Stuck up bitches in skanky clothes don't care about your car

Edmonton Police have advice for those who worry about break-ins:

Citizens should be extra mindful of their cars this summer, Edmonton police warn.

Community Liaison Sgt. Kim Clark said valuables left in the car and unlocked doors make easy targets for thieves.

“It’s one of those crimes that’s so very easy to commit,” Clark said.

But even locking your car may not be enough: In about one-third of thefts from vehicles, it’s licence plates that are stolen, Clark said.

Last July, there were 872 thefts from vehicles in Edmonton.
Heywaitaminute! Didn't we have this story cause all sorts of troubles before? Way back in January, a Toronto cop told an audience...
“You know, I think we’re beating around the bush here,” the officer said, according to Hoffman. “I’ve been told I’m not supposed to say this, however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.”
What's the difference between telling women not to dress like sluts and telling car owners not to leave their doors unlocked and their valuables visible? Let's play a game, replacing car theft related comments into these rape-related comments that an Edmonton cop was chastized for:
If you are going to go out driving and you're are going to park in that environment where you know there are a lot of predators, you know there's a lot of people out there, you are creating opportunity shall I say...there is consequences, not saying anyone deserves to be victimized, but the fact is you have to mitigate how you become a victim
Of course, we know the difference: this isn't about trashy bitches wanting to have their cake and eat it too. This isn't a cheap excuse to attack men for the reality that we're bigger and stronger and are better at sex. So the outcry is minimal. The message -- a good one, at that -- is the same.

Edmonton fixing the wrong traffic problems again

The City of Edmonton is working on reducing the smooth flow of traffic:

Crews are removing two traffic circles and continue to make changes to intersections, where 47 per cent of 28,480 collisions occurred in 2010.

“Some have a right laneway, instead of a T-junction where you would stop,” said Boutilier. “People have got into a lot of accidents in those particular areas.”

For those keeping score, the three worst intersections in the city are:
  1. 137 Ave and 97 St
  2. 118 Ave and Groat Road
  3. Yellowhead Trail and 127 St

The top three collision causes (53% of which don't happen at intersections, by the way) are:
  1. Following too close
  2. Striking parked vehicles
  3. Improper lane changes

True enough two of the three intersections in question have a right laneway. But then again, lots of intersections have the right laneway. All along 137th Avenue, or 170th Street, or 23rd Avenue, or 34th Avenue, or 75th Street are these same type of intersections. 95th Ave at 170 St, to pick a close-to-home example, easily has as much traffic volume at 97th and 137th. Maybe it's time to look at other factors? [Hey, isn't there an asian grocery store at 137th and 97th? -ed]

Also note that the Groat Road accidents are possibly because Groat Road, rather than a normal traffic circle like anybody on the planet would understand, inexplicably has stop lights on it? (Incidentally, Groat/118 is staying a traffic circle, though the stoplights are still up in the air). How counter-intuitive can you get?

Oh...that would certainly qualify. How many accidents at Groat and 118th occur from somebody thinking that, insanely, the left lane must turn left and the right lane can go right or turn left. Like in every other intersection in the city. Between traffic lights and that turn system, no wonder Groat "traffic circle" is in so much trouble.

But then Mayor McCheese shows his usual degree of intelligence:
On Tuesday, Mayor Stephen Mandel expressed concern about the city’s injury collision rate per 1,000. In 2009, Edmonton’s (at 6.65) was higher than those in Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver.

“The numbers show we’re not being very successful,” said Mandel,

He wants to see more street-based enforcement such as 24-hour ticket programs and the speed-on-green cameras.
Hey genius, guess what both the Yellowhead/127 and 137/97 intersections feature? Speed-on-fucking-green cameras. They didn't work, did they? When Mandel says he wants more here, he's basically saying he wants more money. Likewise, "speeding" isn't on this list, phantom crime that it is, which is the only thing these "24 hour ticket programs" ever cover. When was the last time these ticket programs made sure people stayed in the correct lane while making the right turn at 119th St and 23rd Ave? Hell, at that same Yellowhead/127 intersection drivers never turn left into the right lane (lane control is in effect). If you devote police resources to the wrong cause, don't be surprised to see that the accident rate climbs even as the money in your greasy palms keeps flowing. Maybe, just maybe, Mandel should ditch the speed-on-green cameras (I wonder how many accidents are caused or almost caused by people doing what I and every other sane person now does: gun the engine to 110 km/hr or faster and then slam the brakes to the speed limit just in time for the intersection).


American Hypocrisy

So Iran is planning to take the next step in their space program:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran says it plans to send a monkey into space next month as the next step in a space program that Western leaders worry could also bring major advances in Iran's missile arsenal.

The U.S. and allies are concerned that the technology in the space program could also be used to develop long-range missiles with possible nuclear warheads

Now on a certain level, Iran is crazy and should be stopped from doing crazy things with rockets. But on the other hand, the United States itself started off by putting monkeys into space. It seems a little odd that they'd complain about putting monkeys in space now, especially when they're even willing to put one in the White House.

Two Steps to Oilers Success

Step 1. Bring Ryan Smyth back. Done.

Step 2. Bring back Ryan Smyth's mullet.


The World's Silliest Error

I mean seriously...I'm the one shutting down the Windows station. Don't stop shutting it down to give me a dialog box I can only accept which delays the action I've already requested.


Explain! Explain!

Anybody wanna take a gander at what this novelty front license plate means?

The Alberta Party's latest assault on fundamental freedoms

Why Bill 205 Matters: road construction on your streets cries out the latest nonsense from the far-left Alberta Party. Whenever you see anybody use the phrase "better regulate" you should brandish a shotgun. When the Alberta Party uses it, you need to pack a couple of grenade launchers along just in case.

Here's the relevent bit, emphasis mine:

The full title of the Bill is the Municipal Government (Delayed Construction) Amendment Act, 2011, and its goal is to provide municipalities with the tools to better regulate construction within their boundaries. Bill 205 was created as a response to a number of stalled developments in the province – most notably the site at 4th Street and 21st Avenue SW in Calgary. The good people of the surrounding community have been living with this unsightly fenced-in hole-in-the-ground for nearly a decade now! Delayed developments hamper the vitality of communities, lessen their desirability for businesses and reduce the ability of residents to fully enjoy and experience their surrounds.
Bill 205 would allow municipalities to protect the economic and societal interests of communities existing near to such construction sites, and ensure projects are not significantly stalled, suspended or delayed for unreasonable lengths of time. In these cases, municipalities should have the authority to require the landowner to improve the appearance of the site within a specified timeframe.

Stomping on the rights of private businesses to meet some third party (okay, fifth party considering the source) expectations on what the property should look like. Forcing others to "protect societal interests of communities" by restricting the freedom of property owners? Now that's politics done differently!

Tales from the Inbox

I received this email from Travel Alberta last week (click to view full size):

Am I interested in camping, it asks. It's been around 12 degrees and raining ever since Thursday. No, I'm not interested in camping. Ask me about Mexican getaways!


East (Orthodox) Edmonton Mall?

Can anybody, anybody, explain why Google Maps thinks that West Edmonton Mall should be translated into Cyrillic?


You say the 2011 Vancouver riots, we say a victory for modern 'urban place-making'

Some of you may remember, after Games 1 and 2 of the Stanley Cup Final, seeing this op-ed in the Globe and Mail:

Like many other suburban politicians, Ms. Rasode and her fellow councillors are grappling with a dilemma of urban place-making, brought home by the Stanley Cup playoffs: What spaces do we have for people to gather in public? Where is the heart of our city? And can we manufacture a heart if we have to?

As urban designers have long known, great cities provide the kinds of spaces that human beings seem to need as part of their pro-social wiring.

“When big things happen, people want to be able to engage with other folks,” says Andrew Pask of Vancouver Public Space Network, an organization that encourages the creation and preservation of the kind of non-assigned space that allows people to connect. “It's one of the few times when social barriers drop and people will engage with strangers.”

Typically, the best public spaces are somewhat enclosed spots that are already popular pedestrian areas, like Vancouver’s well-defined celebration street, Granville Mall.
When big things happen, eh? By now, everybody in the western hemisphere has seen the big thing that happened...
Angry, drunken fans ran wild Wednesday night after the Vancouver Canuks' 4-0 loss to Boston in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals, setting cars and garbage cans on fire, smashing windows, showering giant TV screens with beer bottles and dancing atop overturned vehicles.

"We have a small number of hooligans on the streets of Vancouver causing problems," Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson said in a statement. "It's absolutely disgraceful and shameful and by no means represents the city of Vancouver...We have had an extraordinary run in the playoff, great celebration. What's happened tonight is despicable."

Police said they had reports of four stabbings, though a spokeswoman for the city would not confirm them.

BCTV reported that at least 58 people were injured. CBC reported that at least 10 remain hospitalized Thursday morning and some may face surgery, reports CBS affiliate KIRO.

Officers from around the region flooded into downtown. It took about four hours before downtown was quiet again.

At the Bay store, a high-end department store, looters were seen grabbing T-shirts and young women were seen leaving the store with MAC cosmetics. The landmark building was filling with smoke as people continued to take anything else they could get their hands on.

The violence started when fans set fire to a stuffed bear decorated to symbolize the Boston Bruins.
Say, where is that Bay store downtown? Why, if it isn't Granville Mall! The very enclosed public space that apparently the suburbs are lamenting they don't have. So far the only advocate seems to be Barinder Rasode, a politician so far left she goes by "Ms". Sure Surrey spent millions on "Surrey Central Plaza", but city governments find ways to spend money on all sorts of silly ideas.

Edmonton, for example, has been blowing money into Churchill Square for a decade now. Where is the central party location in this city? Why, it's the corner of 104th and Whyte! Much like Vancouver's mall, it turns out that a wealth of private businesses people like to frequent to have a good time is the real secret to gathering the riotous crowds (as happened on Whyte in 2001 and 2006). Meanwhile, suburban BC planners spending huge sums of money for suburban party places may want to read this article...
The pictures and videos coming out of Vancouver since last night's Stanley Cup loss are sickening, pure and simple. There's no excuse for people turning a disappointment like that into a mass riot, and in the days and weeks ahead, we can expect a thorough analysis as to what happened, why, and perhaps a piece or two of blame thrown around.

Perhaps the first bit will go to the mayor of Vancouver, Gregor Robertson, for actively courting tens of thousands of extra fans into the city during the games to watch on huge screens.

What could go wrong, right?

Post #1800, baby!

Well, with all the excitement going on right now over my slutwalk posts, just a breather moment to note that this blog is about to get its 1,801st post.

No insight really, but here's a video of a girl who dressed slutty at a houseparty and then passed out:


The Canucks loss: hilarious overconfidence captured in vivid Kodachrome

As the Canuckleheads lose another Game 7 against an Original 6 team suffering a drought dating back to before Vancouver even joined the league, it's time for a little photo rundown to celebrate the welcoming of Vancouver into the "Northwestern Conference team losing in Game 7" club, with an option for the Presidency in the "the only team that was favoured starting the season" category.

So here...we go!


I haven't seen sexual deviants so proud of their sickness since that girl's story about her horse-molesting boyfriend

It's that time again! Time for the joke that's so good it has to be brought out twice a year...

I thought the faggots held their AIDS Walk in September?

(Previously enjoyed 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Orange sponsor this year seems intent on stealing my thunder though)

Bonus Uranist Pride link: Sodomists in Australia are intimidated and frightened by normal women. You can't make this stuff up!


The slut was asking for it (no, the other one!)

I can't believe I hadn't noticed this one. Two Third Edge of the Sword controversial posts are connected:

From yesterday: Edmonton Slut Walk refuses to acknowledge that sometimes the girl who got raped did so because she acted like a slut and paid the price

From 2006: Edmonton gangster loving girls refuse to acknowledge that sometimes girls like Lily Tran are murdered because she wanted to be a rich gangster's boyfriend and paid the price

As I wrote at the time:

Remember thug-girls, the bling bling makes you feel great for a bit, and then your drug-dealing boyfriends get you pumped full of lead. Remember that when you turn down guys like me for the 50-Cent dream:

In both cases, here I am blaming the victim? Why? Because sometimes the victim makes a horrible mistake and deserved what she got.


#yegslutwalk participants, as sluts, agree to any and all sexual activity. They don't say no: if they do, they don't mean it, they're just teasing

On Saturday, June 4 2011 the sluts shall go a-marching. Sorry, "sluts". These aren't actual sluts, alas. These are, to borrow from the classic joke, bitches. But for now, let's pretend they are sluts. They're dumb sluts, we've already covered this. But the stupidity of their cause isn't relegated to just not knowing where to put their feet. It's not knowing what not to put their feet (and other various body parts) into.

First let's get to the basics: if you do dress slutty, men are going to stare at you. We're going to catcall. We are going to tell you all sorts of sexual things we want to do to your body. And if you dress slutty and wave your ass in our face, we will do them. The organizers of this event are not oblivious to this point: what they want is a fake sexual revolution. They want to be able to impersonate sluts without actually being sluts, and that's unacceptable. If you don't want to be treated as a piece of meat, don't marinate and grill yourself and sit perched on a piece of garlic toast. You dress slutty, you show off the goods, you try to get a reaction, you will get one. Hint: it's not always going to be the one you want. If this is new or shocking to the sluts, then I suggest they go visit another universe because they are simply not going to be happy with the one they currently live in. [re-read the "Dumb Sluts on the Highway" post if you're a slut wanting an easy way to free yourself of this universe on June 4th and go visit another... -ed].

The slut marchers are so loud, so dominant, that we forget that we're talking here about a tiny loopy minority (the Edmonton fag parade comes with much the same caveat). Women are kowtowed by their uber-feminist sisters on this one: I've had a couple emails from readers who loved the "Dumb Sluts on the Highway" but were scared to even anonymously comment on it. Last weekend out on the town I overheard a group of 5 women all trashing Slut Walk for its insane silliness. "I can't complain about sexual harassment when I'm dressing like a girl who gets off on being sexually harassed". What next harsh reality are these girls planning to protest? If you walk into the Hell's Angels club on the Yellowhead wearing a rival club jacket, you're gonna get murdered. Do we 'blame the victim' for this crime? Uh, yeah. If you do something stupid, bad things happen to you. As I wrote last week:

if they don't want to pay the city they can have their little meeting at the Legislature grounds and then walk to City Hall: crossing on marked crosswalks when the light indicates its safe to do so. If the city is really worried about them stepping onto the road that's easy enough to fix: declare a full clemency to any driver who hits and/or kills one of these sluts if she happens to step off the sidewalk and onto the street. It's the slut's fault for defying the rules and social conventions, not yours. So in other words, pretty much the same harsh reality that the sluts are marching to try and defy in the whole "dress like a streetwalker" meme.
In both cases, the easiest and most cost effective solution is just to declare "if you dress like a slut you might just get raped, and if you can't keep your protest on the sidewalks understand that any man mad at his ex-wife has de facto authority to kill you with his car". We've already had all of this sorted out, we don't need slut marches and demands that judges ignore reality messing it all up.

Now let's turn to the sluts vs. "sluts" problem alluded to earlier. If you impersonate a police officer, or a massage therapist, or a doctor, or even an auto mechanic you'll be fined at best and more than likely spend some time in the slammer. Now when you impersonate a slut we don't fine you, and we don't throw you in jail. There's really only one punishment for dressing like a streetwalker when you aren't one: you do have to endure the occasional rape. You should really suffer it in silence. Accept the character flaw within you that caused this, and move on. Police and court resources are already busy enough with real criminals: like actual rapists who do nasty things to their niece or the homeless native chick passed out under the bridge, or a conservatively dressed urban professional walking to her car, or a girl out jogging in a track suit. To equate the act of actually violating and raping one of these people with having sex with a girl who's every square millimetre of public persona screams anybody who wants to can screw me right now is ridiculous. It reduces women to helpless automatons [the proper spelling is "reduces", not "highlights". I fixed the spelling and grammatical errors for you -ed], who are just out on Whyte Avenue in a blue Lycra mini and 3" red heels wearing more makeup than the average Sears store stocks when from out of the blue for a completely alien and unknown reason some man stuck his hand down her boob. It's utterly ridiculous. Society has established rules like this for thousands of years: there's a cultural undertone that is the equivalent of the fake sign on the photo at the top of this post. If you go out on the street in an outfit that would make Britney Spears feel uncomfortable, you do so knowing that your ultimate aim is to make men want you. Well, they want you now. Congrats. Oh, wait, you mean you didn't understand what that implied? That in the great Bell curve of sexual congress you've just pushed everybody on the right-hand side of the -2 std devs line past that imaginary barrier that says "there is no power in the universe powerful enough to stop me from sliding my finger inside your panties"? I call bullshit. You do know. But you want to be a virginal slut, to dress in ways that makes men helpless to their urges but still leaves you fully in restrictive control. If you give Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a machine gun and slowly parade Jewish dykes past him for an hour and a half, don't be surprised if the magazine ends the experiment a little on the empty side.

But, as the post title implies, the Edmonton Slutwalk girls have gone a step further. They are explicitly passing themselves off as sluts. This is fortunate, as it means that now we can start bringing the legal and moral force of society to bear upon them. To re-iterate:
Every woman marching in the Edmonton Slut Walk is publicly declaring herself a slut. This means every woman there desires sex with any and all partners. Any sexual activity you initiate with them comes with implied consent. They cannot say no, and if they do understand all their 'no's mean yes. They are all asking for it. They want it bad. Now. From you. Go get 'em!

Now if you disagree, if you think that's not what this is about at all, then two things come to mind:
  1. If a bunch of women stand on the street claiming that they are shoe shiners, and they refuse to shine your shoes, you not only have a false advertising charge you can lay on them, but also discriminatory business practices. Women claiming to be nymphomaniacs who can't get enough may just find themselves having to explain why they are so prudish.
  2. By their own admission, they are lying bitches. The worst kind of woman. All marching on the street. Together.

If your wife is one of them, I'm very very sorry. Maybe a good rape might make her a little more manageable around the house.


Fun facts about time

Lynn-Holly Johnson, who played the teeny bopper Bibi in the Bond film For Your Eyes Only is 53 years old. When the film was released, Roger Moore, who turns her down for being too young, was 54.