103 Replies to “April 1, 2023: Reader Tips”

    1. Funny how the Guardian found it was just fine when the Soviet Union was in charge of the UN Security Council.

      1. Or when Zimbabwe was leading the Human Rights Committee or when Lybia did or so many other examples.

        1. I can’t find the video. It was the Libyan UNHR ambassador kept interrupting a presentation on Libyan human rights abuses. Every time the guy would speak she would start banging her gavel.

  2. Just in time for April Fool’s Day, Erin O’Fool announced his retirement and no one thanked him for his service or wished him well. Did the Conservatives suddenly notice that he’s the biggest warmonger in Canadian history, or did he make a mistake by planting himself in the middle of the China interference story that could still blow up in his face? He seemed to be advocating for World War III even before the war in Ukraine started, so good riddance.

  3. Chubby parliamentarian Karen asks, Would Pierre Poilievre wish to “backtrack or apologize on characterizing the CRTC as a small group of privileged insiders closest to the Prime Minister. I would also ask him if he would like to define Woke…”. He backtracks as expected…well, not exactly.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8RVjTvINFE

      1. And don’t forget, B-2, ‘Woke’ carries a commitment to denying reality.
        –
        –
        BTW, why are ‘Woke’ people (they/them/nutters) always angry, offended, and have zero sense of humor?

        Answer: Because reality refuses to cooperate with their utopian fantasies and that keeps the nutters in a perpetual 3-years-old tantrum mode.

        That’s no way to go through life.

        1. “‘Woke’ carries a commitment to denying reality” – yes, it sure does. Correcting the definition above, more accurately would be to define it as “trying to pass equity as equality”.

  4. Raising the bar of insanity: Russia loudly declares itself a “unique country-civilization”
    https://tass.com/politics/1597785

    I can only wish they would give up all that gay Euro-American technology and limit themselves to what they created without foreign influence: some shchi to guzzle and a pair of bast-shoes to guzzle with. Even vodka, they will have to give up – they had no distilleries before Peter I brought the technology from Poland, so they’ll have to get drunk on mead or something. Obviously, it’s impossible for them to actually give up vodka, so instead, they will claim everything as their own invention; they already claim they invented radio, television, light bulb, even built the first balloon and the first airplane (they don’t seem to have enough brainpower to wonder “if the Russians invented radio, why is it being called by a non-Russian word?”).

    In seriousness, I think we’re seeing the death throes of Ruϟϟischeschweinism (their present ideology, officially called “Russian World”). It’s basically a collection of lies and self-contradiction held together by flattery, now reaching the point where the lies become so absurd they actually make it less popular, but that’s forcing even more absurd lies to appear.

    1. Well they are “unique” , just don’t really have much in common with anything resembling civilization.

      1. They do have what they copied or purchased, that’s the point. Ruϟϟischeschweinism is, basically, a cover for their inferiority complex (they have no substantial achievements are actually quite insignificant), but now in the wake of their poor performance in Ukraine it’s got too much to cover and is tearing itself.

        2. For some reason my earlier comment disappeared, but the point is that if you write Russia “have no substantial achievements”, you simply are laughably uninformed.
          Look at the contributions from Russia in math, science, literature, music, chess, .. it’s extremely impressive.
          (Compare that to Canada/Ukraine/Poland/whatever – not many nations can match Russia’s contributions.)
          /Johan

          1. No, I’m not “laughably uninformed”, I’m just not sold on the Ruϟϟischeschweinen propaganda, according to which Mendeleyev (or Lomonosov) is an equal (or superior) to Newton, Lobachevsky is an equal (or superior) to Einstein, etc., etc. The most prominent Russian literary figure is actually Vladimir Lenin (can provide proof if needed), which says a lot about the rest. “Music, chess” is completely ridiculous; tell me, who set the standards? What in the rules of chess or the musical notation is of Russian origin?

          3. Mendeleev made the OG periodic table. Okay that was pretty important though later iterations were better.

            Dostoyevsky is one of literature’s greatest. Ayn Rand is history’s best philosopher….and she hated her homeland.

            Lysenko was a quack…but there’s growing evidence that Lysenkoism is not completely wrong. And uh….Lobachevsky.

            Slim pickings for ‘Russian Greatness’.

          4. Mendeleyev was not the first to arrange elements according to their atomic mass, he was just the first who got widely noticed and in any case, it’s not an achievement that sets you among the greatest.

          5. “Ayn Rand is history’s best philosopher….”

            ROTFLMAO, sure she is, according the her followers who mostly grow out of that stage when they eventually lose virginity around the age of thirty.

          6. Colonialista– Ayn Rand was quite a brilliant thinker and writer — even though she gets sneered at by leftists. She could think rings around most of her critics. Suggest looking into her biography to get a better perspective. She also has some fine essays writing. Those who dismiss her have a very poor understanding her giant intellect.

          7. “There’s a really crappy book by Ayn Rand called Atlas Shrugged. It’s a snoozer but I was really bored one time on an exercise and struggled all the way through that f|_|cker. The basic premise, though, was simple. A guy who built a widget that was very important to, well, everything it turned out, decided to quit. The guys who took over building the widget didn’t build it as well and society fell apart.

            Societies are dynamic complex systems. It is not easy to break a society or an economy. You can’t do it by missing any one widget. If the guys making the widget, now, don’t make it well enough someone will come along who does. And probably better than the original widget maker. That’s the whole point of a free-market. Command economy? Maybe. But then the KGB will come break down the widget maker’s door and explain that he’d better get back to making widgets or he’s never going to see his daughter again.

            And one widget never does it. Ever.” ~ John Ringo “The Last Centurion”

          8. @Colonialista — So I guess we take John Ringo’s word for it, rather than thinking for ourselves. Yes — a lot of people dislike her books . . . or her philosophy. That’s not my point. My point is that she was a remarkable intellect. Her perspective on collectivism stems from her life experience. In person, most people could not win an argument against her.

          9. “So I guess we take John Ringo’s word for it, rather than thinking for ourselves.”

            Oh please, you don’t have to take anyone’s words for it. I just cited one that very well expresses how I feel about Rand’s graphomania, and yes, I have read Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead decades ago. Look, Rand is okish but the fanatical following she enjoys among the pimple face virgin crowd with long oily hair is tiring. There is not much debt or anything thought provoking in there.

            To me (again, to me I do not demand others follow) reading Rand is like watching Yellowstone. People who like it, like it because it does not provoke them to think and confirms what they want to hear. I like Kid Rock music for the same reason, I just don’t pretend there is some enormous debt behind it.

        3. “math is science”
          Wrong.
          Math is a tool that (e.g.) physics uses to describe reality.

          Mendeleev was a chemist, not physicist (nor mathematician), so not a competitor to Newton. So wrong again.

          Lobachevsky was a mathematician, not a physicist, so not a competitor to Einstein. So wrong again.

          I understand that you think music and chess are “completely ridiculous”; it shows very clearly from your statements. Lenin was mandatory reading for the whole eastern block until 1989, so no wonder people (had to) read him. But as literature it is nothing. So wrong again.

          /Johan

          1. Simply of of curiosity, so who are the correct Russian competitors to Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, Faraday, Shakespeare, Proust? I mean, people with comparable achievements. And Lenin certainly is well-known way outside of the “whole eastern block” (learn the correct spelling).

        4. Something very odd, I have tried posting just the names of some outstanding Russian writers ( 4 times) . . . each time the post is censored. Must be part of the boycott Russia mandate. Anyway, Lenin is not their most notable literary figure. I would not call him a literary figure at all.

      2. @B-2Admirer
        “They do have what they copied or purchased”

        Not sure if they purchased much. (Rolls Royce Nene jet engines comes to mind. Sold by the moronic Attlee government.) More like begged, borrowed, stole or pillaged. (The politically correct term is removed.)

        “After the capitulation of Nazi Germany in World War II, the Soviets removed thousands of factories from Germany to the Soviet Union.” italics added
        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31422969/#:~:text=After%20the%20capitulation%20of%20Nazi,them%20in%20the%20Soviet%20context.

        Let’s not forget the enormous amounts gifted to them by the US under LEND-LEASE-LOSE-LOOT. (The Soviets stripped the US of its copper and the UK of its aluminum.) They also could use US patents for free — and did so till 1948!

        1. Didn’t the Americans steal lots of German technology after WWII or did I dream that?

          1. There was very little apart for ballistic missile technology that Germans had that US did not do better. Type XXI subs, some guidance for torpedoes and missiles very little apart for that. Besides NOTHING was stolen. The defeated lost their trademarks. This wasn’t theft of artworks that Siberian Mongols did.

        2. Lend Lease was a disaster. Pretty sure it’s why the Korean War happened more or less.

          4. “Teah” not “teach”

            Anyway the argument hat LL lead to Korean War is completely bogus.

          5. Stalin told Roosevelt and Churchill that if it wasn’t for lend lease we would have lost WW2.

            Ref the book Arsenal of Democracy.

          6. Joe, yes that is true but to extrapolate from it that Korean War was a result of LL is still idiotic.

        3. They purchased a lot from China recently (and claimed for their own). The stories about the marvels of Russian high-tech turning out to be consumer-grade products from China are numerous. For the USSR, modus operandi was “reverse-engineer from the West and claim you developed it”, for the Ruϟϟischeschweinen Pediration it’s “purchase from China and claim you developed it”; even reverse-engineering is too much for the fascist kleptocracy (remember how they shipped the weapons captured in Ukraine to Iran).

          As to what happened during and immediately after WWII, well, if the British were so stupid as to give away to the Soviets everything the latter wanted, the British should only blame themselves for it.

          1. I’ll give them the AK47, the RPG, and some good helicopters. MiG-25 FoxBat could do some crazy flying…but taking it to the max would mess up the airframe and make it unworthy. Other than that, um, some nuclear reactors on the cheap…until they melted down.

          2. AK and RPG were based on the German weapons of WWI (not carbon copies, but different implementations of the “stolen” ideas). In terms of aviation, their achievements are best illustrated by Tu-4 (a bomber slavishly copied from B-29). Then there was Tu-144, a flying coffin that had no purpose and was built because the Russians knew that Europeans were building the Concorde, apparently with the help of some stolen data about the latter. MiG-25 was also partly based on a foreign aircraft.

          4. Eh, okay but innovation especially in military is very often based on ‘borrowed’ concepts and ideas and designs. Nothing wrong with just much better implementation of someone else’s weaponry.

            The Tupalov is hilariously crap compared to the B-52 though. The latter can carry just about any ordinance, the former is a cruise missile launchpad more or less.

          5. “The Tupalov is hilariously crap compared to the B-52 though. ”

            You’re talking about Tu-95, he is talking about completely different Tupolevs. Tu-4 was a literal copy of B-29, according to Suvorov, when Stalin ordered a copy they copied everything including the color of internal paint. They eventually had to quietly inquire of they were supposed to paint red stars on it or American white stars.
            Tu-144 was a Soviet attempt to replicate Concorde, did not work as advertised.

            “The latter can carry just about any ordinance, the former is a cruise missile launchpad more or less.”

            Nope Tu-95 (aka Tu-20), it is a derivative of Tu-114 passenger airliner and it a very versatile platform, there were/are ELINT, maritime patrol and AWACS versions of that aircraft, so three roles that B-52 never performed.

          6. “Nothing wrong with just much better implementation of someone else’s weaponry.”
            I don’t believe that the first models of AK and RPG were any better than MP 44 (a. k. a. StG 44) and Panzerfaust 250.

  10. Do check on the threads from Ian Miles Cheong on the assault of Billboard Chris in Vancouver.
    My favourite line from Dan Dicks interviewing what is supposed to be a cop.
    ” How did you become a police officer? “

  11. Why would the Communist Chinese government be interested in such a thing?

    Chinese team behind extreme animal gene experiment says it may lead to super soldiers who survive nuclear fallout
    https://archive.is/PBKl5

    1. Does QD mention he was pushing the jabs? No? Still never watching him again.

      Some sins are forgiveable…

          2. Better be careful DB, that level of independent thinking will deem you impure in the eyes of HoBot (aka YouSuck) and his fellow Jacobins.

    2. Wildly unconstitutional. The support for this from the likes of Jonah Goldberg just goes to show how worthless all conservatives really are.

  16. Not sure why my link to the poll showing the NDP may be winning in Alberta was filtered but yeah Smith not doing the thing.

    1. Even the filter knows when you’re posting garbage.

      Saw an ad on ewe-tube earlier today, some Commie BS about Alberta not being able to afford DS. Hilarious! Apparently they have a short memory regarding their own debt & deficit numbers.

      1. The polls are the polls are the data. But go ahead, just claim it’s rigged. It isn’t and won’t away.

        1. Polls are supposed to be based on random sampling. Problem is many people don’t answer polls. So they are not really random.

          Polls may seem useful, but you should be prepared to be surprised.

  20. Saturday PM feel-good story.

    When America was strong, fun, and prosperous

    https://theferalirishman.blogspot.com/2023/03/when-america-was-strong-fun-and.html

    “This 1967 true story is of an experience by a young 12 year old lad in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. It is about the vivid memory of a privately rebuilt P-51 from WWII, and its famous owner/pilot.
    In the morning sun, I could not believe my eyes. There, in our little airport, sat a majestic P-51. They said it had flown in during the night from some U.S. Airport, on its way to an air show. The pilot had been tired, so he just happened to choose Kingston for his stop over. It was to take to the air very soon. I marveled at the size of the plane, dwarfing the Pipers and Canucks tied down by her. It was much larger than in the movies. She glistened in the sun like a bulwark of security from days gone by.”

    1. And the P51 was built in something like 187 days!

      And it was the Brits who installed the Merlin engine in the P51, creating arguably the best fighter aircraft of WW2.

      And it was the Americans who built massive quantities of Merlin engines. The story went that RollsRoyce provided Merlin drawings, but the Americans had to modify the drawings, because US manufactures were used to tighter manufacturing tolerances.

      1. I was amazed when I found out that the P51 was designed and built by North American Aviation for the RAF considering it is such an American classic.

    1. That’s fine. Let parents stop the perverts instead of letting the law do it. We’re rapidly reaching the point where vigilantes will do a better job than a corrupt judiciary.

    2. Drag shows demean women. They exploit ridiculous stereotypes. Would folks be ok with blackface public performances? Most would be offended.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation