Let's go Oilers, honk honk

The Edmonton Oilers are about to start their Game 1 against the Calgary Flames. On a completely unrelated note, earlier this year, the Freedom Convoy held Edmonton protests downtown every Saturday afternoon starting around 1pm.

Of course, Mayor "I'm Literally a Shitface, just look at it" Sohi hated this and could not let it stand. In fact, the City of Edmonton got an injunction against the convoy using its unique voice: its honking^†. The reason? Officially, to borrow from the nonsense used by Ottawa government whiners, was how horrible and disruptive that honking was. It's just not fair to all the residents, you see, to make them endure all this endless noise. The Edmonton Freedom Convoy, unlike the equally wonderful and justifiable Ottawa version, was only on Saturday afternoons. By 5pm the event was pretty much died down.

^† In fact, not just honking: the injunction included speakers and anything else that made any noise whatsoever.

Curiously enough, and sorry if I confused you, this isn't "unrelated" to the upcoming Oilers game at all. You see, on Saturday night I was out on Whyte Avenue to enjoy some beers and watch Game 7 of the opening series. A good time was had by all, and during an exciting and well-played while still nail-biting game, the Oilers defeated the Los Angeles Kings and moved onto the second round for the first time in the Retarded Land Acknowledgement Era. As you might expect, people were rather excited about this.

Since the game was played at 8pm for both the benefit of the Los Angeles TV audience and to accommodate the now-eliminated Maple Leafs, the Oilers victory didn't come until around 11pm. Just like in 2006, that first round victory led to a large crowd descending on the avenue (downtown arena be damned). And then the strangest thing happened. Cars started honking: loudly, incessantly, constantly. When I left the strip around 1:15am, the line of cars up and down the road honking over and over and over was only growing.

Unlike the strip from 109th Avenue between 98th Avenue and 104th Avenue where the vast majority of the Freedom Convoy operated, this is right smack dab in a well populated residential area. Unlike the Freedom Convoy, it was late at night. And also unlike the Freedom Convoy, Mayor Shitface hasn't denounced it and the City of Edmonton has taken no legal action against it. (It's worth noting the equally nonwhite and equally freedom-hating bitch who is Mayor of Calgary acted similarly in both aspects).

Leftists online haven't freaked out about people being harmed by all the honking.  If the celebration resumes after every Oilers game it will be even more common, and always at night. Yet the usual losers are completely silent on the issue. Of course we all know why but it still doesn't make it right.

2022 Kentucky Derby

Today is the 148th running of the Kentucky Derby, and because this year it falls on the same weekend as Mother's Day and a birthday party I can't get out of, I'll be missing out on the festivities (unlike last year, where my Kentucky Derby party had record attendance as we all reveled in the joy of openly violating COVID laws). The big story this year, of course, is legendary owner Bob Baffert enduring year one of his two year ban for the Medina Spirit controversy (he at the very least outlived the horse). One notes I actually made a disqualification joke last year referencing the 2019 Derby controversy, so I will keep the streak going.

However as always I will at least quickly run down who I would bet on, if I was betting which I wasn't (note the odds will likely change by the time this post goes up):

Win: White Abarrio (10-1)
Place: Messier (8-1)
Show: Zandon (3-1)
Super-trifecta 4th place: Tawny Port (30-1)
Super-trifecta 4th place after the disqualification: Epicenter (7-2)

@EontheEevee123 - Have you ever considered negros are just really bad drivers?

First of all, qualified immunity is from the United States and has nothing to do with Canada. As for POC being pulled over more than others where is your evidence to back this up,

— David Gillis (@bikehard400) May 7, 2022

Hey remember back when I used to do those #yegtraffic bad driver alerts? Those were fun. Anyways one of the gags I did with it was indicate the race of the bad driver. It made a lot of people, including that useless cunt Jesse from 100.3 The Bear, upset. But what I occasionally notified people of was a secret rule I used for it: I only gave the race of the driver when I correctly guessed it before getting a look at them.

Here's the thing: I'm really good at it. I'm well north of 80% accurate at guessing the sex of a driver and at least 75% accurate at guessing their race. In other words, niggers drive a certain way and I know it. Here's the hint as well, they are often bad drivers and were what triggered the infamous bad driver alerts. (Indeed, I referenced their driving habits in this infamous post)

So when folks like Eon try bleating about "racial bias" in policing, it's important that they understand how stupid it really is. Blacks don't drive the same way as whites (much like how they don't "pick up a few things at Athlone Liquor Store"  the same way as whites either) so why would you expect their pullover rates would be equal either? After all, how many percentage of police stops are from behind (where officers don't know the race of the driver)? The infamous Stanford study which Madame Eon quotes later in the thread talks about blacks being pulled over at night when, as Archie Bunker famously reminded us, cops literally wouldn't be able to tell a nigger was even behind the wheel.

Much like how they tend to commit more (serious) crimes and therefore any statistic purporting to look at "disproportionate" outputs without looking at the disproportionate inputs is meaningless, so is this one. Nobody should care how often blacks are pulled over: if they committed 100% of all traffic violations we would expect them to be 100% of the people pulled over, and no harm would be indicated by it.

What it certainly doesn't indicate is that police should be "anti-racist" or "decolonized" or whatever other nonsense Robyn Maynard is yammering about. After all, an "anti-racist" police force would harass innocent Gerald Stanley for the noncrime of shooting a jackpine savage out to do him harm...and we already have that!

"Then now the time is, Commander"

It's May 4th, which is commonly dubbed "Star Wars Day", which means it's now been two years since the disgusting and disgraceful performance by Lethbridge Police. What did I say at the time? Oh, right:

This is 50,000 shades of insanity. As Kate McMillan says, the first thing we need to do is publicly expose and shame the 911 callers. At bare minimum the transcript of the calls must be released so we can determine exactly what information was provided to police.

Secondly, and this is the key: Somebody on the Lethbridge Police Service needs to be fired over this. There can be no wiggle room. A person currently on their payroll needs to be unemployed.

Later that year we learned there would be no criminal charge. Last summer we learned that the officers involved would not be in any way punished for their conduct. The Police Chief at the time, Scott Woods, was only an interim chief and in July of 2020 new Chief Shahin Mehdizadeh took over, and in that time made...exactly zero changes. At no point has he made any amends on the key issue which was that if the officer conduct was according to policy than that policy needed changing.

Mehdizadeh has been completely useless on that front and needs to be made to answer the question: why hasn't policy been changed to prevent this reoccurring? If officers can be demoted for making fun of people in emails, surely policies can be changed to allow demotion for pointing guns at a girl in a cosplay outfit.

The provincial government also has to shoulder some blame: then-Justice Minister Kaycee Madu demanded Lethbridge Police reform their broken system, yet it was entirely over "MemeGate" and a police database search against an NDP cabinet minister rather than the far more serious incident on May 4th 2020.

April Fools Day

It's been far too long

For the first time since 2019, you can (starting just a few minutes ago) have yourself a pint of Guinness and a second pint of green beer at O'Byrnes.

Thank a trucker.

I look forward to Bruce Jenner's obituary

Notorious Edmonton slum landlord and con artist Carmen Pervez is dead.

At about 9:55 p.m., police were called to a weapons complaint at a home in the area of Heath Road and Riverbend Road.

Police said 59-year-old Abdullah Shah was outside the residence in life-threatening condition. Shah, who is also known as Carmen Pervez, was taken to hospital where he died of his injuries, according to police.

Regular readers might recognize the name, or more specifically the names. Is it Abdullah Shah or Carman Pervez? Well, we covered that. In fact, as a curious note far-left Edmonton Journal writer Elise Stolte had no problem referring to him as Pervez as his primary name. It is, of course, how we've known about him for a couple decades now.

This Abdullah Shah thing, while at first glance seeming very Cassius Clay, was what I more accurately noted as more along the lines of sodomites pretending they aren't dudes (or, in the curiously expanding realm of modern society, chicks who want to pretend their bleeding problem was a cosmic error). Specifically, I noted that both name changes are primarily involved for deception:

He's Carmen Perez. He was Carmen Perez when he was in his mortgage scam, and Carmen Pervez is the man who is out on the streets doing the same shady shit he was doing a decade ago. The name change, of course, is so that he can escape being figured out on Google searches. But it is, quite clearly, who he is. Carmen Pervez is how everybody from his friends to his victims knew him as. Calling him Abdullah Shah is to participate in a bald lie.

Yet this isn't the media's rule for dealing with another group who are using name changes to deceptively hide who they are. Trannies are doing the same thing day in and day out. And you know who's culpably going along for the ride? That's right, the same newspaper chain who sensibly kept warning Edmontonians that Carmen Pervez is back.

[apologies for the spelling error in the quote and original post, but ironically its hard to train the brain to not see "Pervez" as the spelling error. -ed]

Global News' Caley Gibson did something that's (morbidly eerie, in this case) referred to by the ridiculous term deadnaming when it's done to a man like Richard Levine yet we all instinctively understand that it would be a crime to the publishing of facts to talk endlessly about an Abdullah Shah as if he burst on the Edmonton social scene around 2013.

Albert Einstein is still alive, and while it might be useful to refer to people by their nom de plume on occasion it doesn't change the fact that Albert Einstein is still alive even if you don't know him by that surname (or the identity of his late brother).

The most inaccurate thing Ted Byfield ever wrote

As you may know, one of the greatest Albertans in history [we'll try to ignore the unfortunate born in Toronto bit, sins of the father yadda yadda yadda.. -ed], Ted Byfield (editor of the legendary Alberta Report and "godfather of Canadian social conservatism" as I believe Colby Cosh called him) , was lost to us just before Christmas. It's still honesty a raw nerve. And I've written before about how I own his greatest work, a collection of Alberta Report columns (excepting one written for, of all things, the University of Alberta Press which I'll discuss at a future date) under the title The Book of Ted.

Well, one of those columns is hauntingly appropriate today, as it opens with talking about "25 years into the future, when I will almost certainly be dead". That 25 years swung by on February 28th 2019, which as the post title implies makes it his most inaccurate column ever. But first, let's read the actual column.

Sixties people should tread carefully in considering the euthanasia question 

Twenty-five years from now I will almost certainly be dead - indeed, for all I know it could happen 25 minutes from now - so the following warning need not be considered self-interested.

If I were now forty-something, rather than sixty-something, I would be exceedingly cautious about leaping on the current bandwagon for legal euthanasia, propelled with the accustomed theatrics last week by Svend Robinson, MP, Burnaby's dubious gift to national politics.

That is, if I were a member of what is loosely termed the "Sixties generation," the generation that now runs everything, the generation with the great big numbers that has made the great big changes, I would think very hard about where this latest liberal social bonanza is likely to lead.

By the year 2019, when your generation is reaching retirement age, an enormous proportion of the population will be in their 60s and 70s, all requiring pensions and extensive, expensive medical attention. But since you have fully availed yourselves of the modern conveniences of birth control and abortion, assuring yourselves that the pursuit of personal advantage is the very essence of life, and thus you have produced relatively few children, you will discover there are far more people to support than there are to do the supporting. Indeed, the generation that will then be running things, and to whom this weighty burden of supporting you has been bequeathed, will not only be relatively few in number. They will also be carrying an enormous tax burden to pay the debts that you, their forebears - being the caring, sensitive, concerned group that you were - ran up heaped upon them.

Then again, these two groups of people - you, decrepit, gasping in your nursing homes, and your tax-burdened exhausted successors, straining to support you - are distinguished not only by numbers, but also by colour. You are almost uniformly white.

And everybody will know what awful people the whites are because for years you have been at such pains to describe in exhaustive detail the sins and failings of your race. Whereas our youngers will be that vast mix of hues and colours you so often and so admiringly envisioned.

Finally, the youngers will be free. They will not be burdened by the taboos, guilts, inhibitions and moral strictures that once haunted their ancestors. You will have liberated them from all that. They will have been taught - in fact had drilled into them - that the big thing in life is ME. My aspirations, my self-fulfilment, my self-esteem, my view of life, my this and my that, are the things that matter. And when they consider you, the pensioned mass of wheezing and unproductive humanity, they may just conclude that none of it is doing a great deal for ME.

How long will it take, do you think, before the obvious solution occurs to them? Surely the sensible, practical thing, the environmentally positive thing, is to implement...what will we call it? Genocide is such an ugly word. How about Populational Planning, administered under the direction of the fore-runner of so much other social advance by then known as Planned De-Parenthood? The name is important; so is the packaging. It will be seen as the Modern Way to Go. No fuss. No cruel months or years on sickbeds. And above all, no big cost.

Some of you of course may resist. There could be ugly scenes. Unscrupulous people might try to hide their parents away. Instances will be cited where the supposedly dying weren't dying at all. In fact were in good health and went about clutching a little note: "I do not want to die." And there will be stories of the wealthy cheating the system. But with tranquilizing drugs, such evasions can surely be minimized. And, of course, there need be no legal hassles. Good old Svend Robinson and his crowd of advanced thinkers got rid of all legal obstacles back in the 1990s. That's what the euthanasia issue was all about, though few seemed to notice at the time.

Today's euthanasia advocates, of course, will scoff at such a vision. All their legal reform is intended to do, they will assure us, is to enable piteous sufferers like Sue Rodriguez to end their lives in dignity, not in agony. Moreover, this is almost assuredly all they do have in mind. But the advanced thinkers are making their customary mistake. They think always in terms of what nice people will do, and then are horrified to discover that the world is not populated entirely by nice people.

Thus over the twentieth century they have reformed the prison system so that nice people won't be mistreated behind bars, and can be quickly freed to make a positive contribution to society. They are then appalled to discover that the people in prison are not all nice, and many use their freedom as a further opportunity to rob, rape and murder. They designed a welfare system so people can be supported by the state until they are able to support themselves, and are astonished to find that not all welfare recipients turn out to be nice, so that many decide not to work again at all. They created medicare to help people in times of medical necessity, and then are amazed that so many people use the system when there is no medical necessity. They set up abortion clinics for dire cases, which might happen to a nice person once in several lifetimes, and then are shocked to learn that people not so nice were using them as a form of birth control.

This peculiar ignorance of how human waywardness seems to corrupt every social advance applies even to learned economists. John Maynard Keynes taught that nice governments could operate on deficits during economic downturns, so long as they ran on surpluses during economic booms. But governments didn't turn out to be quite that nice. They ran up deficits during hard times all right, and then ran up more deficits during good times. Doubtless Mr. Keynes was likewise shocked and appalled. He forgot or never knew the oldest lesson of all. Men sin. And any system established on the presumption that they won't is certain to fail.

Therefore, O younger generation rapidly growing older when you are considering a euthanasia law, do not consider it in terms of what Sue Rodriguez might do with it. Think rather what an impatient heir might do with it. Think what Stalin and Hitler and Pol Pot might do with it. Imagine if it helps you, the puritanical state envisioned in Margaret Atwood's novel, and consider what they might do with it. Because they, not Sue Rodriguez, are the people for whom you are legislating.

- Ted Byfield (RIP), February 28, 1994

The first thing you may notice is that many of Ted's predictions never came to pass. At least, not yet...one of the things to prevent it was the rise of the Reform Party and the decade of boring centrist legislation by Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pbuh). That movement, which set the leftist agenda back by almost two decades, was of course architected by the same Ted Byfield who wrote about it. Faggot Svend and his cronies didn't control the wheels of power to the extent they could push their euthanasia legislation into effect until Rat Bastard 2.0 brought it in a couple years ago (and after Ted's presumed future-death). This means you can't say whether Ted's predictions specifically about euthanasia were wrong for another quarter century. Meanwhile of course everything else he wrote about, which continues unabated, will make it a moot point.

Interesting that he already saw the Great Replacement as a threat even in the mid 90s where the rest of us were busy worrying if Mulder and Scully would get together, what exciting new music Kurt Cobain would be writing over the next year, and whether Tonya Harding was in on it. The idea of a lack of social cohesion caused by the brown generation of immigrants being taught to hate the (generally more successful) previous generation of whites was perhaps first given a voice here (Mark Steyn wouldn't put it in a book for another 14 years) and both Steyn and Byfield note that the anti-white rhetoric taught in schools (something conservative movements failed to stop across North America) means the generation gets less and less interested in keeping those racist whiteys around and paying to support them. When the Wuhan Flu swingback inevitably occurs, it may occur to them that they were busy putting their lives on hold so that old white people could be infinitesimally safer.

Also he noted, as so many of us have, that nobody seems to be a Keysian when given the reins of power. The Right (who, in fairness, utterly reject Keynes) cut government expenditures more readily in hard times than good times (when they do at all), while the Left (who, remember, embrace Keynes) never want to cut government expenditures at all.

But of course the reason we look back at this today is to celebrate that for just under three years we got to enjoy the existence of Ted Byfield contrary to his 1994 pessimism, and indeed many years of at least putting off the nightmare he saw coming. Rest in Peace dear sir, you've earned it.

Justin Trudeau, Nazi

Honk honk.

A couple days ago Rat Bastard 2.0 inexplicably outed himself as a Nazi. I know, I know, dust off your old jokes: "people told me if I voted for Maxime Bernier Canada would descend into tyranny...and they were right".

And yet there it is:

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement condemning Russia’s attack on Ukraine:

“Canada condemns in the strongest possible terms Russia’s egregious attack on Ukraine. These unprovoked actions are a clear further violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. They are also in violation of Russia’s obligations under international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

“Canada calls on Russia to immediately cease all hostile and provocative actions against Ukraine and withdraw all military and proxy forces from the country. Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected and the Ukrainian people must be free to determine their own future.

Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, proudly defending neo-Nazis. 

He's on the same side as literal Nazis waving swastikas. Isn't that disgusting?

Okay some of you look a little confused. Let's explain.

Have you ever heard of an outfit called the Azov Battalion? In fairness I hadn't, but I'm not up to date on my niche military branches of foreign governments. Anyways, they're a wholly deputized wing of the Ukranian military who is also apparently dedicated (as you might guess) to something called the "Azov movement". That movement is an explicitly "Bajor for Bajorans" sort of group, and since ethnic Ukrainians are white then it is also dedicated to preserving Ukraine for white Ukrainians. This is, indeed, one of the "neo Nazi groups" that Putin has apparently invaded to root out. (Why a group advocating for Ukraine belonging to whites is worse than a group advocating for Canada belonging to Red Indians is an exercise left to the reader, at least for today). All you have to know is that Azov Battalion thinks white people are better than others, or at minimum better to live in Ukraine than somebody else.

The Azov Battalion is fighting alongside their fellow Ukranians against the Russians, and Trudeau implicitly praised them in his statement. Oh, and one other interesting piece of information: here's a photo of the Azov Battalion posing under their organization's flag:

It's not in exactly the same dimensions and orientation as the one you might be familiar with, but your eyes aren't deceiving you: that's a swastika.

It's worth a brief reprieve to note that the swastika wasn't exactly something Adolph sketched out one afternoon: to be frank, he wasn't that good of an artist. 7,000 year old swastikas have been uncovered in Iran and India. As it happens, the world's oldest swastika was found in Ukraine and seems to be a stylized bird (similar to how the Azoz Battalion's swastika looks a lot like the ship from Firefly). If you remember Don Cherry going to Nagano Olympics in 1994 he noted that swastikas were flying from flags all over the place. A swastika itself isn't ipso facto proof of a reference to Nazi Germany. Finland only in the last half-decade removed the swastika from their air force emblem: it had been used for just under a century starting in 1918. So seeing a swastika doesn't immediately mean Nazi. Indeed it's an open topic of discussion whether the emblem is related to the Nazi swastika: remember Ukraine has a dozen millennia of history with the symbol. Facebook, it's worth noting, banned Azov as a "hateful" organization you can't promote on their platform...until today.

Putin disagrees, and wants to purge Nazis from the Ukrainian government and military. Yet Justin opposes this. Now you might think: what's the big deal? For that answer, we have to look to the annals of history, a deep forgotten time (for leftists, at least): three weeks ago.

We recently have it on good authority by Justin Trudeau himself that if anybody in a group of people has a single swastika (even if only one guy three blocks away from everybody except Liberal Party official photographer Adam Scott) then the entire group is invalidated, and any politician who supports that group or their aims is standing with them.

There is no wiggle room. At no point did the Shiny Pony suggest that fighting for the same things the Freedom Convoy advocated for and supporting their movement for change could be decoupled from  "hate symbols" being seen. Indeed its why he refused to even meet with organizers (who hadn't waved any Nazi flags) or the regular truckers in the convoy (who were waving Canadian flags). See a swastika flag = hateful to support them. Plain and simple. So...

When will Justin Trudeau apologize for standing with people who wave swastikas?

These are your new rules, you play by them.

Your Valentines Day fantasy for 2022

Apparently "DJ" is a sex act by which two fingers are used to stimulate the clitoris as if a modern DJ is manipulating a record.

I can't wait for a May-December romance where some 20something expects this when her 50something boyfriend "DJs" her and instead he starts twisting and flicking like he's working on a Yamaha MD8.