If Edmonton Police Constable Shane Conner ever tells you to "F___ Off"...

...then you cuff his hands behind his back and strike him across the face.

And EPS will insist you acted properly. Serious.

Update, 11:17pm: Don't forget too, that if you see somebody taking pictures of you beating Conner across the face and wish there was no evidence, force them to stop taking the pictures and then taser them.

Why Edmonton will never get an MLB franchise

These two photos were taken on Sunday (ie. before we got about another 15cm of snow which at this very moment is still falling). This is April 22: Earth Day as it ironically is known. Right now while eastern Canada is falling over themselves worrying about this global warming nonsense Alberta and her two neighbours are dealing with possibly the worst spring snowfall in history. (Say what you will about the infamous May 14 1986 snowfall which dumped 3 1/2 feet of snow on central Alberta the night +20 day, at least 3 days later the temperature was back up to +16) Having 10 straight days of below freezing highs and heavy snow is... definitely not a sign that "global warming" is coming our way.

The Yanks already went through this

*yawn*

The federal government's new immigration policy is extremely important, and a "progressive" policy is promoted on all sides, despite massive public opposition.

Wait, which federal government again?

Unwittingly revealing

Last week the three remaining Presidential candidates (who all happen to be sitting U.S. Senators) took the time to ask questions about the U.S. Army's efforts in Iraq.

The NYT article starts off with three very telling photographs. Telling about the media that is... not the candidates.

John McCain is photographed answering questions.

Hilary Clinton is photographed being photographed while answering questions.

Barak Hussein Obama is casually in a picture about how many people are photographing Barak Obama.

More second fifth-rate commercials

How about that Ford commercial where a horrible pop cover of The Beatles' "Drive My Car" plays while the occupants, stuck in traffic, start bouncing up and down and make the car leap in the most pathetically cartoon manner possible.

Its an absolutely dumb commercial, and I can't understand why anybody could greenlight it. Ford Focus: the car for people who are so high they think they can make their car bounce like flubber?


(This isn't the first lousy commercial I've talked about. Nor the second. Nor even the third.)

"It's about coming up and staying on top and screamin' 187 on a mother fuckin' cop."

The comparisons between the corruption at Edmonton Police Services and corruption in the late 80s/early 90s LAPD is just getting more and more apt, isn't it?

Already we have:

1. Police brutality caught on tape while the officers responsible get away scot-free? Check.
   
   
2. Unprofessional police conduct so severe that the guilty perpetrator was set free as a result? Check.
   
   
3. Systemic racism and unfair treatment of people based on skin colour? Check.
   
   And now....
4. Minority groups begin fighting back? check.

Pro-sodomite who studies societal change now claims there's no societal change

Its hard to read through this article in the Saskatchewan Star-Phoenix and not suffer boiling blood syndrome. (This is the fourth time today I have read the article and its still pissing me off)

Societal attitudes haven't changed since 1991, making the comments of two Saskatchewan politicians caught on videotape just as disturbing now as they would have been almost 17 years ago, says a sociologist.

"The values back then are the values now," said Bernard Schissel, a sociology professor at the University of Saskatchewan.

Really now? Is Schissel really that stupid, or is he just pushing his own agenda?

Let's rewind just a little bit farther in time, shall we? The year is 1983, and Eddie Murphy's Delirious has been released. Boy Culture remembers the time well, and quotes a letter which has the following things to say about that intolerent pre-societal-change time:

"I'm sure that many of the B.A.R.'s readers are old enough to remember that in 1983, as the AIDS epidemic was ravishing San Francisco, New York, and other gay 'centers,' as many of us watched and ached with horror and fear as friends around us dropped like flies from the disease, Eddie Murphy was making untold millions of dollars with his stand-up 'comedy' routine which prominently featured endless AIDS 'jokes.' When he was confronted in an interview in Rolling Stone magazine about the controversy surrounding his routine and his refusal to change it, Mr. Murphy replied, 'If the faggots don't like it, they can kiss my black ass!'

There was, as you may recall, no serious backlash against Eddie Murphy, who was soon one of Hollywood's biggest stars. However, by 1996 things had...changed, and Murphy apologized for the comments he had made. 1983 to 1996 is thirteen years, and it seems like a whole lot had changed. 1991 to 2008 is seventeen years, so if Schissel wants to claim that 13 years can change a lot but 17 years cannot, then he has more than a little explaining to do.



Think about this: Delirious in 1983 was eight years before Tom Lukiwski's videotaped comments in 1991. Eight years after 1991 it was 1999 (my left-leaning readers have math issues, so I'm just making this all clear). What happened in 1999? Well, on June 8th of 1999 Parliament voted 216-55 in favour of preserving marriage as exclusively the purview of one man and one woman. Edmontonian and Liberal Justice Minister Ann McLellan stated that the Liberals had "no intention of changing the definition of marriage or legislating same-sex marriage."

Two hundred and sixteen votes. You should probably absorb that by the way: that's almost 80% of Canada's legislators agreeing to ban faggot marriages.

It was a mere six years later, in July of 2005, that the Liberal government would let sodomites get married. Just so we don't lose sight of all this:

"The values back then are the values now," said Bernard Schissel, a sociology professor at the University of Saskatchewan.

So why the lies and deceptions? If Schissel's not a uranist, he's certainly reading from their playbook. Its not enough now for poofters to get married and silence all those who might dare oppose their sick agenda, now they also have to rewrite history to make it seem as if they've always had this disgusting degree of popular support.

No societal change since 1991? It absolutely boggles the mind.



Since nobody else seems willing to do it, and since it almost begs to be said, nothing even remotely untrue was stated by Lukiwski in his video rant. Therefore I will remind you that (along with the comments by Stephen Boisson in the Red Deer Advocate) I agree with every single thing Lukiwski says in the video:

There’s A’s and there’s B’s. The A’s are guys like me, the B’s are homosexual faggots with dirt on their fingernails that transmit diseases.

There are real men, and there are pederasts. And while the "dirty fingernails" are metaphorical, there's nothing metaphorical in the fact that pillow biters are indeed disease-ridden. Take it away Doc Kopp:

However, AIDS is by far most common among the homosexual population in the United States, primarily because the type and frequency of sexual contact, combined with STDs, is the perfect method of spreading a body-fluid borne virus.

Public health records demonstrate that homosexuals, representing 2 percent of America's population, suffer vastly disproportionate percentages of several of America's most serious STDs, with incidences among homosexuals of diseases like gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis A and B, cytomegalovirus, shigellosis, giardiasis, amoebic bowel disease and herpes far exceeding their presence in the general population. These are due to common homosexual practices that include fellatio, anilingus, digital stimulation of the rectum and ingestion of urine and feces.

An exhaustive study in The New England Journal of Medicine, medical literature's only study reporting on homosexuals who kept sexual "diaries," indicated the average homosexual ingests the fecal material of 23 different men each year. The same study indicated the number of annual sexual partners averaged nearly 100. Homosexuals averaged, per year, fellating 106 different men and swallowing 50 of their seminal ejaculations, and 72 penile penetrations of the anus. (Corey, L, and Holmes, K.K., "Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men," New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, vol 302: 435-438; as quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

A study by McKusick, et al., of 655 San Francisco homosexuals reported that only 24 percent of the sample claimed to have been "monogamous" during the past year, and of this 24 percent, 5 percent drank urine, 7 percent engag-ed in sex involving insertion of a fist in their rectums, 33 percent ingested feces, 53 percent swallowed semen and 59 percent received semen in their rectums in the month just previous to the survey ("AIDS and Sexual Behavior Reported by Homosexual Men in San Francisco," American Journal of Public Health, December 1985, 75: 493-496; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

Lesbians show similar patterns of high venereal disease incidence relative to the general population. They are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis, twice as likely to have had genital warts, four times as likely to have had scabies, seven times more likely to have had infection from vaginal contact, 29 times more likely to have had oral infection from vaginal contact and 12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact ("Medical Aspects of Homosexuality," Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality, 1985, Jaffe and Keewhan, et al.; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

AIDS research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that the typical homosexual interviewed claimed to have had more than 500 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Considered by themselves, the AIDS victims in this study averaged more than 1,100 lifetime sexual partners. Some reported as many as 20,000. Studies reported by A-P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg and S.K. Hammersmith in the book "Sexual Preference" (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1981) indicated that only 3 percent of homosexuals had fewer than 10 lifetime sexual partners. Only about 2 percent could be classified as either monogamous or semi-monogamous (from "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

To the present time, 75 to 85 percent of AIDS cases reported are related to homosexual activity, promiscuous heterosexual sex and IV drug abuse. AIDS stubbornly refuses to spread into the population in general, even 20 years after its discovery, despite dire warnings to the contrary.

Though this pretty much covers everything that neeeds to be said, two more items of note are available:

• Firstly, a 2002 "CBC In-Depth timeline" shows a whole shitload of details about how, despite pro-homo garbage from Schissel, there has indeed been a lot of "societal change"
• Secondly, I've covered a similar topic before featuring this quote from Jack Layton:

  I think Canadian society has evolved considerably around this issue and Mr. Schreyer is a part of that evolution.

  And more impressively, this defiant notice from yours truely:

  I AM THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAS THE BRAINS AND THE BALLS TO ASK JACK LAYTON WHAT SICK LIFESTYLE HE OPPOSES TODAY AND WILL SUPPORT TOMORROW.

Lock up your daughters

Innocent until proven guilty has long been a tenant of our legal system.

As a result, if Allan Dwayne Schoenborn is indeed charged and tried for the alleged crime of killing his three young daughters in Merrit, B.C., the Crown Prosecuter will have to convince a jury of his guilt.

This can be done in two different ways:

1. Build up a case against Schoenborn, featuring a timeline of the events leading up to the murders and highlighting the opportunity for him to be in all of the places required. Include sworn testimony from the accused as well as his wife and acquaintances. Use forensic evidence and perhaps a psychological assessment so that it can be seen beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of the crime.
   
   
2. Just show them his picture and wait for the verdict: