@JeridU - which fundamental human rights do you deny?

Do you agree I have the right to tell a faggot that he can be cured? I mean, we know that we all have the responsibility to educate/remind sodomites about how conversion therapy offers one of only two escape routes from their evil lifestyle choice, but we do also indeed have that right. So looks like "rights and responsibilities" align better than you might think.

What other "responsibility" does Jerid think I need? Well, for that let's turn to (rare a specimen as it may be) an even deeper thinker than me. Again we open the pages of Ted Byfield's The Book of Ted which at this rate I will have completely reproduced on this blog by the time of our 20th anniversary.

If Chatelaine weds Penthouse, the marriage can't last

I was given the other day the publication of one of the human rights lobby groups which cited and deplored the alarming statistical evidence of social disintegration in Alberta - suicide, juvenile crime, family breakup and so on. It struck me as odd that a civil rights group should deplore such things. If any single factor can be blamed for the contemporary social collapse, it is our ceaseless and impatient insistence upon our "human rights," and our concurrent silence on the subject of human responsibility.

While the causes of our malaise are many, most can be traced to one, notably the seeming failure of the family unit. It in turn is directly attributable to the modern instability of marriage. When the marriage fails, the home breaks up. However "civilized" the divorce (and many are not in the least civilized), the resulting trauma to both parents and children creates many of the other statistics. To solve the problem therefore we must somehow re-establish permanence in the marital partnership. We need a tougher, deeper, more durable commitment that can withstand the storms that all human relationships involve, and emerge from them stronger and more resilient than ever. To achieve this, however, we are going to have to stop yapping about our rights and begin pondering most diligently our responsibilities.

The kind of yapping I'm talking about is eloquently illustrated by certain mass circulation magazines, some addressed to women, some to men. Take, for example, that bountifully profitable Maclean Hunter publication called Chatelaine, which is by a mile Canada's most widely read women's periodical. Much of its content has not changed for generations - advice on cooking, dieting, fashion and home improvement. But in the last ten or so years it has developed a new editorial thrust. This consists in one long, ceaseless and increasingly strident whine for assorted rights. There is the right of women to equal pay, the right of women to equal pensions, the right of women to equal job opportunities, the right of wives to minimum wages, the right of secretaries to refuse to make coffee, the right of mothers to pass child care onto fathers, and on and on. Why is research so retarded on a male birth control pill, demands one article. Why do fifty per cent of married women in their thirties who have good jobs cheat on their husbands? (The answer after about five thousand words: because their husbands are no good in bed.)

The justice of most, if not all, these claims is not in dispute here. The point is that the whine is pretty well the only kind of message which the entire magazine conveys. Its whole communication is described by the single word: GET. There is not the faintest evidence of GIVE. There are no appeals to women to sacrifice their interests to that of their children, no gentle suasions for devotion to husbands, no homilies for the care of aged parents, the nursing of the sick, the bandaging of wounded shins or the healing of wounded hearts. Yet even the most superficial examination of the tough marriages, the ones that work, invariably reveals a wife and mother who does all this and a great deal more besides. And in Canada's biggest and most influential women's magazine it is almost nowhere to be found. This surely is significant.

But it pales into pedantry when contrasted with the implications of Canada's most popular men's magazine. This, as it turns out, is not a Canadian magazine at ail, but an American one that outcirculates all rivals in Canada. It is called Penthouse and its most obvious distinction is the recurrence of four-colour, high-gloss pages full of gynaecology. Its purpose, as every male heart knows but won't admit, is to take the dignity and poise of womanhood and strip it raw, thereby fulfilling some dark desire in the further reaches of our minds that delights in the destruction of innocence. Hence the purer and younger the subject the greater the gratification, so long as it is old enough to look female. This sensation is no more related to art than it is to sex. It is an experience not of body but of mind that comes straight from hell. When women fear and banish it, they are on very certain ground, serving our ultimate interests better than their own, and in moments of lucidity we know it.

But it is not only in its pornography that Penthouse poisons the societal order. It is in the tacit assertion of certain inalienable male rights - the right of perpetual gratification, the right to possess, exploit and abandon, the right of infidelity, the right of concubinage, the right of progeneration without commitment. And again, where is the call to responsibility? Nowhere does it declare that a man must serve, protect and nourish that which he begets, that his loyalty to his wife must be unreserved and inviolate, that her vulnerability in childbirth lies upon him as a holy obligation, and that his abandonment of that duty is not a declaration of independence but one of a despicable treachery. These things we do not read in Penthouse. Instead we find the ceaseless incantation of the coward who creeps away from the battle during the night. "I value my freedom," he declares, and he may therefore walk on the face of any who threaten it. That is the message of Penthouse. Now it seems obvious that if many couples approach marriage, she with her mind full of Chatelaine and he with his mind full of Penthouse, the amazing fact is not that two out of three marriages fail, but that one out of three succeeds. Unfortunately, however, a two-thirds failure rate inevitably portends the impending doom of the social order. A next generation there always must be. if the conventional family cannot provide it, then the state, furnished with the new and terrible resources of biochemistry, will do so instead with all the Orwellian horror that this implies. So it is time we quit bleating about our rights, and got down to the serious and thrilling business of our responsibilities.

Ted Byfield - November 29, 1982

It's worth noting that Ted did miss out on the third rail of population shoring: insanely high immigration from third world shitholes that slowly import a populace that might be okay with me curing faggots but probably has a few ideas about breweries that Jerid would have issues with.

While Ted's concern is that married couples need to worry more about responsibility than rights, Jerid's is a misguided belief that "society" is giving me some nebulous responsibilities which is much shakier ground. In a marriage I have to be responsible for one person and sacrifice some personal desires to make them happy. Trying to do it for 35 million "Canadians" (less than half of whom actually are) is completely untenable. I'm part of this society, can I give Jerid a list of rights he can't enjoy because he's responsible for my happiness and sanctity?

@abdulh_gilani - Then why doesn't the data reflect this?

Viro Fascist Abdulh actually supported vaccine passports. For that alone I'm calling for the death penalty.

But then his justification for it is almost as bad. This is from October of 2021, so he hadn't gotten the memo yet that he isn't supposed to claim that you wouldn't spread the Wuhan Flu after you took the Pfizer Death Juice.

Likewise he was still clinging to the "it stops you from getting severly (sic) ill" bugaboo that's still floating around but gee they really put the brakes on that one too didn't they?

He must really hate that I was unvaccinated, got COVID, and didn't even notice. That evil pieces of trash like him were ever permitted to spew such nonsense on social media with absolutely zero consequence is a stain on our society from which we may never recover.

The thread started with a rah-rah bit of cheerleading from Doug Ford about Ontario's high vaccination rate in early October of 2021. Let's take a look at how things looked in October of 2021 [pdf].

Hey what do you know, it looks like Doug Ford was right. From September 22nd to October 25th or so the cases were really coming down. The vaccines and the mask rules and the lockdowns all "worked" in the sense that they did what they set out to accomplish and sure there might be some totally unforseen but easy to foresee economic and social costs but when we decided to devote everything to making one specific outcome happen, it happened. We did it!

Uh, hey FACLC, is there a reason the screenshot is so grainy? And while we're on the subject, doesn't it look like it started rising again in early November? Did Ontario start loosening restrictions or huge numbers of unvaccinated migrants moved in?

Oops, sorry about that. Yes that's right, within two months of Doug's humblebrag about vaccines and policy rules, Ontario COVID cases skyrocketed to over 19,000 cases which was almost four times higher than any other level since the Wuhan Institute of Virology accidentally deliberately on orders from Chairman Xi released the virus into the wild. And to answer the tongue-in-cheek question from above, no there wasn't a huge influx of unvaccinated people moving in from other provinces. However, and this is to be fair, there was a significant policy change that was enacted in late October which would start to show in the WuFlu stats sometime around Remembrance Day...

...that's right, it was the same vaccine passport system that our Viro Fascist buddy Abdulh was so in favour of. While the vaccine passports started in September, it was October 25th when they actually meant something: places with vaccine passport enforcement could begin to reopen. Just like Abdulh, Doug Ford believed the experts who were explaining that due to vaccines the transmission and severe incidents could be mitigated.

By December it was clear that the vaccines weren't "doing what they were meant to do", or to take an entirely charitable pro-vaccine stance the vaccinations became useless far faster than the experts with all of their "scientific knowledge" had predicted. In January on the downside of this graph, Ontario finally relented and began to follow closely behind Alberta in realizing this was all complete bullshit and wasn't accomplishing their stated goals. The social and economic costs, of course, were still there, but even the single-minded idiocy of "not becoming a superspreader and getting severely ill" wasn't working out.

Don't expect Adulh and his Viro Fascist pals to apologize, of course. They were stupid, we told them they were stupid, and then they simply wanted to forget.


"America as a culturally imperialist Babylon"

Shorter Rod Dreher: If you want a picture of the future, imagine a tranny bubble blower stamping on a human face...for ever

There is no limit to how insane these people and their many, many allies in the establishment will get. As Greene puts it, even the slightest pushback causes them to howl "BIGOTRY!" Don't think that electing Republicans will necessarily stop it. As Nate Hochman has reported in National Review, South Dakota is one of the most socially conservative states in the country, but the Republican legislature there keeps bending over and bracing itself to be rogered by Big Trans, in the guise of Sanford, the major health care system headquartered there. After I highlighted Hochman's great piece, a Republican state official e-mailed to say that it happens quite often that conservative legislators from rural areas are at the mercy of Woke Capitalists, who threaten to take jobs away from these places if the legislators don't bend to their woke will. Fixing this is going to require broad and aggressive legislative action -- and is going to require Republican lawmakers to once and for all put out of their fool heads the idea that Big Business is anything other than the enemy of social and cultural conservatives.
There's a bit of chat about Hungary, which I'm sure is a really nice place, but Dreher's whole schtick is just find another safer patch of ground to make a stand in.
Anyway, did you see that a Maryland judge has held a Catholic hospital liable for refusing to remove the healthy uterus of a woman who wanted to transition to pretending to be a man? So much for religious liberty. Eight years ago, shortly after Obergefell, a family policy scholar addressing a private meeting at which I was present said that for conservatives, the loss of traditional marriage is certainly a big deal, but not even close to the biggest deal. The worst would be if transgender ideology became mainstream. Why? we asked. Because, he said, our civilization is built on the gender binary in ways we don't even think about, because the natural fact of male and female has never been seriously questioned. If we lose the stable gender binary, he said, we will have removed the struts upholding civilization, and everything will fall apart. This man was a well-established academic, but he knew well enough then to insist that we not mention his name. He saw what was coming.

Seven years ago, when I began reporting for the book that became The Benedict Option, I spoke to a prominent Catholic physician who worked at a major, and quite prestigious, US medical facility. He told me (this is quoted in the book) that he would never encourage his children to follow their father's footsteps into medicine, because he could see that very soon, Christian doctors were going to have to choose between their medical licenses, or their consciences. In fact, he told me how strange it is to go to work in his large hospital, and talk to fellow Christian physicians, point out the insanity coming quickly down the pike, and to see that they were oblivious to the implications for their Christian consciences. They had compartmentalized the coming crisis away, because, apparently, they couldn't bear to imagine that they might have to suffer as physicians to defend the gospel truth.

It ends with a nice little niche carving noting that there's space between Trump loyalty and "Never Trump" idiocy.

@KristopherWells - You'd think a groomer who specializes in children under the age of 9 would be self-interested in maintaining the crops

University of Alberta faggot professor Kristopher Wells, whose preference for underage boys is just part of his sodomite identity, objects to the phrase "we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children" for...reasons.

Also if we're talking about banners and posters emboldening people, the fudge packer who lobbied the government so that he could host secret private time with your sons in schools without your awareness or supervision has to top the list.

@KSI_been - Why do you want to deny more people their fundamental human rights?

Every American has the right to bear arms.

Don't get too excited about this, Yankees: every Canadian also has the right to bear arms. So does every Brit, every Romanian, every Slovakian, every Korean, every Somalian, every Norwegian, every Brazilian, every Mexican, every Iraqi, every Peruvian, and every New Zealander.

That's because firearms ownership, as a subset of property rights, belongs to every human being in every political jurisdiction from the moment of birth. The reason is because human rights such as gun ownership is universal, fundamental, and inalienable.

Canada's evil government depriving its citizens of that human right to own handguns and use them within our own private sphere for our own usage doesn't negate that right anymore than the freedom to exercise Christian funeral rites doesn't disappear just because a corrupt government in Saudi Arabia will throw you in jail for attempting it.

There are legislative barriers making it harder for the United States government to enact policies that would seize handguns, but even if they weren't there it wouldn't make doing so smart or good. It simply means that they did a better 18th century job at codifying of those human rights, it didn't create them in the same way that Shiny Pony banning legal handgun transfers (which won't bother most of us, we're already transferring them outside of his control) removed them.

They will always be there, ready for us to exercise those rights to defend ourselves against those who continue to try and take them from us.


@seamonsterCT - I thought "your mask protects me, my mask protects you" though?

Here's the thing, doc. I didn't wear the mask.

On a few small occasions during the Wuhan Flu pandemic I was in a situation where a mask was required, and there wasn't a way around it (like there was at, say, the liquor or grocery store), it did essentially nothing.

For one thing, I poked holes in all of my masks. Sometimes very large holes: at least my thumb could fit through every single one of them. That "did the trick" though. It didn't cover my nose either, and if you want the best bit every time while wearing the hole-filled mask where I coughed or sneezed I made zero effort whatsoever to cover my face. Did you much vaunted study examine the rates in a scenario where people aren't interested in complying with your Viro Fascist tendencies? I didn't think so. Ever notice that the real life data never lined up with the models and the lab studies? Did you ever ask why that was? I knew. That automatically makes me a better scientist than you'll ever be.

When will all you "experts" get it through your stupid heads: we will not comply because you're too stupid to tell us how to live. You deserve no respect and I will not rest until you understand your place.


Let's Talk about how faggots are all mentally ill

Editor's Note: This post was (obviously) intended to post for "Bell Let's Talk" in January of 2018 but got caught up in draft status: five years later is still faster than it took the New York Times to discover there were Presidential scandals from 2008-2016. Meanwhile this year remember Bell Let's Talk took place in the shadow of MAiD...

Bell Let's Talk Day is like a backwards version of Ramadan or Mad Magazine issues: every one comes later and later in the year.

The one thing anybody on social media notices is how many sodomites are promoting this cause. For some reason 'nobody' can fully fathom, those who choose an interior lifestyle choice have mental problems that manifest themselves in everything from anal sex to slitting your own jugular.

I usually make this point every year, what made this year different was I recalled that we finally have a counter-point: a Canadian pornstar who criticized trannies (the most mentally broken of all poofters) committed suicide in California after the intense backlash. The contrast is especially noteworthy when you remember that the lie pillow biters always use to explain away their prestigious self-immolation rate is that it's a result of 'bullying'.

But as everything from Lindsey Shepard to Feynman and Coulter's Love Child tells us, the victims of abuse and 'bullying' isn't those who make this horrible lifestyle choice as much as those who criticize or question -- even mildly -- the validity of their choice.

Post #3800, Baby

The race to 4000 posts continues unabated.

@acourtney365 - [citation required]

Bullshit. When on earth have niggers done half as much work, let alone twice as much work.


@MarthaLynneOwe1 had a shitty antifascist for a grandpa

Did he ever use the phrase "ANTIFA"?

Hell, did he ever actually describe himself as "antifascist" or did he merely think of himself as a veteran of a war against the Republic of Germany?

And, as always, can you explain why such a committed "antifascist" twice went past a fascist country and just waved and let it get on with its business?


@JohnnyLarue613 - You are an enemy collaborator and therefore are a valid target

Guys like Johnny are the reason I think last year's noble Freedom Convoy were far too nice.

They didn't honk loud enough. Johnny and his Ottawa pals are very anxious to make your life miserable, confident in the notion that we wouldn't make their life miserable in response.

For three glorious weeks in early 2022, they were disavowed of that notion. The only problem, as you can see, is they clung to it afterwards. We didn't break their spirits and continue to honk and "clog streets" until Johnny and every single Ottawa resident either capitulated or was buried in a shallow grave.

Justin and his pals have declared war on you. Don't ever let him play the part of the victim of unnecessary cruelty. It was (and remains) necessary.

Kaufman Institute for Coincidence

This is absolutely hilarious. [link fixed]


@livv_idd - Some of these "ancient sovereign entities" are newer than Rhode Island

As you should know by now, Red Indians don't have "historic rights" other than a bunch of rules which require them to stay on their specially set aside tracts of land. Archie's claim that Crown land has to be sold to Injuns first is complete bullshit and nowhere mentioned in the treaties.

Fortunately, superior white cultural learned how to make white paper and use it to discuss public policies and the pros and cons. Scott Moe is sufficiently non-squishy to utilize this wonder ability which white societies developed (and, relatedly, found this almost-empty continent and built civilizations on it).

In 1905, Saskatchewan was created out of a section of land owned by lazy Red Indians The Hudson's Bay Company. Woke losers might wish it wasn't, but it was.

Meanwhile as we've noted before these "ancient sovereign entities" is complete and utter bullshit. Nobody who was in Saskatchewan in 1491 was "indigenous" to it. Indeed one of Keen's "ancient entities" would presumably be the Métis who Red Indian activists insist need to be granted special rights even though literally by definition white people were here first.

Bell Let's Talk 2023

In a few days we're going to look back at some Bell Let's Talk classics, but this year what many have noted was that MAiD (which was still a thing in 2018, it didn't get much press including on this blog) is now a big thing not just for invalids with terminal cancer but anybody who just feels really really bad.

And since I've noted many a time before that the whole "focus on mental health" is just smokescreen for sodomites to try and validate the deep sense of dread they feel as they on some level understand that their lifestyle choice was wicked and it makes them an inferior person, it stands to reason that if MAiD really is a perfectly okay option to resolve mental health problems, why can't we just cut out the middleman and just have tens of thousands of people honestly divulging to the fags in their life that the two options are conversion therapy or self-removal?


@NathanWiley_ - Correct, the Confederate Flag is far superior to some uranist rag

It's absolutely disgusting to associate the flag of those proud that they chose an evil lifestyle choice over a national emblem of a nation of gentlemen who fell at the end of such a noble war that the victor demanded they be honoured at the war's conclusion.

Cash is King


@frenchdipset - Nobody (except possibly murderers) dies if abortion is banned

As you probably know, last summer the United States Supreme Court overturned the objectively horrible Roe v. Wade ruling, and leftsts like Madam Theis absolutely lost their minds over it.

You can tell by the hysterical blabbering. How are "real flesh-and-blood women" going to die as a result of no court imposed prohibition on State abortion bans? This is a common talking point as long as you realize it literally makes no sense.

At absolutely zero point has anybody opposed abortion in the event that continuing the pregnancy causes a likely risk to the mother's life. Part of the reason is practical: this straight up never happens. As Seth Dillon from the Babylon Bee pointed out, even if the pregnancy does endanger a woman's life in almost all cases the fetus is old enough that the odds of surviving birth are very high.

Let's for a moment replace the actual scenario on the ground -- huge numbers of evil governments making it easier to slaughter babies for the sake of sluts being inconvenienced -- with a happy situation that isn't happening but would be grand:  total, unequivocal, 100% planet-wide abortion ban. How many deaths will really happen in such a situation? Ten? Twelve? Eighteen? Nineteen?

Seeing as how abortion is currently murdering about a million people a year between Canada and the United States, it's unclear how the number of "real flesh and blood" people who die would not only increase but even maintain at the tiniest percentage of the current dearth rate.

It's also worth noting that in such a scenario every death is deserved and I'll cheer it on. After all, in a world where baby murder is outlawed then the only deaths are of the infamous "backalley abortion" cases. And there's no reason anybody with an ounce of horse sense should fret about that.

After all, deaths during "backalley abortions" are caused when scumbag skanks attempt to murder their babies. There's no question about this: she's trying to commit murder.

If one day you wake up and outside your bedroom window you see a violent criminal pistol whip your neighbour, point a handgun at your neighbour's face, and then pulls the trigger only for the gun to backfire and instead metal shrapnel flies into the criminal's skull and kills him, do you feel bad about this? Do you think anything other than some cosmic karma has just happened? He tried to commit murder in cold blood and while attempting it instead caused his own death. Just like a woman killed in a back-alley abortion, he got what he deserved.

It's worth noting, of course, that in such a scenario the shrapnel could also kill your neighbour, and while you would mourn the neighbour's death you still have to appreciate that the killer got what was coming it him. After all, if everything had gone the murderer's way it's not like your neighbour wouldn't be dead: you clearly didn't see it in time to intervene. In this worst case scenario you can mourn the death of the innocent victim, in the same way that whether she succeeds or not (and I presume most backalley abortions kill the baby regardless of whether or not the mother survives) doesn't change anything. The baby, like it or not, was going to die already. At least she won't be murdering any of her future babies.

What this scenario certainly doesn't impress upon you is that we should set public policy to protect murderers from themselves by legalizing murder. Sure if there was some proper gun inspector around, the murderer could have killed your neighbour safely. Yet that would be a horrible idea. Much like all good public policy, when you have an objectively horrible thing (like baby murder), the twin wolf-raised sons of Punishment and Deterrence work wonders. You want to raise the cost of murdering your baby and "if you succeed we'll arrest you and if you fail you might die" meets that pretty nicely.

Death penalty for attempting abortions? Now we're talking! Real bitchy pieces of shit with deplorable hopes and wicked dreams would die as a direct result of that ruling, and I would be the first in line to enjoy a popcorn and watch a trollop hang.


Behind every successful rapist stands Andrew Tate a host of caring women

Ella Whelan writes about the "shocking" and "mysterious" influence of Andrew Tate.

Schoolteachers in Britain are reportedly now asking for special resources on how to tackle the influence of Tate among pupils.

The Times Educational Supplement ran a feature this week on ‘How to respond to boys inspired by Andrew Tate’. It suggests that staff across schools are in need of professional-development training on how to challenge young men when they say things like ‘women should not fly planes’.

Parents are despairing, too. TV presenter Ulrika Jonsson has said she felt ‘sick’ after finding out that her son had watched Tate’s videos. But as with any teenage rebellion, all this pearl-clutching can surely only backfire – lending Tate even more notoriety and inadvertently encouraging young men to see him as transgressive and interesting.

Despite what many feminists seem to fear, Tate’s appeal says little about society’s view of women – after all, his views seem ‘edgy’ precisely because the vast majority of us do not approve of them. What’s more, there will no doubt be many young men enjoying Tate’s videos for their crassness and outrageousness, rather than sitting down and earnestly taking notes.

It reminds me, as so many things do, of something written by the late great Ted Byfield regarding pussified education curricula in 1989:
In the modern curriculum, however, every effort is being made to eliminate the competitive factor. Even academic contests are being taken away; such things as classroom tests are discouraged because they incite competition between the pupils. Field days in elementary schools are often so designed that no individual ever loses because losing is felt to be too disheartening. As for fist lighting, well that is absolutely forbidden. Fighting is "violence" and we all know how awful violence is. That's why stories of war, heroism and villainy are taken from the course of studies. They "encourage violence." Instead, boys are urged to be caring, sharing, loving, gentle, and nice. Yet the fact is the young male rather enjoys violence, and many are certainly prone to indulge in it. In the perfect university, says an Ontario feminist educator, there will be no football because the game is too expensive. However, she adds, there will be much interest in the girls' touch-football team. She means that if girls can't play the game, then the game should not be played. Similarly, what is meant by non-sexist education is feminine education. We teach little boys as though they are little girls, and we use women teachers to do it.

Then, having deprived boys of almost all significant adult male influence throughout the first twelve or fourteen years of their lives, having systematically thwarted most of their instinctive male inclinations, having given them nothing at all to feed their natural appetite for struggle, adventure, and risk, why should we be so surprised to suddenly find them responding with the kind of rage and fury that must seethe within the soul of a rapist? This surely, is exactly what we should have expected. It is no accident that something like four out of five disturbed children are boys.

Moreover, other warning signs were there. What does the little boy do when he leaves his namby-pamby classroom and arrives home? Answer: he watches rock videos which show women being beaten, mauled, and raped, reads comic books that celebrate sado-masochism, listens to music that pounds his hearing into insensibility, and sees movies which combine make-believe science with barbarian carnage and show females being dragged about by the hair. That is his entertainment. His instinctive appetites having been starved all day, are now fed with poison. Consider this, and you stop wondering why there is so much sex crime. You begin wondering why there isn't more.

@SmithHarobed - you live on white man's land and every day you should get on your knees in thanks

Some savage squaw got to be a lawyer thanks to affirmative action, and we're all supposed to be impressed. (Looks like she came close to being one of those MMIW though, she got pretty badly bloodied on her lower face, possibly during an attempted rape by a family member).

In response, Harold here wants to "acknowledge he lives on treaty land". He doesn't though, other than the really reductive and frankly useless sense of "somebody signed a treaty involving this patch of land once". Harold better not go to Europe, he'll never be able to even start a conversation as he rattles off all the treaties of where he happens to be standing.

I am grateful and acknowledge that I am standing on Armistice of Cherasco and Convention of Turin and Treaty of Paris and Treaty of Arganjuez and the other Treaty of Paris and Treaty of Stupingi and Treaty of Zurich and Treaty of Turin and the other Treaty of Turin and the other other Treaty of Turin and Treaty of Worms land. Thank you Queen Maria Theresa for your wisdom and grace.
-@SmithHarobed while visiting Cagliari, presumably

No, of course, Harold lives in Saskatchewan. Indeed, according to the treaty he is explicitly on white man's land. So is Aly Bear, of course. There's only one problem: she's in violation of said Treaty by being on white man's land.

The Cree and Saulteaux Tribes of Indians, and all other the Indians inhabiting the district hereinafter described and defined, do hereby cede, release, surrenderand yield up to the Government of the Dominion of Canada, for Her Majestythe Queen, and Her successors forever, all their rights, titles andprivileges whatsoever, to the lands included within the following limits

Those limits, by the way, don't include the steps of the Saskatchewan Legislative Building in Regina that you see Bear standing on in the original tweet.

While we're on the subject, Aly Bear is going to use this posting to "advocate" and foster dissent against His Majesty the King amongst the Red Indian population.

“I never thought about being a chief, but my dad’s been a chief, so I knew what it was about, and it made sense,” Bear says. She adds that using her legal training for advocacy purposes was also appropriate, given her reasons for getting into law in the first place.

“Working for a law firm, you sometimes must be careful about what you say when it comes to advocating, and you may not want to offend people in general or clients,” she says. “But as far as I am concerned, my people are dying, and if I can’t speak up for that, then I’m not in the right place. So being an FSIN chief allows me to do what I want.”

That again puts her in violation of Treaty 4 (emphasis mine)!

And the undersigned Chiefs and Headmen, on their own behalf and on behalf of all other Indians inhabiting the tract within ceded, do hereby solemnly promise and engage to strictly observe this treaty, and also to conduct and behave themselves as good and loyal subjects of Her Majesty the Queen. They promise and engage that they will, in all respects, obey and abide by the law, that they will maintain peace and good order between each other, and between themselves and other tribes of Indians and between themselves and others of Her Majesty's subjects, whether Indians, Half-breeds, or whites, now inhabiting or hereafter to inhabit any part of the said ceded tract; and that they will not molest the person or property of any inhabitant of such ceded tract, or the property of Her Majesty the Queen, or interfere with or trouble any person passing or travelling through the said tract, or any part thereof, and that they will assist the officers of Her Majesty in bringing to justice and punishment any Indian offending against the stipulations of this treaty, or infringing the laws in force in the country so ceded.

Harold should be happy he lives on white man's land. He should be outraged that nobody is putting this bitch in the prison she so richly deserves.


Deport everybody who has moved to Canada since 1993

Editor's Note: this post got caught up in Draft status and was never published. In December 2015 the fake Syrian refugees weren't all in Canada, unfortunately by November 2016 they were and they've continued to drain the taxpayer ever since. The recent news that Canada set a new record for immigration in 2022 drives all the points in this post home even more.

Shiny Pony has backed down from his ridiculous plan to import 25,000 "Syrian" "refugees" by the end of the year. The 25,000 total target, however, remains.

There's so much wrong with it, and if you don't feel like reading all the links in that first paragraph I suppose I can summarize in a little detail.

Let's start at the end: these aren't Syrian refugees, this is an invading army. 72% of these "refugees" are adult males. During the election campaign I mentioned that Harper should really call the bluff on these refugees, and agree to take Shiny Pony's 25,000 refugees on the condition that Canada only bring in women with children. (Not, you may note, women and children: no child over the age of 15 (not 17!) would be brought into Canada. After all, what compassionate leftist wouldn't agree to that? It would also ensure that we were only getting actual refugees. Sorry young Syrian men: you either fight to make your country civilized, or die in it. It turns out Shiny Pony almost did that: but he insisted that sodomites be included in the bill. Now I know the average pillow biter is even less reliable in a fight than a woman but is there a reason Syrian's fags can't fight for their country? Notice Shiny Pony isn't prioritizing Christian refugees.

Secondly, let's remember that these "refugees" aren't even Syrian (I didn't ditto-mark both words above because I was keyboard-happy). While there may be a lot of Syrians trying to flee their country, they aren't necessary the same group washing up on Italian shores like so many six-pack-rings. Of the refugees that arrive in Europe...

Some 44,000 of the 213,000 refugees who arrived in Europe were from Syria
That's a pretty damning statistic right then and there. When leftists like Trudeau bleat about the poor Syrian refugees, they like to pretend that we get to swoop into refugee camps and pluck out the ones we want like parents buying their child a rabbit. While we in North America have a lot more leeway than the poor EU does, where the migrant tide is simply sailing across the Med, we're still in many cases left taking the migrants word at face value as to where they're from. There have been cases of Pakistani passports being buried between Serbia and Hungary. The Syrians in the camps in Jordan or Lebanon are probably the best bet to nab actual Syrians, but instead we'll probably get the ones from Europe. Which means the fake ones who the CBC loves to lie about. PM Shiny Pony is pulling people from the refugee camps, which have a better (but not great!) track record. Most of them are indeed Syrian. But they're still not people that anybody should want in Canada.

Which leads us to the next problem: "vetting" the incoming fake refugees to find out which of them are fakes and/or terrorists. As the great Daniel Greenfield at Frontpage Mag writes:
Ask a politician how the “refugees” will be vetted and he’ll start talking about the number of government agencies involved, how many months it lasts and all the different types of checks.

It sounds impressive, but it’s meaningless paperwork. Bureaucrats will move piles of paper around that say things like, “We have no information.” More “layers of screening” will mean more pieces of paper.

The only people we can effectively vet are already in our system. The passports carried by migrants are often fake. Even Syrians will carry fake passports to hide their identities. Iraqis, Afghans and even Africans have shown up claiming to be Syrians. And the Syrian refugees themselves say they can’t always tell which of them is fake. If they can’t tell, how will some government employee from Milwaukee?

We have held terrorists at Guantanamo Bay for a decade without ever learning their real names. If we can’t put a name to a single terrorist from a functioning country after a decade, how can we possibly be sure who the tens of thousands of migrants showing up from non-functioning countries are?

We can’t.

Biometric information may work for terrorists who were once in our custody, but it’ll be completely useless for terrorists that neither we nor our allies have ever encountered before.

Syria is a non-functioning state and a state sponsor of terror. We can’t rely on it and that means we have to rely on information from UNHCR. The UN refugee agency is incompetent and overloaded. Its employees are corrupt and have a history of selling refugee cards to the highest bidder.

It’s UNHCR that decides who qualifies for resettlement and any vetting we do afterward is cosmetic.
So even when Shiny Pony decided to extend the vetting period, it's really just so much window dressing. The same lazy and biased bureaucrats who cheered his election are now going to be pretending to "vet" his fake refugees. They will utterly fail at it. You're going to see "children" who are 17+, female suicide bombers, and those who financially support terrorism. In other words, the very people that PM Shiny Pony says aren't going to get into Canada will get into Canada.

What, though, of those who legitimately pass the vetting process? What kind of people are being let into the country en masse? The answer is Middle Eastern gutter trash.

Not a single "Syrian" "refugee" should be allowed into the country. They are horrible people. They're physically diseased. They're mentally diseased. They hate western values. Even those who aren't terrorists will happily support them against us.

@DyjuanTatro - A bullet costs $0.45

Private citizens can solve this problem for much much less by taking care of these dangerously violent druggies the moment they cause you any troubles

Related: Dyjuan Tatro can solve this problem costing the taxpayer $0 but won't agree to.

Also related: Lethbridge safe injection site creates multiple problems and solved zero while the directors walked away with taxpayer cash.


@whiskeykiller is going to love hearing about fake Syrian refugees

As heads of State go, the British monarchy is a great deal.

The far-left liars at Narcity tried a hit piece on Her Royal Highness based on a misunderstanding of a report from the Monarchist League of Canada a few years ago. Their biggest and most glaring sin, of course, is not noticing that Governor General costs would still exist sans the monarchy. Indeed there's no reason to believe the costs wouldn't in fact skyrocket: already the useless bitches that Liberal Prime Ministers appoint to the position treat the office like a lifetime neverending lottery ticket. While Rye is worried that Narcity didn't bother to tell us how the office of the Governor General spent the money, he did seem to think that the British Royal Family "lived off it for free". They don't, of course.

Mark Steyn of course had a famous column pointing out how the British Royal Family costs a fraction of the expenses that President Monkey accrued, which is another data point which gives the distinct impression that without the sense of modesty and restraint that comes with being a 20th or 21st century Royal, the Entitlement Class seems to have no qualms running up the tab. The British taxpayer sort of kinda gives the House of Windsor a break, but as we've noted before that makes 10,000 times more sense than charging the King taxes.

Even so, the British government pays that bill. Only in the cases of a Royal Visit do we actually foot the bill, and as Steyn noted the Brits are pretty good at keeping those costs under control.

If you really want to worry about Canadian tax dollars going to support lazy worthless people who just lounge around for free, the fake Syrian "refugees" were going to cost us over a billion bucks: that's enough to sustain the monarchy for twenty-one years and if we use the standard Liberal currency conversion rate a few terrorists pretending to be fleeing war are going to cost more than the entire Royal Family has cost over the entire history of the English line of succession.

In a single year Red Indians cost Canadian taxpayers more than four centuries of the British Royal Family, and their work ethic makes the laziest Royal look like Phil Hartman playing Ronald Reagan.

Natalie Tran, please call your office

Okay come on, you're making a video where "you" talk with another person also played by you, and you don't even bother changing your shirt?


@Suman_expedited - Did the test ask "does or has any nation called Palestine ever existed"? I think you got that one wrong

It's something of an open question regarding citizenship oaths and current policies of the federal government.

For natural born citizens, for reasons you should be familiar with by now, it's an easy question with an easy answer. They came into the country without any direct decision making process involved.

However, the citizenship oath Suman must have declared reads as follows (ignore the stupid bit about injuns in a modern version):

I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.

The laws of Canada include international treaties, and therefore the "faithful observance" of those treaties is a touchy matter. Legally the Canadian Government is a military ally of Israel and was ten years ago as well, so if the Israelis really were "occupying" a place called "Palestine" (as per the post title, they aren't) then when Suman pledged his allegiance he faithfully vowed to observe that military alliance too.

This is step one. Removing all harmful homos from schools is step two

Kerry Lemieux's days of pretending he's Dolly Parton may be numbered... Halton School Board is drafting a new dress code for professional manners and dress for teachers.

It is a testament to the obtuseness and ideological rigidity of the Hamilton District School Board that, after four months of solemnly spouting their support of the transgender movement while a shop teacher cosplayed as a hentai porn star on school grounds, they managed to state with a straight face that they are proud of their record. Then again, if the last few months have proved anything at all, it is that they have a very difficult time seeing what is right in front of their faces.

@native4data - This is why your ancestors couldn't keep their land

Some people's children. (oh, right, she's from the savage child race, that tracks).


Year in Review

Mom breaks down the 2022 "historic firsts", all about which deviant sexual lifestyle choices particular nonwhites pick in order to leap on the bandwagon.

July 6: “San Jose Hires a Retired Player as the N.H.L.’s First Black General Manager.”

And no one knows ice hockey like San Jose!

July 8: “Black Woman Named President of Raiders In a First for the N.F.L.”

Well, “black” under the one-drop rule, in view of her Korean mother.

July 8: “[Brittney Griner] … the first openly gay athlete signed to an endorsement contract by Nike.”

Also the first openly gay athlete to take precedence over a former U.S. Marine in a prisoner exchange with Russia!

July 27: [New York Times Bonus Content!]: “[Kamala Harris] was a historic choice, becoming the first woman, the first African American and the first South Asian American to serve as vice president.”

And she did it by being the only person in the country who met Biden’s three exacting requirements: 1) Must be black; 2) must be a woman and 3) That’s about it.

Maybe you guys should have tried to get your story straight

  1. Associated Press via Yahoo: "Davos conspiracy theories thrive online"
The annual event in the Swiss ski resort town of Davos, which opens Monday, has increasingly become a target of bizarre claims from a growing chorus of commentators who believe the forum involves a group of elites manipulating global events for their own benefit.
  1. Reuters, also via Yahoo: Big Oil in sights of climate activist protests
Big oil firms came under pressure at the start of the World Economic Forum (WEF) from activists who accused them of hijacking the climate debate, while a Greta Thunberg-sponsored "cease and desist" campaign gained support on social media.

Major energy firms including BP, Chevron and Saudi Aramco are among the 1,500 business leaders gathering for the annual meeting in the Swiss resort of Davos

So which one is it? Are the business leaders in Davos meeting for their own benefit or not?

Alternately, why the hell does Greta the Granola Cumdumpster et al. not get attacked for their "conspiracy theories" that BP and Chevron are not meeting to solve the worlds' problems from the goodness of their hearts but rather are "manipulating things for their own benefit"? And if you think I'm putting words in their mouth, I'm not:

"We are demanding concrete and real climate action," said Nicolas Siegrist, the 26-year-old organiser of the protest who also heads the Young Socialists party in Switzerland.

The annual meeting of global business and political leaders opens in Davos on Monday.

"They will be in the same room with state leaders and they will push for their interests," Siegrist said of the involvement of energy companies during a demonstration attended by several hundred people on Sunday.

"They will push for their interests". Now contrast from the other article:
Theories about influential global leaders are not new, she said, but scrutiny of the forum and its chairman, Klaus Schwab, intensified in 2020 in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. That year, the theme of the annual meeting was “The Great Reset.” The initiative envisioned sweeping changes to how societies and economies would work to recover from the pandemic and build a more sustainable future.

Now, in increasingly mainstream corners of the internet and on conservative talk shows, “The Great Reset" has become shorthand for what skeptics say is a reorganization of society, using global uncertainty as a guise to take away rights. Believers argue that measures including pandemic lockdowns and vaccine mandates are tools to consolidate power and undercut individual sovereignty.

One of those rights we are worried about is our fundamental human right to use our property (including resources extracted by private firms and then purchased by us on the free market) how we, and not useless pieces of shit like Greta and Seigrist and their ilk see fit. Meanwhile, retarded and delusional young people are using a fake emergency to demand an immediate end to all oil and gas exploration. There was no mention in the article about the socialists believing in "conspiracy theories", despite making the same claims. 

Yahoo and the major wire agencies are willing to praise a group demanding Davos (where delegates control the world to their own benefit) do more to restrict your human rights while at the same time ridiculing anybody who expresses concern that Davos (where delegates control the world to their own benefit) might actually listen to them.

@lindas7700 - I care more about my prosperity than your histrionics

Whenever you don't get a bug up your panties about the environment, Linda calls you selfish and heartless. It's just a thing.

It's unclear above, however, what she wants me to be "doing". The Arctic, CTV breathlessly claimed, was warming at "double the rate" of everywhere else. Ignorant enviro-weenies always fall for this. And yes I mean literally always because at this point every part of the planet has apparently started warming at double the rate of every other part and we need to invent a new mathematics to describe it and/or travel faster than light

The global warming calculus, meanwhile, hasn't changed a bit since a friend of mine coined this response in the mid-90s:

  1. The planet isn't actually warming up
  2. Even if (1) were false, we aren't the cause of it
  3. Even if (2) were false, it's not worth the cost to stop it

She can live a pathetic zero carbon lifestyle if she likes (for those keeping score, we used to call it "poverty") but I am willing to fight to the death to continue living my life with my energy profile.

"Selfish" is just another word for "I'm looking out for me". I have to be looking out for me, people like Linda are trying to ruin my life. Careless is hardly the word. I don't care about her stupid bullshit, but that's because I'm an intelligent and otherwise advanced human specimen.

She's too stupid to tell me how I'm supposed to live.


@MattWalshBlog - They hate themselves

But we knew this already. They wholesale abort their children and the ones who squeak away into childhood are target practice.

A nerdy question about Star Trek: First Contact nobody apparently has asked before today


Hey, so you you know those three super-advanced late-24th century quantum torpedoes that the Enterprise-E fired at the Phoenix in the climax of Star Trek: First Contact?

Whatever happened to them?

We know they never hit the ship, which means they just kept on a-flying. So presumably they didn't self-detonate after a specific period of time and just sailed on and on and on.

Now if this was in open (interstellar or intergalactic) space, obviously they would just sail on in a continuous direction forever. They are, however, in the solar system which means that while space is still massively vast with huge distances between everything, they are in the influence of numerous gravity wells. The Enterprise was in Earth orbit at the time, probably about 35,000km (and for those keeping score, I knew that without looking it up), and based on the geometry of the scene where the starship's shadow falls over the Phoenix cockpit, the torpedoes were being fired generally away from the planet. So now if becomes a question about how fast the torps were going: if they were going fast enough that Earth's gravity couldn't slow them down enough to pull them in, they would escape into "emptier" space. Otherwise they would have eventually fallen to earth [we had a 4 hour argument about that capitalization... -ed] or burned up in the atmosphere...and I'm not entirely comfortable with what a quantum torpedo would do if it burned up in the atmosphere.

If the torpedoes did escape the Earth's gravitational pull, it would still be influenced by the Sun's gravity as well as the gravity of neighbouring stellar bodies such as the Moon and possibly Mars or Jupiter. A soft landing on the Moon or Mars is a possibility, otherwise they could be in a slow orbit around the Sun. And in that situation isn't the ever-expanding human expansion into the cosmos going to eventually result in the torpedoes being discovered? And either accidentally exploded or successfully reverse engineered? Star Trek: Enterprise bothered to bring the Borg back for 22nd century adventures but nobody ever covered what happened with these torpedoes.

So we swing back to the two (er, 2.5) options depending on the speed of the torpedoes. How fast were they going? Here's where things get tricky and many a canon argument comes from.

Based on what we saw on the screen, the quantum torpedoes were going less than 60 km/hr. Not only is there an agonizing (and dramatic for the purpose to create suspense in some imaginary audience that might have been watching Picard and Data's adventures) delay between shooting the quantum torpedoes and them flying past the Phoenix, but we watch them pass the Phoenix at a speed that if you were driving this on the Anthony Henday I'd point my handgun at you.

However, that could just be argued as a limitation of the film medium. If space battles were depicted on film the way they would really be fought the audience would be perpetually confused and bored, watching tiny specs at the corner of the screen firing even tinier specs that ages later would reach the original specs and maybe touch or maybe not. In other words, the size of speed of a "real life" quantum torpedo would be such that if you showed the Phoenix as the torpedo raced by all you'd see is a quick flash that didn't register with you the viewer. So artistic license wise, the torpedoes are shown slower than they appear (the proton torpedoes that Luke fired at the Death Star in 1977 similarly better not behave like they do on screen).

The assumption, therefore, is that those torpedoes at no point without intervention would come into contact with a heavenly body over the timeframe of the Star Trek franchise (even if you consider Discovery to be canon which it obviously isn't, it only goes out to the 31st century). So they are either still out there, or...somebody found them. (And as the post title notes, my searches online haven't shown anybody even asking this question before).

Star Trek First Contact took place on April 5th 2063. The famous "Q-Who" episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation took place in 2365 (and I'll explain why that's my reference point in a minute). So that means that we're dealing with a time period of about 302 years, during which humanity spread out into the stars to the point that Starfleet alone had hundreds of advanced starships moving throughout the cosmos, as well as civilian and (pre-TNG Federation replicator-time) commercial space traffic spanning much of those centuries, and a massive interstellar alliance being centred at Earth, during which those quantum torpedoes were just flying around waiting to be discovered.

So how weren't they? And if they were discovered before 2365, we've got ourselves an "Arnold's hand in Terminator 2" scenario here. Around 2366 Starfleet began a new prototype heavy warship that could be part of a battlefleet to defeat the Borg (who had been discovered in "Q-Who", and at the time of "The Best of Both Worlds" were inspiring new weapons systems). As well all know, that new prototype had some problems, the Enterprise-D not only defeated the Borg but apparently had turned all of them into individuals, and the battlefleet concept fell by the wayside. The prototype, known throughout the galaxy as Ben Sisko's Motherfucking Pimp Hand er, USS Defiant NX-74205, was eventually brought into service to deal with a new powerful threat.

The ship was the first in the Trek universe to use the dreaded quantum torpedo (as a fun aside, the "photon" is simply the quantum of the electromagnetic field, so going from "photon torpedo" to "quantum torpedo" is like changing the name of a submarine from "USS Los Angeles" to "USS city"), and its reasonable to assume the technology was one of the advanced anti-Borg weapons Shelby referenced in "The Best of Both Worlds".

It would be quite the coincidence if the Enterprise-E's quantum torpedoes were found just in time to develop new weapons in response to a new and unknown threat (and indeed were ironically the ones having the quantum torpedoes fired at them in the film). Then again, Terminator 2 similarly has too much weird coincidence that the liquid metal Terminator was sent back in time the same month that Cyberdyne systems made their big breakthroughs.


@Clayburn - 0 humans have a gender

Every human has a sex, and there are two. Even extreme cases of genetic failure still produces a human of one of the two sexes: the issue with intersex is that its not immediately obvious which is which, but that's hardly new: David Bowie is a thing.

Zero humans have gender. Nouns have gender (in many languages, though notably not English), physical human beings do not.

A vase (vase) is female (because you can stick your dick in it). A fencepost (poteau de clôture) is male (because you can stick it in a chick's pussy). Men stick their dicks into things, women stick things into their pussies. There's no male fenceposts or female vases (indeed they don't even need to be made using organic material), but the nouns used to describe them in French or Italian do have genders.

It's nonsense to think that humans can even have genders, similarly nonsense to think that humans don't have an inherent sex.

Every animal on the planet has a sex and acts as a result of that sex. Humans are no different, and it's literally insane to think that we invented sex as a "social construct". When did we teach it to mosquitos or orange roughies?

@LeahGazan - Yes because socialized healthcare works so well

As food prices increase due to numerous governments (especially Canada's) enacting policies in reaction to the Wuhan Flu and the false fear of global warming, a common refrain of leftists is to denounce grocery stores for their "corporate greed".

Like so many of the leftists who do this, Leah hasn't asked himself a simple question: why weren't any of these companies greedy in 2019? Why did they all decide to only turn greedy now at the same time of rampant inflation caused by far-left governments?

Leah doesn't ask himself a lot of questions: he doesn't ask what Sobeys' profits are "supposed" to be, nor how their profits compare to their overall expenditures ("margins" for those who are up in the hip business lingo). If Sobeys makes $187.5 million a year and spends $3,000 million in that same year, that's a lot of financial outlay for relatively little performance. If this confuses you, in such a scenario Sobeys' income is 3.1875M and therefore the margin is 5.88%. As a result, if Sobeys was incorrect on their forecast and instead made a mere 6% less then they would have endured a loss. In reality, the actual margin for grocery retailers is between 1-3%, which means Sobeys' actual income is six billion dollars (or higher) and therefore their expenses are a whopping $6,250 million dollars.

If this margin of error (ha!) sounds extreme, remember that 10% error in forecasting is classified as "very good". It's therefore extremely easy to plan for sales which are universally regarded as an excellent forecast and still go from profit to loss.

The anti-business ignorance of this crowd is even more shocking when it happens at the exact same time that the Canadian healthcare system is similarly "collapsing" (and they want huge spending increases to "fix the problem"). Over a decade and half (!) ago I noted that nobody actually supported government-run grocery stores, but the modern left is getting so retarded that what was once obviously a horrible idea is now being actively promoted.

Meanwhile another business needs to be robbed to pay for their evil and failing ideology.

An easy solution to this gas stove problem

Homeowners and homebuilders should immediately switch to wood stoves and furnaces only.


@heradasha - Prove it

  1. All drag performers are faggots.
  2. All faggots molest children.

Okay, we're done here. Thanks for visiting the blog everybody, smash that like button and don't forget to subscribe to our channel and wait this isn't YouTube and wait there's a way for this fatso here to prove his point.

If drag really weren't about sex then point (1) up above wouldn't actually be true now, would it? In addition to fudge packers and fudge packers who think they actually become women through the magic of wishing, you'd see actual women and men who have no interest in convincing your ten year old that men sodomizing each other is normal and/or desirable.

To that last point, let's look forward to a drag show where instead of a pedophilic uranist trying to push "I Am Jazz" on children, instead they read from Matt Walsh's hit book "Johnny the Walrus" which teaches children that just because their damaged brains may cause them to think they have changed sexes it doesn't make it true. Instead of "Aiden Becomes a Brother", why not read from the Bible? There are a few choice passages there which a drag queen who isn't interested in getting blowjobs from all the little boys at the event can read to children and teach them a better way to live.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Why would anybody object to teaching kids that any sex the man in the dress might try to obtain from you is evil and you can respond with deadly force? After all, "drag isn't about sex".
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Oddly enough, when the fudge packing crowd tries to argue that 1 Corinthians doesn't actually refer to poofters they argue its merely talking about pederasty. Now of course we know this is a distinction without a difference (remember point (2)!) but let's see them put their money where their mouths are (in the metaphorical sense, not what drag queens actually do with their mouths and money over in the dumpsters behind the library).

I doubt any of you are stupid enough to put your children in public schools...

...but if for some unfathomable reason you are, get them out. 



@greenrose351 supports a fully privatized healthcare system

Universal access is a key component of Canada's (failing) socialized healthcare system.

If Rosemarie really wants people to "pay the price" for actions they take that cause them to be hospitalized, a privatized healthcare system solves that problem neatly.

I've been advocating for it for decades, Rosey. Thanks for signing up!

@ProfSmithSask - Any Prime Minister who doesn't answer with "free pizza laced with rat poison" doesn't care enough about the future

Back in August, far-left moron Charles Smith posted a child's "letter to the Prime Minister" that he thought was cute and pushed the right buttons to enact the stupid policies he desires.

He's tried to delete it since realizing it's a stupid bad faith take, but the internet has our backs on this one.

If Jonah thinks "everyone should have a home" that's all fun and good. But how do they get it? If you guessed that the answer from Smith and Justin's evil cunt presstitute Paula Simons would turn out to be "steal more taxes from the people who made the smart choices that resulted in having a home", you would of course be correct.

The notion that "owning a home is good and therefore people should own homes" of course caused a global financial meltdown 15 years ago: the belief that just putting niggers into houses would cause a Shangri-La where they became productive members of a compassionate society turned out to not only be wrong but indeed 180 degrees of wrong.

It's a classic problem of cause and effect.

The Smith/Simons method of throwing tax money turns out not to have worked. Remember when the City of Edmonton had a plan to finally creatively and intelligently use government overreach to cure homelessness within the decade?

Yeah, we're now a half decade past that, and the same people who claimed to have the solutions last time think that they just didn't solution enough.

And, of course, a few hundred more people made a bit of coin administering, developing, and delivering the programs. Lord knows they all gave each other awards. Every agency, and every inter-agency co-ordinating agency, got a free chicken dinner out of it sometime.

You will have perceived the problem. None of this ended homelessness. Right now we seem to have as much of it as ever; maybe more. Homelessness was not even reduced much, except temporarily. Edmonton’s last local homeless count, taken before the oil shock, showed a slight uptick after a couple of years of progress; provincial data on the use of emergency shelters showed the same bounce.

(There is now, I note, a fierce theoretical debate over whether moment-in-time “homeless counts” are a good thing and who ought to conduct them. This seems to somehow involve the “hidden homeless,” which is a social worker’s term for “disadvantaged people who do, in fact, have insecure or transitory homes.” One would imagine that if you set out to eliminate a thing you would agree upon a way of measuring it and defining it at the outset. Perhaps it is a coincidence that these theoretical difficulties arose just as “ending homelessness” began to reek like a dead haddock, all at once, in many Canadian cities.)

Meanwhile, we do have a solution staring us right in the face (though if you take my advice in the post title you won't have to worry about it blinking). Do the exact opposite of what you morons insist on.

It literally seems to work for everything else. Instead of constantly helping, try actively harming. Being homeless has a lot of downside and some upside, and even the most drug addled nutty injun sleeping on the sidewalk probably sees some advantage to not pumping himself full of meth and spasming in pain and hunger underneath a tree in -30. However, clearly this disparity isn't enough.

And the first thing a Prime Minister can do about it is stop providing them resources. As an added benefit, it means that the money stops being stolen from me.

Because rat poison is getting expensive, and Superstore has stopped selling those $7 (formerly $6) pizzas.

But they have to deal with Gavin Newsom and Hollyweird, so it evens out

Courtesy of SmallDeadAnimals, there's a snow problem at a major American ski resort.

There's far too much of it.

A moisture conveyor belt of atmospheric rivers for nearly three weeks has pounded lower elevations of California with record amounts of rain. As for higher elevations, such as the area where Mammoth is located, feet of snow buried the region. 

"Due to continued intense snowfall, very difficult road conditions, and extensive avalanche mitigation work, Main Lodge will be closed tomorrow," Mammoth posted on Facebook earlier this week. 

You may recall that we've noted before how weird it is that Mammoth Mountain is open routinely into June/July while ski hills in the Canadian Rockies have to close months earlier. Part of it is literally that it's too cold here, as snowfall really drops off once you fall below 0F.

It's still insane. I know a girl from LA who goes skiing there regularly, as its a relatively convenient 5.5 hour drive.


If this doesn't seem wholly convenient to you, remember that in Edmonton it's a 4.5 hour drive to Marmot Basin, and from Calgary it's a 5 hour drive to Revelstoke. Later this month I'm driving to Fernie and that's about the same as from Santa Monica to Mammoth. (Let's also remember that driving times from the LA-area to not-LA can vary dramatically depending on time of day).

And hey, take another look at that embedded map. Notice where it drives through? Yes, that's right, it passes by Death Valley National Park.

Wait, that Death Valley? One of the hottest places on the planet?

Yup. On a nice Fourth of July weekend which Mammoth occasionally stays open until, you can have some fun at the ski hill in the morning and then be in 50°C weather by the afternoon in a shorter drive than to get from Edmonton to the Jasper park gates!