking while upset, strangers may offer comfort that cannot actually hold the weight of your life. But something about Him made leaving feel less possible than staying. He waited until she looked at Him directly, and then He said, “You have been bracing yourself for collapse so long that you no longer know how to stand without it.” It was too true and too gentle at the same time. Alina laughed once, but it cracked in the middle and turned into the sound people make when they are trying not to cry from deep in the chest. She said she did not have time to fall apart. Jesus said, “I know.” She told Him she had done everything she could think to do. She had worked. She had prayed. She had sacrificed. She had swallowed her pride. She had gone without. She had kept moving when it would have been easier to stop. She did not say those things with self-praise. She said them like a tired witness listing evidence nobody seemed interested in. Then she whispered the thing underneath all of it. “I cannot carry him forever.” Jesus looked at her with a steadiness that neither accused nor excused. “No,” He said. “But love does not mean carrying what truth is meant to uncover.” Alina wiped her face and asked Him what that was supposed to mean. He answered, “Some burdens are healed by help. Others stay heavy because everybody in the room is hiding.”

Gabriel had driven away from Mesa Riverview without knowing where he meant to go, then parked near Country Club and Main because he was nearly out of gas and could not bear the thought of circling the city again. He bought the cheapest light rail pass he could manage with the wrinkled bills in his wallet and boarded because movement felt less humiliating than sitting still. The train carried him along the corridor into downtown Mesa while the city brightened around him. He sat by the window and watched storefronts slide by with that distant look of someone whose mind is louder than the world. He kept imagining his mother checking the apartment door, looking at the clock, calling him, deciding not to leave another voicemail because it would only make her sound desperate. He hated himself for what he had turned her into. Across from him, a man in work boots with paint under his fingernails stared at an overdue notice and rubbed the bridge of his nose like he was trying to erase the numbers by force. A teenage girl in scrubs studied flash cards with a concentration that looked holy. An older woman carried flowers wrapped in paper and mouthed something to herself that could have been a prayer or an apology. Mesa moved by outside in light and dust and business and ordinary need, and Gabriel felt like a ghost inside it.

Jesus sat down beside the man with the overdue notice first. Gabriel noticed because the man had been holding his whole body tight and then, within moments of that quiet conversation beginning, something in his face changed. Not fixed. Not suddenly bright. Just less alone. Gabriel could not hear every word over the rail noise, but he caught fragments. A job lost. Two daughters. A truck payment. The shame of borrowing again. Jesus spoke in the simple way people do when they are telling the truth and are not interested in sounding impressive. He said, “Need is not failure.” He said, “Pride wears many disguises.” He said, “Ask before the door closes, not after.” The man covered his mouth with one rough hand and nodded as if holding back tears embarrassed him. When he got off a stop later, he did not look cured. He looked like a man who had remembered he still had choices left. Gabriel hated how much he wanted that for himself. When Jesus turned and sat across from him after the man left, Gabriel stared out the window and pretended not to notice. Jesus let the train carry them in silence for another minute before saying, “You think disappearing keeps other people from suffering.” Gabriel kept his face turned away. Jesus continued, “It only makes them suffer without you.”

They got off near downtown and walked along Main Street with the steady hum of the city around them. The rail line, the storefronts, the old buildings and newer signs, the people moving in and out of coffee shops and offices, all of it gave the morning a lived-in pulse. Gabriel kept asking himself why he had not simply left. He was stronger and younger and under no obligation to stay with a stranger whose words cut too close. Yet every time he considered breaking away, something in Jesus made running feel childish. They passed the Mesa Arizona Temple area, where the grounds held that unusual kind of order and quiet that can soften a person even when they are trying not to be softened. Gabriel looked at it only briefly. His grandmother had taken him there once when he was little, mostly because she liked walking where things were peaceful and free. He remembered fountains, shade, and the feeling that adults could sometimes breathe easier in places built for stillness. He had not thought about that day in years. Jesus did not comment on what he was remembering. He simply walked with him toward the Mesa Arts Center, where the broad structure and open spaces stood in the middle of downtown like a place that understood people came carrying things they had no language for yet.

Near the arts center, a maintenance worker was dragging a trash liner from one bin to another with the weary focus of somebody who had already been up longer than his body appreciated. He was in his late fifties, thick through the shoulders, with a face that looked both strong and used up. His name tag read Raymond. One hand trembled just enough to notice when he reached for a bottle on the ground. He saw Jesus and Gabriel standing nearby and gave them the quick nod workers give strangers when they want to be polite without being delayed. Then his phone buzzed. He looked at the screen and froze. Gabriel could see the name before he looked away. Abby. Raymond stared at it until the ringing stopped. He swore under his breath, put the phone back in his pocket, and bent again to his work with a kind of anger that did not seem aimed at anybody present. Jesus stepped toward him and asked, “Why did you not answer?” Raymond gave a humorless laugh. “Because nine months sober doesn’t erase twenty years stupid.” Jesus said, “No. But refusing mercy does not honor the damage either.” Raymond leaned on the trash cart and looked at Him hard. “You don’t know what I did.” Jesus answered, “You are wrong about that.” Gabriel felt the air change around them.

Raymond said he had missed too much. Birthdays. Graduations. Hospital visits. Phone calls he should have returned. He had lied, stolen, disappeared, come back, promised, failed, promised again, and finally taught his daughter that hoping for him was the same thing as volunteering to be hurt. Abby had texted him two weeks earlier for the first time in months. He had stared at the message so long it made him sick. He had started answering and stopped. He had told himself he would wait until he had one full year sober because maybe then his apology would mean more. Jesus shook His head slightly. “Delayed honesty is still fear.” Raymond looked down. “I don’t want to break her again.” Jesus said, “She is already living with the break. Your silence is not gentleness.” Raymond’s throat moved. He was a man the world would call rough and maybe even difficult, but there was something almost childlike in the grief that crossed his face then. Jesus put a hand on the side of the trash cart as if grounding the moment and said, “Call her while there is still morning.” Raymond stood motionless for a few seconds. Then he reached into his pocket with that trembling hand, opened the missed call, and pressed redial. He turned away for privacy, but Gabriel heard enough. “Abby,” he said, and the one word came out like a confession. “I’m here. I should have answered. I’m sorry.” Gabriel looked at Jesus and hated how close he felt to tears.

By then the day had grown bright and warm. Alina left the college with the kind of controlled panic that makes people drive too carefully because they are afraid that one more problem will push them clean through the edge. She called Gabriel twice and got voicemail both times. She texted him that she was not angry and then, three minutes later, texted again that she was angry but that was not the point. She texted that he needed to call her now. She deleted a longer message before sending it because the words looked too desperate on the screen. She drove toward downtown without a plan because that was where he used to go when he needed air and did not want to spend money. He liked sketching buildings and people. When he was younger, she used to find him watching strangers the way artists do, as if every face was carrying a clue. She parked near Main and walked under the dry Arizona light, checking every bench and passing face with the frantic restraint of a mother trying not to become a spectacle in public. The city moved around her without slowing. A train passed. A pair of office workers laughed at something on a phone. A woman in heels crossed the street with a coffee balanced in one hand. None of them knew the size of the emergency inside her. That is one of the cruel things about ordinary days. They keep looking ordinary to everyone except the person breaking open inside them.

Alina ended up near the visitors’ center across from the temple grounds more because her feet carried her there than because she had chosen it. She was not thinking in denominational terms. She was thinking in survival terms. Shade, bench, breath, five seconds to not lose her mind. She sat with both hands wrapped around her phone and tried to pray, but the prayer came out tangled. It was not elegant. It was not church language. It was a tired mother’s prayer, the kind that barely forms before it breaks. She asked God where her son was. She asked what she had missed. She asked whether loving somebody was supposed to feel this much like drowning. Jesus sat beside her, and this time she was too worn down to be surprised. She did not ask how He kept appearing. She only stared ahead and said, “If I find him, I don’t know whether I’m going to hold him or scream at him.” Jesus said, “Probably both.” Despite herself, she gave the smallest, saddest laugh. Then He said, “Do not confuse your fear with your love. They are not the same.” Alina nodded slowly. She knew that was true, but truth did not simplify anything. It only made her more aware of how thin the line had become between her pain and the words she might say once she found Gabriel.

Jesus left her there with a quiet assurance that did not sound like a promise meant to control the outcome. It sounded like Someone who knew where lost people were even when they did not. He found Gabriel again several blocks away, this time sitting alone near Pioneer Park with his elbows on his knees and a paper cup of water he had not touched. Children’s voices rose and fell in the distance. The park held that strange blend of play and fatigue found in city spaces where parents watch from benches while carrying problems the children know nothing about yet. Nearby, a grandmother with a stiff gait was trying to keep two little boys from turning a disagreement over a ball into a full fight. One of them shoved the other hard enough to make him fall backward in the grass. The older woman grabbed her own side as she bent, clearly in pain but refusing to stop. Jesus went to her first. He separated the boys without force, spoke to them with a calm that ended the fight faster than shouting would have, and helped the woman lower herself to the bench. She said she was fine before anybody had accused her of not being fine. Jesus asked how long she had been caring for them. She said, “Long enough that I’m tired of pretending it’s temporary.” The honesty in her voice startled even her. Jesus listened. He did not rush her. When she admitted their mother was not coming today and had not been well for a long time, His face held no judgment. Only sorrow and a kind of strength that made truth easier to say aloud.

Gabriel watched all of it. He watched the boys settle. He watched the grandmother’s shoulders drop once she was no longer pretending she had everything under control. He watched Jesus kneel so He was at eye level with the younger boy, who had started crying again out of delayed shock more than pain. There was nothing dramatic in the moment, which was exactly why it pierced him. Jesus was not moving through Mesa performing scenes. He was attending to people as though each interruption mattered. As though weariness mattered. As though hidden strain mattered. As though the city was full of souls and not inconveniences. When He came back and sat beside Gabriel, the younger man’s resistance had thinned. He stared at the splash of sunlight on the pavement and said, “I didn’t spend the money on drugs or anything.” Jesus said nothing, which made the silence feel like room instead of pressure. Gabriel swallowed and kept going. He said the apartment notice had been on the kitchen counter for days. His mother thought he had not seen it. There was rent due, late fees, and a shutoff warning folded underneath. He had money in his student account that had hit at just the right time. He told himself he would fix the apartment first and the school part later. He told himself he was being a man. He paid what he could, hid the receipts, and figured he would catch up after picking up more hours. Then one thing slipped into another. Fees showed up. Deadlines passed. He got embarrassed. He stopped going to class because showing up while behind felt worse than disappearing. Then disappearing became easier every day. By the time he understood how bad it was, he could not imagine telling her.

Jesus listened without interruption. Gabriel expected a lecture once he finished. He expected the usual adult balance of disappointment and practical advice, the kind people use when they are trying to seem compassionate without getting too close. What came instead was quieter and heavier. Jesus said, “You wanted to rescue her without letting her know you were afraid.” Gabriel nodded, eyes burning. Jesus continued, “You made yourself both son and savior, and the lie grew in that space.” Gabriel pressed his hands together so hard his knuckles whitened. He said he had been trying to help. Jesus answered, “I know.” The words were not sharp, but they did not excuse anything. “Trying to help is not the same as walking in truth.” Gabriel stared at the ground. A child laughed somewhere behind them. A train bell rang in the distance. Life kept moving while his chest tightened around words he had not wanted anybody to know. “She already had enough,” he said. “I couldn’t give her one more thing.” Jesus turned toward him fully then, and there was both kindness and weight in His face. “You did give her one more thing. You gave her your absence.”

Gabriel covered his eyes with one hand. He was twenty years old, broad-shouldered, old enough to drive and vote and make choices that changed the shape of a home, yet in that moment he looked painfully young. “I don’t know how to go back from this,” he said. Jesus did not answer with a strategy. He answered with a direction. “You go back through the truth.” Gabriel shook his head immediately. “She’ll look at me different.” Jesus said, “She already is. She is looking at an empty chair and a silent phone and a future she cannot read. Truth may wound her for a moment, but silence is wounding her every hour.” Gabriel’s breathing changed. He was close to crying and hated it. Jesus let him hate it without moving away. Then He said, “The fear underneath your hiding is older than this. It did not begin with school.” Gabriel’s jaw tightened. He knew what Jesus meant before He said it. A father who left. A house full of tension. Years of watching his mother take hit after hit and keep moving. The vow he had never spoken out loud but had built his whole young manhood around. I will not be another burden. I will not fail in front of her. I will not be the reason she breaks. Jesus saw all of that without being told, and Gabriel realized with a sudden awful clarity that the part of him he kept most hidden was not merely the mistake. It was the desperate pride that had grown around the mistake.

Alina was only a few blocks away by then, worn down, angry, heartsick, and still searching. She had called one of Gabriel’s friends and gotten vague answers. She had checked a parking area where he sometimes went to think. She had even driven past Mesa Riverview because mothers learn the geography of their children’s avoidance whether they mean to or not. Now she had circled back toward Pioneer Park almost by instinct, because years earlier Gabriel had once told her he liked that part of town because it felt like people still showed up there even when life was hard. She parked with hands that shook more than she wanted to admit. For a long moment she stayed in the car and closed her eyes, not because she was calm, but because she needed one final second before hope and fear hit her at once again. Somewhere in the park, children shouted. Somewhere behind her, a train moved through downtown. The whole city seemed to hold its breath with her.

She opened the car door and stepped out into the heat that had already begun to gather over the pavement. For a few seconds she did not see him. Then she saw the familiar slope of Gabriel’s shoulders near a bench, and the sight of her own son standing there alive and real hit her so hard that anger and relief rose together and almost made her unsteady. She started toward him fast. Gabriel looked up, saw her, and went still in the way people do when the moment they have been dreading finally arrives. Jesus stood beside him, calm as ever, not stepping in front of either of them, not trying to soften the collision before it happened. Alina stopped a few feet away. She looked at Gabriel’s face, then at his clothes, then at the backpack near his feet, and then back into his eyes as if she could pull the truth straight out of him by force. The first thing she said was not polished. It was not wise. It was the sound of a mother whose fear had been running wild all morning. She asked where he had been. Gabriel opened his mouth, but nothing came out. She asked again, louder this time, and the pain under her anger was so plain that even the children playing nearby seemed suddenly too loud for the moment. When Gabriel finally said, “Mom,” in that weak and broken way, she put a hand to her mouth and shook her head. “Do not give me one more half answer,” she said. “Not today.”

Gabriel’s face changed. Something in him had been held tight for too long, and now every part of him looked tired of holding it. He glanced at Jesus once, not because he needed permission, but because he needed courage. Then he looked back at his mother and said he had not been going to school the way he said he had. Alina closed her eyes for one second as if bracing physically against the sentence. Gabriel kept going because stopping would have meant crawling back into the lie. He told her about the money. He told her about the rent notice. He told her he had seen the bills and panicked. He told her he had thought he could fix it before she knew. He told her he kept waiting for the right time to explain, and the right time never came because each day made the truth uglier. He told her he had skipped class because he was behind and ashamed. He told her he had slept in his car because going home with no explanation felt impossible. He did not say these things smoothly. He said them with his voice catching in the middle, with long pauses, with his eyes watering in spite of himself. By the time he finished, he looked like a young man standing inside the wreckage of his own pride.

Alina listened without interrupting, but that did not mean she was calm. Her breathing went shallow. Her hands opened and closed at her sides. The hurt on her face was not only about the school. It was about trust. It was about the long months in which she had believed one thing while reality had been moving another direction. It was about every morning she had watched him leave with hope in her chest. “You let me think you were building something,” she said, and her voice broke on the last word. Gabriel nodded once because there was no honest defense. “I was trying,” he said. It was the wrong sentence in the wrong moment, even though part of it was true. Alina gave a small sound of disbelief that carried years of strain in it. “Trying is not what you call this,” she said. “You lied. You disappeared. You let me walk around thinking I was crazy for feeling something was wrong.” Gabriel looked down. The space between them felt raw and exposed. Jesus remained present in that space without rushing to cover it. He did not rescue either of them from the cost of truth. He let it stand there because some things cannot heal while everybody is still trying to make them sound smaller than they are.

At last Jesus spoke, and His voice was quiet enough that both of them had to stop pushing in order to hear it. “Let the truth finish its work,” He said. Alina turned toward Him, not with disrespect, but with the desperation of someone already beyond restraint. She said she had let truth into her life for years and it had not exactly been gentle. She had faced rent notices, abandonment, fear, long hours, and the kind of choices people never congratulate you for surviving. She had told the truth to herself when there was not enough money. She had told the truth when her body was tired. She had told the truth when nobody came to help. “And now this,” she said, gesturing toward Gabriel with a trembling hand. “Now this too.” Jesus looked at her with deep compassion. “Yes,” He said. “Now this too. But this truth is not arriving to destroy you. It is arriving because hiding has already been hurting both of you.” Alina’s eyes filled again, and this time she did not look away. Gabriel stood there taking it in. The city moved around them in the plain light of day while the three of them stood with what could no longer be hidden.

A little boy ran past chasing a ball, and the ordinariness of it almost made Alina angry. How could the world sound so normal when her heart felt split open. Jesus motioned toward a shaded area away from the center of the park, and they went there because neither of them had strength left to refuse Him. The shade was thin but enough. Traffic drifted beyond the trees. A dog barked somewhere near the sidewalk. A train bell sounded again in the distance along the downtown line. Jesus waited until they sat. Gabriel leaned forward with his elbows on his knees. Alina sat upright as though posture alone might keep her from coming apart in public. Jesus looked first at Gabriel. “Why did you believe your mother needed your performance more than your honesty?” Gabriel did not answer right away. He kept staring at the dirt near his shoes. Finally he said he did not know. Jesus let the silence stay until the deeper answer came. “Because she has already been through enough,” Gabriel said. “Because every time life hits us, she gets back up, and I didn’t want to be another thing that knocked her down.” Jesus asked, “And what were you protecting then. Her or yourself.” Gabriel’s jaw tightened. The question was too clean to dodge. “Both,” he said at last.

Jesus turned to Alina then. “And you,” He said gently, “have been so busy surviving that you began to believe love means carrying everything before anybody else can feel it.” Alina exhaled hard through her nose and looked away toward the street. The sentence found its place in her immediately because it was true in ways she did not like having named. “If I don’t carry it,” she said, “who does.” Jesus answered, “Sometimes another person must feel the weight of what they have done. Not so they are crushed, but so they can finally stand in truth.” Gabriel looked over at his mother as if hearing for the first time that her strength had not only protected him. It had also taught him, without either of them meaning it, that she would keep absorbing damage until the house stayed upright. Alina felt that look and hated it because it was not accusation. It was understanding. That somehow hurt more. She rubbed at her forehead and said she did not know how to do this differently. Jesus said, “You begin by stopping the lie that pain avoided is pain healed. It is not.” The words were simple. The weight in them was not.

For a while nobody spoke. The sounds of Pioneer Park moved around them, and the world kept being itself. A couple argued quietly near the splash pad entrance. A father untangled a stroller blanket with tired patience. A city worker crossed the far side of the park carrying a grabber and bucket. Gabriel lifted his head when he recognized Raymond from earlier near the arts center. Raymond was talking on the phone again. He had tears in his eyes and a look of wonder and fear together. He kept nodding. When the call ended, he stood with both hands on his hips and looked up at the sky like a man who had expected punishment and received room instead. He saw Jesus across the distance and gave the smallest grateful shake of his head. Then he went back to work, but not with the same heaviness as before. Gabriel watched him and understood that delayed honesty did not become less costly with time. It only became lonelier. That understanding sat on him like fresh weight.

Alina noticed Gabriel watching the man. “What is it,” she asked. Gabriel said there had been another person earlier, a man who had not answered his daughter’s call because he felt too ashamed to pick up. “Jesus told him silence isn’t mercy,” Gabriel said. The sentence hung there. Alina’s face changed because she knew exactly how silence can pretend to be something noble while it is hurting everybody in the room. She thought of her own life. She thought of years of not telling people how bad things really were because she did not want pity, or judgment, or the shame of being seen as one more woman barely making it. She thought of how many nights she had gone to the bathroom to cry with the fan running so Gabriel would not hear. She had called that love. Maybe part of it had been. Maybe another part of it had been fear wearing responsible clothes. She sat back slowly and looked at Jesus with an expression that carried both resistance and surrender. “So what now,” she asked. “We just say everything and hope it doesn’t break us.” Jesus answered, “You are already being broken by what is not said. Truth does not remove pain. It changes what pain can do.”

They left the park after a while and walked toward Main Street because staying still felt too sharp. The city had fully awakened by then. Downtown Mesa held its usual mixture of motion and pause, people moving with purpose, people drifting because they had nowhere urgent to be, storefront windows catching bright desert light, the rail line dividing and connecting the day all at once. Jesus walked between them, not as a barrier, but as a steady center that kept either of them from slipping too quickly back into anger or retreat. They passed the Mesa Arts Center again, and the broad shade near its edges gave them a place to slow. A young woman in a black polo sat on a low wall by one of the entrances with her head bowed over her phone. Her mascara was smudged. One shoe was half off her heel. She had the strained posture of somebody trying not to cry at work. Jesus stopped and asked if she was all right. She looked up with immediate embarrassment. “I’m fine,” she said in the automatic voice of people who have had to say it too many times. Jesus did not challenge her sharply. He only said, “You have said that so often it no longer means anything.” The woman laughed once in spite of herself and then covered her face. She said her name was Taryn. She worked there part time and at a restaurant at night. Her mother’s health was getting worse. Her brother was unreliable. Her rent had gone up. She had spent the last week telling everyone she was handling it because if she admitted she was close to the edge, then being close to the edge would become real.

Alina listened to Taryn, and some of her own anger began to make room for recognition. The details were different, but the pressure was familiar. Gabriel listened too. He saw how easy it was for pain to become private and private pain to become isolating, and isolating pain to become a life people around you can no longer read clearly. Jesus asked Taryn who knew the truth. She stared at Him blankly for a moment and then said, “Nobody all the way.” Jesus nodded. “That is why you are starting to disappear while still showing up.” Taryn’s eyes filled. She said she did not have the luxury of falling apart. Jesus said, “No one does. That is why they fall apart in secret.” There was no performance in His voice. No attempt to sound profound. He spoke like Someone describing the human heart as plainly as weather. Taryn took a long breath, wiped her face, and said she had been about to text her manager some half story about food poisoning because she could not get herself to go inside smiling again. Jesus told her to send a truer message. Not every detail. Just enough truth to stop feeding the lie. She nodded slowly and began typing with hands that still trembled. Before they moved on, Alina touched Taryn lightly on the arm and told her she was not weak for being tired. Taryn looked at her and nearly cried again. The moment was small. It still mattered.

They crossed toward a coffee shop near Main Street, and Jesus led them inside because people tell the truth better when they are seated and not braced for movement. The air conditioning hit their skin with sudden relief. A few people worked on laptops. A couple sat in tense silence over iced drinks. The line was short. Jesus paid for cold water for Gabriel and tea for Alina without either of them asking how He had money, because by then practical questions felt much less urgent than what was happening in them. They sat at a small table near the window where they could see the rail line beyond the glass. Alina wrapped both hands around the cup even though it was not cold. Gabriel stared at the water as if it might settle his chest. Jesus waited until the room itself seemed to quiet around them. Then He said, “What each of you fears is not only this moment. It is what this moment seems to prove.” Neither of them answered. He looked at Gabriel first. “You fear you have become a disappointment in the shape of your father.” Gabriel flinched as if struck. Then Jesus turned to Alina. “And you fear that all your labor can still be undone by one more wound you did not see coming.” Alina’s face tightened, and she blinked fast. The sentences did not merely describe feelings. They reached the place beneath the visible crisis where old beliefs had been running the whole story.

Gabriel swallowed hard. “I’m not him,” he said, but the sentence came out weak because he was not saying it from confidence. He was saying it from fear. Jesus answered, “No. You are not. But you have let fear of repeating his harm drive you into another form of it.” Gabriel looked down. He knew it was true. He had not left the family in the same visible way his father had left. He had done something quieter. He had withdrawn into secrecy, absence, and self-made burden, and he had told himself it was love because it felt sacrificial. It took a strange kind of mercy to show a man that his good intentions had still become a wound. Alina stared into her tea. “And what about me,” she asked after a moment. Jesus said, “You have been faithful. You have endured much. But you have also believed that if you stay vigilant enough, strong enough, and tired enough, you can outrun loss.” Alina gave a sad little shake of her head because she had never put it that way, yet it was exactly how she had been living. Jesus continued, “Strength is a gift. It becomes a prison when it will not let you be human.”

The words opened something in her then. Not a dramatic breakdown. Something deeper and less theatrical. A tired surrender. She began to talk about years she had never narrated plainly to anybody. She talked about the day Gabriel’s father left and how she had stood at the kitchen sink afterward because dishes were easier than grief for the first ten minutes. She talked about learning to turn every fear into a task because tasks at least moved. She talked about working while sick, about being too proud to ask for help, about the humiliation of doing mental math in grocery aisles, about the nights she woke up certain that one unexpected expense would push them over the edge. She admitted that when Gabriel got into school, some part of her had leaned on that future too hard. Not because she wanted to own his life, but because hope can become heavy when you need it too much. “I needed him to be okay,” she said quietly. “Not just because I love him. Because I thought maybe if he made it out, then all of this meant something.” Gabriel looked up at her then with tears in his eyes. He had known pieces of her struggle. He had never heard it laid out like this.

“I’m sorry,” he said, and this time the words were not a reflex. They came from the center of him. “I’m sorry I made your hope carry what I should have told you. I’m sorry I made you feel crazy. I’m sorry I let you keep believing something I knew was falling apart.” Alina pressed her lips together. The apology mattered. So did the damage. She did not rush to make him feel better. That was one of the truest things she could do in that moment. “I believe you mean that,” she said, and her voice was tender but tired. “But I need more than hearing it once in a coffee shop.” Gabriel nodded immediately. “I know.” Jesus watched them both with that same steady compassion that never excused and never abandoned. “Good,” He said. “Now you are near something real.” Gabriel looked at Him, confused by the word good. Jesus said, “Not because this is painless. Because false peace has stopped pretending to be peace.”

They stayed there a long time. Not filling the silence to prove progress. Just letting it exist without running from it. Jesus eventually asked Gabriel what was true now, not what he wished were true. Gabriel took a breath and answered slowly. He said he was not currently in good standing at school. He said he had avoided looking at every detail because seeing it all at once scared him. He said he had been picking up extra shifts at a warehouse but not enough to solve what he had broken. He said he was embarrassed to talk to anybody at the college because he felt like he had already proved he could not handle it. Jesus asked him what he would do if shame were not leading. Gabriel sat with that for a while. Then he said he would go back to the school, find out exactly where things stood, ask what could still be repaired, and stop treating confusion like a safe place to hide. Jesus nodded. He asked Alina what was true now. She said she was angry, hurt, and exhausted, and that her first instinct was to grab control of everything so she would not have to feel helpless. Jesus asked what she would do if fear were not leading. She sat very still before answering. “I would let him face what he made,” she said, “without making him face it alone.” Jesus nodded again. The sentence held both boundary and love. It was stronger than control.

When they left the coffee shop, the day had tipped into that bright Mesa afternoon when light feels almost physical on the skin. They walked back toward Mesa Community College because truth needed feet under it. None of them pretended this next part would be inspiring. It was paperwork, questions, office doors, hard clarity, and the stripping away of vagueness. Real change often begins in places like that. Not on mountain tops. Not in dramatic speeches. In fluorescent offices and honest conversations and forms people wish they did not need to fill out. On the way, the light rail rattled past, and Gabriel watched it with a strange calm. Earlier the movement had only made him feel like a ghost inside the city. Now he felt exposed, but real. That was harder. It was also better. Jesus walked with him toward the campus again. Alina walked on his other side, not clinging and not distant. The three of them moved through the heat and traffic and plain business of the city like any other small group heading somewhere necessary.

At Mesa Community College, the answers were not magical. There was no sudden reversal that erased consequences because the truth had finally come out. There were deadlines missed. There were limits. There were financial facts that could not be sweet-talked into disappearing. But there were also people whose job it was to help students understand where they stood when they stopped pretending not to need help. A counselor explained options. A staff member printed information. There was a path forward, though not the easy one Gabriel had hoped to recover by hiding. He would likely need to slow down. He would need to repair standing over time. He would need to work and plan and swallow pride. Sitting there in that office, hearing plain reality spoken without contempt, he realized how much shame had exaggerated everything in his mind. It had told him that once he slipped, he was finished. Truth did not tell him he was finished. It told him he was responsible. That was heavier than denial and lighter than despair. Alina listened too. Now and then she asked practical questions. Now and then she fell quiet and let the information settle. Jesus said little during this part. He did not need to. His presence had already brought them here.

When they walked back outside, Gabriel’s face looked different. Not happy. Not relieved in some simple way. More honest. He said, almost to himself, “I should have done that weeks ago.” Jesus said, “Yes.” There was no sting in the answer. Only agreement. Gabriel let out a breath that seemed to come from deep in his body. “I thought if I waited until I had a better version of the story, then maybe…” He stopped because the sentence embarrassed him. Jesus finished it gently. “Maybe you would not have to be seen in weakness.” Gabriel nodded. Jesus said, “But weakness seen in truth can heal. Weakness hidden in pride spreads.” They stood for a while under the hot bright sky. Students crossed the campus with backpacks and conversations and plans for later that evening. Life did not pause because one young man had finally stopped lying. Yet everything in Gabriel felt altered because he had stepped back into reality. The path ahead looked longer than he wanted. It also looked walkable.

They did not go home right away. Jesus led them instead through quieter streets toward the temple grounds and the gardens nearby because both of them needed a place where the city noise would not press so hard against the inside of them. The fountains moved steadily. The trimmed paths and shade gave the afternoon a kind of order their hearts did not yet fully share. They sat where they could watch water and people without being crowded. A young couple passed speaking softly. An older man moved slowly with a cane. A family posed for pictures. Ordinary life again. Alina looked at Gabriel and said she was still angry. He nodded and said he knew. She said she would probably be angry tomorrow too. He nodded again. Then she said, “But I do not want to lose you while being angry.” That was as close to an embrace as she could get with truth still fresh and hurting. Gabriel’s eyes filled again. “You’re not losing me,” he said. She looked at him long enough that he had to hold her gaze. “Then do not disappear again,” she said. “Even if the truth is ugly. Even if you are ashamed. Even if you think I’m going to break. Do not leave me alone with silence.” Gabriel said he would try. Jesus, hearing the word, turned toward him. “Do not give her the language of delay again,” He said softly. “Say what you mean.” Gabriel swallowed. “I won’t disappear again,” he said. This time the sentence stood.

Alina looked away because tears were close again, and she was tired of public tears. After a while she admitted something she had not wanted to say. She said part of her anger came from how much she had needed him to be the part of life she did not have to worry about. “That isn’t fair,” she said. “You’re my son. Not my proof that all this was worth it.” Gabriel sat with that as if receiving something fragile. He did not rush to comfort her or deny it. He simply listened, and in listening he became more like a man than he had been that morning. Jesus watched both of them and said, “Love grows stronger when it stops demanding that another person carry your hidden salvation.” Neither of them answered because both of them knew He was speaking to each in a different way. Alina had leaned on Gabriel’s future more heavily than she realized. Gabriel had tried to save Alina from worry by becoming secretive and self-appointed protector. Both had loved. Both had also bent that love under fear. Jesus did not shame them for being human. He only kept calling them out of distortion and into something cleaner.

Later, as the afternoon began to bend toward evening, they rode the light rail together through part of Mesa just to keep moving while they talked. The car was not crowded. A nurse with tired eyes sat near the door. Two teenagers whispered over a phone screen and kept trying not to laugh too loud. A construction worker slept with his head against the glass. Gabriel watched the city slide by and felt, maybe for the first time in months, that he belonged inside it again instead of outside it. Alina asked practical questions then. Where had he slept. How much money was left. Which shifts was he really working. What had he not told her about the apartment. It was not a warm conversation, but it was honest, and honesty has its own kind of warmth once you stop fighting it. Gabriel answered everything. A few answers made her close her eyes. A few made him wince at himself. Jesus said little, but when the conversation began to tilt toward blame alone, He steadied it. When it drifted toward denial, He steadied that too. He let nothing false settle over them again.

They got off near Mesa Riverview as the sun began to lower. Gabriel wanted to show Alina where he had parked and slept because hiding the place would have been one more small lie. The lot looked unremarkable in the early evening light. Cars moved in and out. People carried shopping bags. Somebody loaded drinks into the back of an SUV. It was almost obscene how ordinary the place was compared to what it had held for him during the night. He unlocked the Honda and let his mother see the crumpled sweatshirt, the dead charger, the wrapper on the floorboard, the half-empty water bottle, the position in which he had folded himself to get a few hours of broken sleep. Alina stood there looking into the car with one hand over her mouth. Not because the scene was dramatic. Because it was her son’s private collapse made visible in plain daylight. Gabriel said he had sat there around three in the morning and tried to figure out how to become the version of himself that could go home and explain everything. “I kept thinking if I waited a little longer,” he said, “I’d feel brave enough.” Jesus said, “Courage was never going to arrive through waiting. It arrives through yielding to truth.” Gabriel nodded. He had learned that now.

From there they went home. The apartment was small and familiar and carried the signs of real life lived under pressure. Shoes by the door. Mail stacked at the counter. A dish towel hanging slightly crooked. The rent notice still there. The shutoff warning folded underneath. Afternoon light slanting through blinds. Home did not suddenly feel peaceful just because they had returned. It felt exposed. That was right. Alina sat at the kitchen table. Gabriel stood across from her for a minute before finally sitting too. Jesus remained near the counter, present but not imposing. There, in the place where months of avoidance had been feeding on silence, they began doing the plain work of bringing things into the open. They looked at the bills. They wrote numbers down. They talked through what had been paid and what had not. They named what could wait and what could not. They spoke about work, class options, time, and what honesty would look like going forward. It was not glamorous. It was holy in the way truthful labor often is. Every line spoken plainly weakened the hold of shame a little more.

At one point Gabriel broke down fully. Not the restrained tears he had fought in public. A deeper collapse. He put both hands over his face and cried in a way he had not allowed himself to cry since boyhood. He cried for the pressure he had tried to outrun. He cried for the lie he had become. He cried for how scared he had been to fail in front of his mother. He cried because some part of him was exhausted from acting older, stronger, and more in control than he really was. Alina sat still at first because hurt was still alive in her. Then she stood, walked around the table, and put one hand between his shoulders. She did not tell him it was all okay. It was not all okay. She did not say it did not matter. It mattered. She only stood there with her hand on his back while he wept, and that act held more love than easy forgiveness would have. Jesus watched them with quiet tenderness. When Gabriel’s crying began to ease, Jesus said, “Shame wants you hidden. Love tells the truth and stays.” The room went still around the words. They were not sentimental. They were solid enough to build on.

Evening settled over Mesa in layers of softer light. The fury of the afternoon heat began to lift. Sounds from neighboring apartments came and went. A television somewhere. A door closing. A child laughing in the courtyard. Normal life again, but changed now because what had been hidden in this home was hidden no longer. Gabriel charged his phone and sent the messages he should have sent earlier. Not dramatic ones. Honest ones. To work. To the friend who had covered for him without knowing how bad things were. To one professor whose silence he had been afraid to break. Every true message felt awkward. Every one also made the next one easier. Alina called the utility office and asked questions without letting pride make her vague. She hated that part. She did it anyway. Jesus stayed until the first signs of night began to enter the windows. He was with them while they did the small unglamorous things that make repentance real. Not as spectacle. As presence.

When it was time for Him to go, neither of them asked Him to stay because somehow they both sensed that what He had given them was not meant to make them dependent on His visible nearness. It was meant to re-order the way they would live once the room was ordinary again. Gabriel walked Him to the door. So did Alina. In the fading light of the apartment entry, Gabriel said he was afraid of failing again. Jesus answered, “Then fail in the open and rise in the open. Do not return to hiding.” Alina said she was afraid of becoming controlling now that she knew how much had been concealed. Jesus looked at her with compassion and said, “Guide with truth. Do not grip with fear.” They stood there taking in the words because both knew how quickly old habits try to return once crisis passes. Jesus then looked at both of them and said, “Peace does not come from having no wounds. It comes from bringing them into the light where love and truth can both remain.” Neither of them had anything to add. The sentence fit the day too well.

Jesus left the apartment and walked out into the Mesa evening while the sky held its last bright color low in the west. He moved through streets that were still alive with people going home, picking up food, finishing shifts, sitting in cars with thoughts too heavy for the day that carried them. He passed lives full of hidden ache, quiet resolve, private fear, exhausted love, and hopes hanging by threads no one else could see. Near downtown, Raymond sat on a bench with his phone in both hands and a look of stunned gratitude on his face. Abby had agreed to meet him later that week. It was not reunion yet. It was room. Taryn left the arts center after an honest conversation with her manager and a text to a friend she had been too proud to call. The grandmother from Pioneer Park carried one sleeping boy and held the other by the hand, tired but steadier. None of these stories were finished. That was not the point. The point was that truth had entered them. Shame had lost some ground. Silence had been interrupted. That alone changes the air around a life.

At last Jesus made His way back toward Usery Mountain Regional Park as night deepened over Mesa. The city lights spread below in quiet lines and clusters. Traffic moved like brief rivers of red and white. Houses held dinners, arguments, apologies, loneliness, television noise, dishes in sinks, prayers whispered by people who were too tired to make them sound impressive. Somewhere a young man sat at a kitchen table no longer pretending nothing was wrong. Somewhere a mother went to bed still hurt, but no longer trapped inside silence. Somewhere an older father prepared to see his daughter after months of fear. Somewhere a woman who had been saying she was fine admitted she was not. Mesa did not look holy from a distance. It looked human. That was enough for Him. He climbed again into the quiet dark of the mountain and knelt in prayer as the first stars settled overhead. He prayed without hurry. He prayed for the city in its hidden rooms. He prayed for the ashamed, the overburdened, the angry, the exhausted, the people performing strength, the people disappearing behind silence, the people who feared truth because they could not imagine surviving what it would uncover. He prayed for the ones who were still not ready. He prayed for the ones who had just begun. And there, above the city that held so much unspoken ache, Jesus remained in quiet prayer while the night covered Mesa in mercy.

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

Watch Douglas Vandergraph inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/douglasvandergraph

Qué poco es necesario -recortando  la necedad: un trébol de dos hojas.

Hay tiempo para decirlo. Si ya pasó, si no ha llegado. Y el silencio atronador.

Canciones con rosas o sargazos, y otras que dan palos al avispero.

Everyone agrees that artificial intelligence should be fair, transparent, and accountable. That sentence could have been written in 2018, and it would have been just as true then as it is now. The difference is that in 2018, arriving at consensus on those principles felt like the hard part. In 2026, we know better. The hard part was never agreeing on what AI ethics should look like. The hard part is making anyone actually do it.

A growing body of research confirms what practitioners and regulators have been circling for years: the global AI ethics landscape has converged around a remarkably stable set of principles. Transparency. Fairness. Non-maleficence. Accountability. Privacy. These five values appear in the vast majority of the more than 200 ethics guidelines and governance documents that researchers have catalogued worldwide. A landmark review by Anna Jobin, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena, published through ETH Zurich and later expanded through broader global analysis, found that transparency appeared in 86 per cent of guidelines examined, justice and fairness in 81 per cent, and non-maleficence in 71 per cent. The world, it turns out, has been surprisingly good at articulating what responsible AI ought to involve. The world has been catastrophically bad at enforcing it.

That gap between articulation and enforcement defines the current moment in AI governance. And it is not an abstract policy debate. It is the difference between a hiring algorithm that discriminates against older workers and one that does not. It is the difference between a facial recognition system that operates with impunity and one that faces genuine consequences. It is the difference between a corporate ethics board that exists to absorb criticism and one that has the power to halt a product launch.

The question that matters now is deceptively simple: what does meaningful accountability actually look like in practice? And when enforcement mechanisms fail to materialise in time, who bears the cost?

The Principles Paradox

The proliferation of AI ethics guidelines over the past decade represents one of the most remarkable exercises in global norm-setting since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Governments, corporations, academic institutions, and civil society organisations have produced hundreds of frameworks, each articulating some version of the same core commitments. The World Economic Forum has described the challenge as one of “scaling trustworthy AI” by turning ethical principles into tangible practices. The International Labour Organization has reviewed global ethics guidelines specifically for AI in the workplace, finding consistent themes around worker protection and human oversight.

Yet this apparent consensus masks a deeper dysfunction. As research published in Patterns journal noted, while the most advocated ethical principles show significant convergence, there remains “substantive divergence in how these principles are interpreted, why they are deemed important, what issue, domain or actors they pertain to, and how they should be implemented.” In other words, everyone agrees on the words. Nobody agrees on what the words mean in practice.

This is the principles paradox. The more guidelines that exist, the easier it becomes for organisations to claim alignment with ethical AI while doing very little to change their behaviour. The phenomenon has a name: ethics washing. And in 2025 and 2026, it has become a defining feature of the corporate AI landscape.

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission has flagged “AI washing” as an enforcement priority, scrutinising whether company disclosures about artificial intelligence capabilities match actual practices. The SEC and the Department of Justice have already taken action against companies for exaggerating AI capabilities to attract investment. But the problem extends far beyond securities fraud. When a company publishes a set of AI ethics principles, appoints a chief ethics officer, and then deploys systems that systematically discriminate, the principles themselves become a form of camouflage. They provide the appearance of responsibility without the substance of it, a shield against criticism rather than a genuine constraint on conduct.

The most notorious illustration of this dynamic played out at Google in late 2020 and early 2021. Timnit Gebru, co-lead of Google's Ethical AI team, was fired after the company demanded she retract a research paper examining the environmental costs and bias risks of large language models. Three months later, Margaret Mitchell, the team's founder, was also terminated. Roughly 2,700 Google employees and more than 4,300 academics and civil society supporters signed a letter condemning Gebru's departure. Nine members of the United States Congress sent a letter to Google seeking clarification. The paper that triggered the conflict, “On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?“, was subsequently presented at the ACM FAccT conference in March 2021 and has since become one of the most cited works in the field.

The Google episode demonstrated something that has only become clearer with time: internal ethics teams, no matter how credentialed or well-intentioned, cannot function as accountability mechanisms when they exist at the pleasure of the organisations they are meant to constrain. The fox does not appoint its own gamekeeper.

Deployment at Speed, Governance at a Crawl

The numbers tell a stark story. According to ISACA's 2025 global survey of more than 3,200 business and IT professionals, nearly three out of four European IT and cybersecurity professionals reported that staff were already using generative AI at work, a figure that had risen ten percentage points in a single year. Yet only 31 per cent of organisations had a formal, comprehensive AI policy in place. The gap was not closing. It was widening.

The same survey found that 63 per cent of respondents were extremely or very concerned that generative AI could be weaponised against their organisations, while 71 per cent expected deepfakes to grow sharper and more widespread. Despite these anxieties, only 18 per cent of organisations were investing in deepfake detection tools. The pattern is consistent: organisations recognise the risks, articulate concern, and then fail to allocate the resources necessary to address them. A separate finding from the same research revealed that 42 per cent of professionals believed they would need to increase their AI-related skills within six months simply to retain their current position, a figure that had risen eight percentage points from the previous year. The workforce, in other words, is being transformed by AI faster than individuals or institutions can adapt.

Globally, the picture is even more fragmented. A separate analysis found that 94 per cent of global companies reported using or piloting some form of AI in IT operations, while only 44 per cent said their security architecture was fully equipped to support secure AI deployment. More than half of organisations surveyed, 57 per cent, acknowledged that AI was advancing more quickly than they could secure it. The phrase “governance gap” has become a staple of policy discourse, but it undersells the scale of the problem. This is not a gap. It is a chasm.

The Partnership on AI, a multi-stakeholder organisation that includes major technology companies, academic institutions, and civil society groups, identified six governance priorities for 2026. These include responsible adoption of agentic AI systems, improved documentation and transparency standards, governance convergence across jurisdictions, and protections for authentic human voice in an era of synthetic content. The priorities are sensible. They are also an implicit admission that none of these foundations are yet in place, despite years of discussion.

Meanwhile, the technology itself continues to accelerate. Agentic AI systems, which can take autonomous actions in the real world rather than simply generating text or images, introduce what the Partnership on AI describes as “non-reversibility of actions, open-ended decision-making pathways, and privacy vulnerabilities from expanded data access.” These are not theoretical risks. They are features of systems already being deployed in customer service, software development, and financial trading. The governance frameworks meant to constrain these systems are, in many cases, still being drafted. The speed of silicon, as one commentator put it, outpaces the speed of statute.

Regulation Arrives, Eventually

The European Union's AI Act represents the most ambitious attempt to date to translate ethical principles into enforceable law. The legislation entered into force on 1 August 2024, with a phased implementation timeline extending through 2027. Prohibitions on AI systems posing unacceptable risk took effect on 2 February 2025. Obligations for general-purpose AI models became applicable on 2 August 2025. The bulk of requirements for high-risk systems take effect on 2 August 2026, when authorities will gain the power to enforce compliance through administrative fines reaching up to 35 million euros or seven per cent of global annual turnover.

The EU AI Act adopts a tiered, risk-based approach, classifying AI applications from minimal to unacceptable risk. High-risk systems are subject to strict oversight, including conformity assessments, technical documentation, CE marking, transparency requirements, and post-market monitoring. The European AI Office became operational on 2 August 2025, taking on responsibility for supervising and enforcing the Act alongside Member State authorities.

This is, by any measure, a significant regulatory achievement. But it also illustrates the temporal mismatch that defines AI governance. The Act was first proposed by the European Commission in April 2021. It was adopted in March 2024. Full enforcement does not arrive until August 2026 at the earliest, with some provisions extending to 2027. During that five-year legislative journey, the AI landscape transformed beyond recognition. When the Commission drafted its proposal, ChatGPT did not exist. Nor did the current generation of multimodal models, autonomous agents, or AI-powered code generation tools. The regulation is, by design, chasing a target that moved while lawmakers were still aiming.

The situation in the United States presents a different set of challenges entirely. Rather than pursuing comprehensive federal legislation, the US has relied on a decentralised approach combining agency-specific enforcement, voluntary frameworks, and sector-level regulation. The National Institute of Standards and Technology published its AI Risk Management Framework, with a February 2025 revision adding testable controls for continuous monitoring. The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice have used existing consumer protection and anti-discrimination statutes to pursue AI-related enforcement actions.

Then, in December 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” which sought to advance what the administration called “a minimally burdensome national policy framework.” The order directed the Attorney General to establish an AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws deemed inconsistent with federal policy. It instructed the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate existing state AI legislation and identify laws considered “onerous.” It even tied broadband infrastructure funding to compliance, specifying that states with AI laws identified as problematic would be ineligible for certain federal grants.

The order was, in effect, an attempt to pre-empt the patchwork of state-level regulations that had been emerging across the country. Colorado's SB 205, effective February 2026, requires developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems to use reasonable care to protect consumers from algorithmic discrimination, implement risk management policies, and conduct impact assessments. New York City's Local Law 144 had already established bias audit requirements for automated employment decision tools. More than a hundred state AI laws were enacted across the United States in 2025 alone.

Governors in California, Colorado, and New York issued statements indicating the executive order would not stop them from enforcing their existing AI statutes. Legal scholars noted that the administration's ability to restrict state regulation without Congressional action was constitutionally questionable. The result is a governance landscape that is not merely fragmented but actively contested, with federal and state authorities pulling in opposing directions while companies navigate overlapping and sometimes contradictory obligations.

When Enforcement Fails, the Vulnerable Pay

The consequences of the enforcement gap do not fall equally. They concentrate, with brutal predictability, on those with the least power to resist.

In employment, the case of Mobley v. Workday, Inc. illustrates the human cost. Five individuals over the age of forty applied for hundreds of jobs through Workday's automated hiring platform and were rejected in nearly every instance without receiving a single interview. The plaintiffs alleged that Workday's AI recommendation system discriminated on the basis of age. In 2024, a court allowed the disparate impact claim to proceed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, holding that Workday bore liability as an agent of the employers using its product. The case remains one of the most significant tests of whether existing anti-discrimination law can reach the companies that build, rather than merely deploy, algorithmic decision-making tools.

In housing, the SafeRent algorithm case exposed how automated tenant screening can systematically disadvantage Black and Hispanic applicants. Plaintiffs demonstrated that SafeRent's scoring system produced discriminatory outcomes, and the court held that the company bore responsibility because its product claimed to “automate human judgement” by making housing recommendations. SafeRent agreed to pay more than two million dollars to settle the litigation in 2024. The settlement was significant as legal precedent, but for the applicants who were denied housing on the basis of an opaque algorithmic score, the damage was already done.

In biometric surveillance, Clearview AI's trajectory encapsulates the enforcement timeline problem. The company scraped billions of photographs from social media platforms without consent and sold facial recognition services to law enforcement agencies worldwide. In September 2024, the Dutch Data Protection Authority fined Clearview 30.5 million euros for constructing what the agency described as an illegal database. In March 2025, a US federal court approved a class action settlement valued at roughly 51.75 million dollars, structured as a 23 per cent equity stake in the company itself, because Clearview had insufficient assets to pay a traditional cash settlement. The settlement structure was unprecedented in biometric privacy litigation, and its adequacy was contested by a bipartisan group of state attorneys general who filed formal objections.

These cases share a common structure. Harm occurs. Years pass. Legal proceedings unfold. Settlements are reached or fines imposed. But the systems that caused the harm often continue operating during the entire adjudication process, and the individuals affected rarely receive compensation proportional to their injury. The enforcement mechanisms exist, technically. They simply do not work fast enough to prevent the damage they are meant to address.

In consumer markets, similar patterns have emerged. Instacart drew widespread criticism after reports revealed the company was using an AI-powered pricing experiment that displayed different grocery prices to different customers for the same items at the same store. The programme, designed to test price sensitivity, was condemned by consumer advocacy groups and policymakers who argued it constituted algorithmic price discrimination without adequate disclosure. The controversy highlighted a recurring blind spot in AI governance: the gap between what is technically possible and what existing consumer protection frameworks are equipped to regulate.

A study from the University of Washington provided stark evidence of the scale of algorithmic bias in employment contexts. Researchers presented three AI models with job applications that were identical in every respect except the name of the applicant. The models preferred resumes with white-associated names in 85 per cent of cases and those with Black-associated names only 9 per cent of the time. A separate study led by researchers at Cedars-Sinai, published in June 2025, found that leading large language models generated less effective treatment recommendations when a patient's race was identified as African American.

These are not edge cases or hypothetical scenarios. They are documented patterns of discriminatory behaviour embedded in systems that millions of people interact with daily. And they persist not because the ethical principles governing AI are inadequate, but because the mechanisms for enforcing those principles remain woefully underdeveloped.

The Audit Illusion

One of the most commonly proposed solutions to the enforcement gap is algorithmic auditing: the idea that independent third parties can evaluate AI systems for bias, accuracy, and compliance with ethical standards, much as financial auditors examine corporate accounts. The concept has gained significant traction in policy circles. New York City's Local Law 144 requires annual bias audits for automated employment decision tools. Colorado's SB 205 mandates impact assessments for high-risk systems. The EU AI Act requires conformity assessments for high-risk AI applications.

But the AI Now Institute, in a report titled “Algorithmic Accountability: Moving Beyond Audits,” has mounted a detailed critique of the audit-centred approach. The institute argues that technical evaluations “narrowly position bias as a flaw within an algorithmic system that can be fixed and eliminated,” when in fact algorithmic harms are often structural, reflecting the social contexts in which systems are designed and deployed. Audits, the report contends, “run the risk of entrenching power within the tech industry” and “take focus away from more structural responses.”

The critique has substance. Current algorithmic auditing suffers from several fundamental limitations. There are no universally accepted standards for what constitutes a passing score. Audit costs range from 5,000 to 50,000 dollars depending on system complexity, placing the financial burden disproportionately on smaller organisations while allowing well-resourced technology companies to treat audits as a cost of doing business. Audits evaluate systems at a single point in time, but AI models drift as they encounter new data, meaning a system that passes an audit today may produce discriminatory outcomes next month.

Perhaps most critically, audits place the primary burden for algorithmic accountability on those with the fewest resources. Community organisations, civil rights groups, and affected individuals must navigate complex technical and legal processes to challenge algorithmic decisions, while the companies deploying those systems retain control over the data, models, and documentation necessary to evaluate their performance. The information asymmetry is profound and, under current frameworks, largely unaddressed.

The Ada Lovelace Institute, the AI Now Institute, and the Open Government Partnership have partnered to examine alternatives to the audit-centred approach, including algorithm registers, impact assessments, and other transparency measures that distribute accountability more broadly. These efforts are promising but nascent, and they face the same temporal challenge that afflicts all AI governance: by the time robust accountability frameworks are established, the systems they are meant to govern will have evolved.

Geopolitical Fractures and the Sovereignty Question

The enforcement gap is not merely a domestic policy challenge. It is a geopolitical one. The February 2025 AI Action Summit in Paris, co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, drew more than 1,000 participants from over 100 countries. Fifty-eight nations signed a joint declaration on inclusive and sustainable artificial intelligence. The United States and the United Kingdom, notably, refused to sign.

France announced a 400 million dollar endowment for a new foundation to support the creation of AI “public goods,” including high-quality datasets and open-source infrastructure. A Coalition for Sustainable AI was launched, backed by France, the United Nations Environment Programme, and the International Telecommunication Union, with support from 11 countries and 37 technology companies. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei described the summit as a “missed opportunity” for addressing AI safety, reflecting a broader frustration among researchers that international forums produce declarations rather than binding commitments.

The geopolitical dimension becomes even more fraught when considering the position of developing nations. Research from E-International Relations and other academic sources has documented how AI development mirrors historical patterns of colonial resource extraction. Control over data infrastructures, computational resources, and algorithmic systems remains concentrated in a small number of wealthy nations and corporations. Regulatory gaps in many developing countries make the deployment of biased AI systems more likely while preventing communities from taking legal action against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The environmental costs of AI computation fall disproportionately on these same regions, where data centres proliferate because electricity and land are cheap, exporting the benefits of artificial intelligence while localising its burdens.

The disparity in content moderation illustrates the pattern. Reports have shown that major technology platforms allocate the vast majority of their moderation resources to the Global North, with only a fraction addressing content from other regions. Algorithms deployed without cultural context produce moderation decisions that are at best irrelevant and at worst actively harmful to the communities they affect. When 98 per cent of AI research originates from wealthy institutions, the resulting systems embed assumptions that may be irrelevant or damaging elsewhere.

Some scholars have called for a shift towards what they term “global co-creation,” an approach to AI development that prioritises local participation, data sovereignty, and algorithmic transparency. The concept recognises that meaningful accountability cannot be imposed from outside but must be built through inclusive governance structures that reflect the diverse contexts in which AI systems operate. One hundred and twenty countries representing 85 per cent of humanity, researchers argue, have the collective leverage to insist on these conditions. Whether they will exercise that leverage remains an open question.

Building Accountability That Works

If the current approach to AI governance is inadequate, what would a more effective system look like? The evidence points to several structural requirements that go beyond the familiar call for more principles or better audits.

First, accountability must be anticipatory rather than reactive. The current model waits for harm to occur, then attempts to assign responsibility through litigation or regulatory action. By the time a court rules on an algorithmic discrimination case, the affected individuals may have lost housing, employment, or access to healthcare. Meaningful accountability requires mechanisms that identify and address potential harms before deployment, not after damage has been documented across thousands of decisions.

Second, enforcement must be resourced proportionally to the scale of AI deployment. The ISACA survey finding that only 31 per cent of organisations have comprehensive AI policies is not simply a failure of corporate governance. It reflects a broader reality in which the institutions responsible for oversight, whether regulatory agencies, standards bodies, or civil society organisations, lack the funding, technical expertise, and legal authority to match the pace of industry. The EU AI Office is a start, but its capacity to oversee a technology sector that spans hundreds of thousands of organisations across 27 Member States remains untested.

Third, transparency must extend beyond model documentation to encompass the full chain of AI development and deployment. The Partnership on AI's call for standardised documentation templates and strengthened reporting frameworks is necessary but insufficient. What is needed is a transparency regime that enables affected communities, not just regulators and auditors, to understand how algorithmic decisions are made, what data they rely on, and what recourse is available when those decisions cause harm.

Fourth, the costs of non-compliance must be sufficiently high to alter corporate behaviour. The EU AI Act's fines of up to seven per cent of global annual turnover are significant on paper. Whether they will be enforced consistently, and whether they will prove sufficient to deter violations by companies with revenues in the hundreds of billions, remains to be seen. The history of technology regulation suggests that fines alone are rarely sufficient; structural remedies, including requirements to modify or withdraw harmful systems, are necessary to create genuine accountability.

Fifth, governance frameworks must be designed for iteration, not permanence. The five-year legislative cycle that produced the EU AI Act is incompatible with a technology that transforms every six months. Regulatory approaches must incorporate mechanisms for rapid adaptation, whether through delegated authority, technical standards that can be updated without legislative amendment, or sunset clauses that force periodic reassessment.

None of these requirements are novel. Researchers, civil society organisations, and some regulators have been advocating for them for years. The obstacle is not a lack of ideas but a lack of political will, complicated by the enormous economic interests that benefit from the current arrangement in which deployment runs ahead of governance and the costs of failure are borne by those least equipped to absorb them.

The Cost Ledger

When enforcement mechanisms fail to materialise in time, the costs are distributed with grim predictability. Workers screened out by biased hiring algorithms never know why they were rejected. Tenants denied housing by opaque scoring systems cannot challenge a decision they cannot see. Patients who receive inferior treatment recommendations based on their race are unlikely to discover that an algorithm played a role. Consumers shown different prices for identical goods based on algorithmic profiling have no way to compare their experience against other buyers.

These costs are real but largely invisible, diffused across millions of individual decisions and absorbed by people who lack the resources, information, or institutional support to seek redress. The aggregate effect is a systematic transfer of risk from the organisations that build and deploy AI systems to the individuals and communities that interact with them. That transfer is not an accident. It is the predictable consequence of a governance architecture that prioritises speed of deployment over adequacy of oversight.

The financial scale of the problem is staggering when considered in aggregate. Individual settlements and fines, whether SafeRent's two million dollar payout, Clearview AI's 51.75 million dollar settlement, or the Dutch data authority's 30.5 million euro fine, may appear substantial in isolation. But set against the revenues of the companies deploying these systems and the cumulative harm inflicted on millions of affected individuals, they represent a cost of doing business rather than a meaningful deterrent. The economics of non-compliance remain, for the moment, firmly in favour of deployment first and accountability later.

The question of who bears the cost when accountability fails is, ultimately, a question about power. Those with the resources to influence policy, fund litigation, and shape public discourse are best positioned to protect themselves from algorithmic harm. Those without those resources are not. Until governance frameworks are designed to address that asymmetry directly, rather than assuming that better principles or more audits will suffice, the enforcement gap will persist.

The field of AI ethics has accomplished something genuinely remarkable in building global consensus around core values. That achievement should not be dismissed. But consensus without enforcement is aspiration without consequence. And aspiration without consequence is, in the end, just another way of saying that nobody is responsible.

References and Sources

1. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., and Vayena, E. “Worldwide AI ethics: A review of 200 guidelines and recommendations for AI governance.” Patterns, 2023. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666389923002416

2. ISACA. “AI Use Is Outpacing Policy and Governance, ISACA Finds.” Press release, June 2025. Available at: https://www.isaca.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/2025/ai-use-is-outpacing-policy-and-governance-isaca-finds

3. Partnership on AI. “Six AI Governance Priorities for 2026.” 2026. Available at: https://partnershiponai.org/resource/six-ai-governance-priorities/

4. European Commission. “AI Act: Shaping Europe's Digital Future.” Available at: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai

5. International Labour Organization. “Governing AI in the World of Work: A Review of Global Ethics Guidelines.” Available at: https://www.ilo.org/resource/article/governing-ai-world-work-review-global-ethics-guidelines

6. World Economic Forum. “Scaling Trustworthy AI: How to Turn Ethical Principles into Tangible Practices.” January 2026. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2026/01/scaling-trustworthy-ai-into-global-practice/

7. AI Now Institute. “Algorithmic Accountability: Moving Beyond Audits.” Available at: https://ainowinstitute.org/publications/algorithmic-accountability

8. Trump, D. “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” Executive Order, December 2025. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/12/eliminating-state-law-obstruction-of-national-artificial-intelligence-policy/

9. MIT Technology Review. “We Read the Paper That Forced Timnit Gebru Out of Google. Here's What It Says.” December 2020. Available at: https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/12/04/1013294/google-ai-ethics-research-paper-forced-out-timnit-gebru/

10. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart and Sullivan, LLP. “When Machines Discriminate: The Rise of AI Bias Lawsuits.” Available at: https://www.quinnemanuel.com/the-firm/publications/when-machines-discriminate-the-rise-of-ai-bias-lawsuits/

11. Clearview AI Class Action Settlement, Northern District of Illinois. Approved March 2025. Available at: https://clearviewclassaction.com/

12. Dutch Data Protection Authority. Clearview AI fine of EUR 30.5 million, September 2024. Reported by US News and World Report. Available at: https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2024-09-03/clearview-ai-fined-33-7-million-by-dutch-data-protection-watchdog-over-illegal-database-of-faces

13. AI Action Summit, Paris, February 2025. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_Action_Summit

14. E-International Relations. “Tech Imperialism Reloaded: AI, Colonial Legacies, and the Global South.” February 2025. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2025/02/17/tech-imperialism-reloaded-ai-colonial-legacies-and-the-global-south/

15. Colorado SB 205 (2024). AI bias audit and risk assessment requirements, effective February 2026.

16. AIhub. “Top AI Ethics and Policy Issues of 2025 and What to Expect in 2026.” March 2026. Available at: https://aihub.org/2026/03/04/top-ai-ethics-and-policy-issues-of-2025-and-what-to-expect-in-2026/

17. Crescendo AI. “27 Biggest AI Controversies of 2025-2026.” Available at: https://www.crescendo.ai/blog/ai-controversies

18. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. “AI Auditing: First Steps Towards the Effective Regulation of AI.” February 2025. Available at: https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/assets/digestImages/Farley-Lansang-AI-Auditing-publication-2.13.2025.pdf

19. RealClearPolicy. “America's AI Governance Gap Needs Independent Oversight.” April 2026. Available at: https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2026/04/03/americas_ai_governance_gap_needs_independent_oversight_1174471.html

20. Cedars-Sinai study on LLM treatment recommendation bias by patient race. Published June 2025. Reported in multiple sources.

21. Ada Lovelace Institute, AI Now Institute, and Open Government Partnership. “Algorithmic Accountability for the Public Sector.” Available at: https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/project/algorithmic-accountability-public-sector/

22. Infosecurity Magazine. “Two-Thirds of Organizations Failing to Address AI Risks, ISACA Finds.” Available at: https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/failing-address-ai-risks-isaca/

---

Tim Green UK-based Systems Theorist & Independent Technology Writer

Tim explores the intersections of artificial intelligence, decentralised cognition, and posthuman ethics. His work, published at smarterarticles.co.uk, challenges dominant narratives of technological progress while proposing interdisciplinary frameworks for collective intelligence and digital stewardship.

His writing has been featured on Ground News and shared by independent researchers across both academic and technological communities.

ORCID: 0009-0002-0156-9795 Email: tim@smarterarticles.co.uk

In Summary: * The Texas Rangers winning their exciting game this afternoon put a smile on my face and contributed greatly to this satisfying day in the Roscoe-verse. There are no more scheduled tasks ahead of me as I move through this evening, so I'll be able to structure the few remaining Thursday hours around my night prayers. And after wrapping them up, head to bed reasonably early.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night. Details of that regimen are linked to my link tree, which is linked to my profile page here.

Starting Ash Wednesday, 2026, I've added this daily prayer as part of the Prayer Crusade Preceding the 2026 SSPX Episcopal Consecrations.

Health Metrics: * bw= 233.9 lbs. * bp= 145/85 (66)

Exercise: * morning stretches, balance exercises, kegel pelvic floor exercises, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups

Diet: * 06:00 – 1 banana * 07:00 – 1 seafood salad & cheese sandwich * 07:50 – 1 crispy oatmeal cookies * 09:10 – cole slaw * 09:47 – 1 peanut butter sandwich * 12:00 – egg drop soup, rangoon, beef chop suey, fried rice, fortune cookie * 16:00 – 1 fresh apple

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 04:30 – listen to local news talk radio * 05:35 – bank accounts activity monitored. * 05:45- read, write, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, nap. * 08:40 – load weekly pill boxes * 10:00 – listen to the Phil Hendrie Show * 12:00 – watch old game shows, eat lunch at home with Sylvia * 14:00 – following the Texas Rangers vs Oakland Athletics MBL Game * 17:18 – and my Rangers win, final score 9 to 6.

Chess: * 16:00 – moved in all pending CC games

GITA श्रीमद्भ

I got home, exhausted. Shower and straight to bed. Hair still wet, listening to some Raul’s old songs from my dad’s time.

I’ve walked all over the world looking for it. But in my case, it was precisely in this moment, with my ears still full of water and foam, that a voice told me:

“According to the tibetan monks, this has seven layers of interpretation. You will understand it in the level you can reach.

Sometimes you wonder why I am so quiet, I barely speak of love around you I barely smile by your side.
You think of me all the time, you eat me, you spit me, you leave me. Perhaps you don’t get it, but today, I’ll tell you.

I am the light of the stars, I am the color of the moon, I am all the things you love and I am your fear of loving them.

I am the fright of the weak, I’m the strength of your imagination, I’m the bluff of the players, I am, I was, and I will be.

I am your sacrifice, I am that wrong way sign on your path, I’m the blood in the vampire’s gaze, I’m all the curses from the one who hates you (obs: and I don’t know why they do, and they don’t know why they do, but they do)

I’m the candle you light up, I am the light you turned off. I am the edge of the cliff calling you, I am all these things and I am nothing at all.

Why do you wonder so much? Your questions will not bring you anywhere. Just like you, I am made of earth and fire, and air.
You have me all the time, but you never know if it is good or bad. You can feel me within you, but know you are not in me.

I am the roof of each tile, I’m fishing for the fisherman, Each word has my name on it, I am the love behind your dreams,

I am the guy going shopping with the discount stickers, I am the hand of your torturer, I’m shallow, I’m wide, I’m deep.

I am the fly on your soup I am the teeth of the shark I am the eyes of the blindman And I am the blindness of the ones who see,

I am the bitterness on your tears I am your mother, I am your father, I am your grandfather, I am your kid that has not yet arrived, I am the beginning, I am the end and I am everything in between”.

/Apr26