73 Replies to “June 10, 2024: Reader Tips”

    1. Sneakers were named because they allowed people to sneak around quietly, ie. sneak thief. They are not even hiding it anymore.

    2. “You will own nothing; and I will have shoes. Lots of expensive shoes.”

      Shoes won’t help.

      A double industrial garbage bag over her head might help. But she will still draw flies.

    1. Gentlemen do not exist in the hamass world. Women are chattel or human shields after the “freedom fighters” are done with them and have no voice.

      That lowlife has no remorse in his regard for women.

      Chivalry is not dead. It is live and well, waiting for women that want that.

      BTW C, that is not new.

      1. Chivalry is Not dead….Least wise for the ~60+ generation.
        Elsewhere..? not so much.
        Its easily explainable: Women wanted Equality..?? Well they got it.
        I Haven’t been on a bus in at least 45+ YEARS.

        ….But I’ll still hold open a door for a women ALL the time.

        As for Islamic FILTH…?? I’d be delirious to see that vermin Eradicated from the planet.

    2. He has a point, equality must exclude chivalry; in fact, I am sure the modern feminist will find chivalry to be a thing of the patriarchy.

    1. The Turd is out of touch. Meanwhile, notice how the cause of the fire remains undisclosed, and my money says that the cause will remain undisclosed.

      Meanwhile, GYM is probably off celebrating somewhere, singing and dancing in celebration, totally disregarding the loss of priceless art kept at that church.

      1. “Meanwhile, GYM is probably off celebrating somewhere, …”

        Pride parade?

  1. Well Robert … who does Neil Young better than Neil Young? Who does grunge FAR BETTER than Eddie Vedder?

    https://youtu.be/TNOvqFISxIc?si=GcmlCPPqip-HhjpA

    Built to Spill … Doug Martsch. Hands down. Imagine if Neil Young didn’t just fade out the end of this song? Well, Martsch did … and the result is amazing – squared!

    1. It’s from another planet, which is probably why we can’t understand her dialect.
      Whatever language she is speaking, it isn’t English, notwithstanding the universal pejorative slur probably understood in all corners of the galaxy.

      The planet Earth isn’t enough anymore. We’re taking immigrants from all over the universe now.

  2. Wow…right wing parties have almost swept the EU elections (or as the MSM is reporting them, “far right” parties).

    Open borders have been a dismal failure and everyone knows it.

    1. Open borders have not been a failure. The Globalists want them to destroy Western national societies and nation states.

  3. “Strong military ally” and all that; looks like Admiral Kuznetsov (the only Russian Aircraft Carrier and Flagship of the Russian Navy) will not be making the world laugh for much longer, being at an end of its utterly miserable existance.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/07/russia-aircraft-carrier-kuznetsov-navy-jets-mig-29/

    Saying that China will become unstoppable if allowed to ally with Russia, the central thought of schweinie-loving UIs (Useful Idiots), is like saying that a gangster will become invincible if allowed to consort with the oldest and fattest prostitute in town.

    I already asked the schweinie-lovers here a very simple question “what is it that China can get from Russia, which they don’t have already?” and the only meaningful response was “nuclear missiles” (obviously invalid, as the Chinise have their own); the rest was just stupid blabbering about the glory days of the USSR (as if it bore any relevance to our times).

    1. An ally against the USA and lots of resources. Plus China sends a signal to other countries disenfranchised by America. We will fight for you. That is a powerful message.

      Look at a map of the world and tell me that China and Russia shouldn’t cooperate. That is a very large border.

      1. If you live in a world where China fights for Russia against the US, it’s your problem. In reality China largely depends on the US.

        1. It’s not my problem. It’s our problem. China and America largely rely on each other. America has been calling the shots since WWII. But with the emergence of the BRICS countries, global power is shifting. It is in China’s best interest to keep Russia strong, not our best interest. That makes it our problem. You can hope that Russia will somehow lose the war in Ukraine. But the reality is, we either escalate the war by getting more involved (bad idea because Russia will destroy the west and itself before it will surrender) or agree to leave Russia alone (peace) and let the China-Russia power axis increase. America is a descending power. China is not strong enough to assume the leadership role. So it combines its power with other countries and chips away at America. Very effectively I would say.

          1. By ending its cooperation, the US can make China lose a lot more than it could possibly gain by cooperating with a worthless shithole like Russia. My understanding is, your answer to the “what is it that China can get from Russia, which they don’t have already?” question is “lots of resources”. If you mean “natural resources” (Russia doesn’t have any other), it’s obvioulsy not valid because, as i have already said, everything China could get in Russia and much more, they can get in Africa, which the Chinese have successfully colonised.

            And BRICS, for all practical purposes, does not exist. Those countries have vastly different interests (remember how Brasilia wanted to overthrow Maduro, whom Russia and China supported?).

          2. @Surfer

            “If you mean “natural resources” (Russia doesn’t have any other), it’s obvioulsy not valid”

            Yea, having abundant resources like agriculture, energy, lumber, rare earth minerals, and scientific collaboration right next door as opposed to shipping from Africa is a strength not a weakness.

            The west could learn something about producing it’s own resources instead of relying on resources from the other side of the planet held by questionable alliances and trade deals.

          3. @Steve from Rockwood

            Well said.

            It’s our globalist idiots who worry about pronouns that have placed us in this mess. Their greed & corruption has pushed these opposing alliances around the world together while simultaneously destroying the west internally.

            There are plenty of fools who still believe the government is on their side providing one of their pet interests is being addressed. Totally overlooked is the fact that they are getting screwed over with 95% of everything else that really matters to them & their families.

          4. Well, it’s not about the distance; it’s mostly about the cost. Notice how the new natural gas pipeline project from Russia to China has, basically, stalled. Unlike sub-Saharans, the Russians will not let the Chinese companies to exctract natural resources from their territory, so I don’t see how China could gain much in that regard.

          5. @Surfer – “it’s mostly about the cost”

            Do say. It is also about political reliability and transit safety.

            “so I don’t see how China could gain much in that regard.” – Surfer

            Apparently the Chinese use different intelligence and geopolitical sources than you do.

          6. Absolutely, “it is also about political reliability and transit safety”, which is why the Chinese show so little interest in the pipeline project that Russia is trying to push through so desperately. The only way to make Russia a reliable partner is to conquer and subjugate it. That would not justify the effort for the Chinese, as long as there are sub-Saharan tribes whose chiefs are willing to sell themselves to them.

            What that “the Chinese use different intelligence and geopolitical sources than you do” was about, I don’t know.

          7. @Surfer – “the Chinese use different intelligence and geopolitical sources than you do” was about, I don’t know.”

            It takes a good deal of narcissism to underestimate ones enemies capabilities. This is precisely why the west is in the bind it’s in, and why the propaganda to say otherwise continues to be parroted.

          8. What does it take to overestimate one’s enemy’s capabilities? Or, declare that enemy an ally? Just curious.

          9. @Surfer – “What does it take to overestimate one’s enemy’s capabilities?”

            I’m no military expert like you, but plenty of other military experts believe the future of Navel warfare is in submarines not aircraft carriers. So your Expert analysis that Russia is to stupid or broke to invest in Aircraft Carriers over the Nuclear Submarines they have indeed invested in, smacks of underestimating your enemy.

            Same thing goes for the Chinese making their resource rich next door neighbour an ally. Your military expertise tells us they are stupid when in fact there is no doubt that they have strategically analyzed their position with way smarter and better trained experts than your average internet blowhard.

            Underestimating the enemy is what the idiots of western leadership have backed us into an awkward corner with. Then people like you come along and parrot the garbage they handed out.

            Yea, go ahead and keep those borders wide open while escalating the fight to three fronts, we just need more trannies in the military to diversify the balance, western experts LOL.

          10. Predictably back to your old demagogue ways, aren’t you, Paul? My point is, I don’t see why anybody should care whom Russia will prostitute itself to; Russia isn’t relevant much and its relevance is decreasing. Beyond bullying its weaker neighbours, there’s nothing Russia can achieve. I have not heard any “idiots of western leadership” saying that.

          11. @Surfer

            You seem oblivious to the fact that we are incrementally heading into full scale war with Russia, and completely naive with comments like “there’s nothing Russia can achieve.”

            Russia doesn’t need to achieve anything except their published goals, “denazifying” Ukraine and keeping Ukraine as a neutral buffer between it’s territory and NATO. All of it is none of our business.

            The alternatives for the west is to either sue for peace or to continue it’s buildup and push for “boots on the ground” in Ukraine. It looks like “boots on the ground” by most accounts today.

            So if you want to continue believing that Russia can’t achieve any harm to the west by all means do so. Just remember that your Government will absolutely 100% keep you in the dark way past “it’s too late”. Of course Trudeau & Biden would never lie to you.

          12. Yawn. Russia had had Ukraine as a neutral country, even with a Russian base on its territory, since 2009. Nevertheless, in 2014, Russia still invaded Ukraine, which was why Ukraine gave up on the neutrality policy. Being a total nitwit, completely sold on Ruϟϟischeschweinen Propaganden, you ignore those facts. The war in Ukraine is not about NATO; it’s purely about Ruϟϟischeschweinen imperialism and expansionism, which is why Ukraine receives so much help from abroad. The only sensible “alternative” for the West is continue supporting Ukraine and let the war burn itself out (and then make sure whatever territory Ukraine controls is fortified enough to deter further Russian expansion).

            And also, the original post had nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.

    2. @Surfer – “looks like Admiral Kuznetsov…… will not be making the world laugh for much longer”

      “Aircraft Carriers are Obsolete: Let the Age of the Submarine Begin”

      “It appears that the Pentagon can’t seem to quit flat tops, even if it means these technological marvels are little more than a sunk cost—both figuratively and literally. The longer the US Navy fails to adapt to the current reality, that aircraft carriers are wildly expensive and woefully exposed to China’s immense missile threat, the greater the likelihood is that the United States may lose any opening engagement with the Chinese military.”

      https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/aircraft-carriers-are-obsolete-let-age-submarine-begin-209886

      1. Absolutely, “aircraft carriers are obsolete, so let’s just give up on that precious POS that we were trying to keep afloat so desperately for the past few decades”, LOL. Aesop would say something about sour grapes.

        1. It’s not Russian aircraft carriers currently swimming the coasts of the US in both the Pacific & Atlantic today.

      2. “Aircraft Carriers are Obsolete: Let the Age of the Submarine Begin”

        Here we go again, Jeune École revived by another idiot.

        Right Americans are fielding a new generation of supercarriers.
        UK is updating their carriers.
        France just awarded first contracts for development of De Gaulle replacement.
        Chicoms are consequently developing and expanding their carrier fleet.
        Ditto for India
        Ditto Italy, consistent expansion for decades, each subsequent generation with more capably, starting with helicopter cruisers ending up with more and more capable carriers.
        Spain? Expansion
        Japan? Nooooo, Izumo and Kaga are just helicopter carrying cruisers, the fact that they can operate F-35 is a cons incidence.

        Every navy in the world that counts, is investing in carriers. But a navy most famous for the Second Pacific Squadron and sinking of ships loaded with refugees knows better and so does Pauline.

        Ryan Philippe said it best:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpHo1Qx-stU

        1. “sinking of ships loaded with refugees”, do you mean during WWII? Anyway, these days they’re most famous for “Russian warship, go…”

      3. From the article:
        “During the Cold War, the Seawolf proved invaluable for covert intelligence missions. ”

        That is interesting as USS Seawolf (SSN-21) was launched in 1995 and commissioned in 1997, which last time I have checked was after the Cold War. So unless she is so super secret that she can travel back in time the story is bullshit.

        This is an example of the faulty nonsense that you cretins cite as sources only because what it says confirms what you want to hear.

    1. LIBERALS = TRAITORS.
      Period

      As I’ve said before, were it conservatives working with Foreign agents.??, it would have been Broadcast to the entire freaking UNIVERSE by the Liberals or as I like to call them: Canada’s NSDAP

    1. Shannon Phillips

      Hopefully she was presented with a 1 way ticket to Venezuela w/no landing rights.
      Just another Leftist Commie Climatard CLunt undeserving of OXYGEN.

  4. It would appear as though giving free access to drugs for drug addicts (aka “a safe supply”) is not necessarily a great idea. It would further appear that said drug addicts are using the access to a safe supply of drugs to increase their use of same. Inconceivable.

    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/dr-sharon-koivu-safe-supply-has-only-worsened-the-addiction-crisis-in-london-ont

    The things you learn while you’re destroying civilization with good will.

Navigation