If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

On Libertarianism vs. Conservatism, I think it's a really good example why the up/down axis between authoritarianisam and non-authoritarianism is so important. A problem is that authoritarian might not be the best word for this. But there is a distinct difference between the top part of the spectrum which tends to look for more strict hierarchical systems vs. the bottom of the spectrum which is much more about creating an unbiased playing field and letting the chips fall where they may.

It's something you see on both the left and the right, on the top of the axis, the idea that it's important that only the "right" people succeed and thrive. That's the reality of communist and dominionist systems of ideology, and why they need to be opposed.

The difference between Right Libertarianism and Left Libertarianism, at least to me, comes down to a belief that markets can and do fail spectacularly, some markets are never going to work well in the first place, and we're all more free in total if we have central systems to regulate, and sometimes even take over those markets. This is things like roads, schools, and getting more out there, health care, communications (not in terms of taking over the markets but in terms of regulation, I.E. net neutrality).

The Trump/Nazi thing started early in his campaign. At rallies during the primaries Trump's calls to beat up and throw out ("I'll pay your legal bills if you get arrested") dissenters combined with his populist message had a distinctly Brownshirt sorta vibe. But as others have mentioned, nearly every political party in Weimar Germany had a paramilitary branch tasked with sending thugs to beat and intimidate the opposition. The question is are the antifa jag-offs enabling Trump acting more like National Socialists, Social Democrats or Communists?

Only one paragraph available but worth quoting:

A new puritanism explains why some feminists are making common cause with Islam
by Matt Ridley

The bicoastal elite might be more effective in opposing Mr Trump if it weren’t obsessed with the persecution of anybody who says the wrong thing. ‘While you self-involved fools were policing the language at the Kids’ Choice Awards,’ raged the broadcaster Bill Maher last week, ‘a madman talked his way into the White House.’ This new puritanism must explain why some feminists make common cause with Islam. One of the Women’s March organisers was Linda Sarsour, a defender of sharia law, which is misogynism incarnate. She said on Twitter of Brigitte Gabriel, a feminist critic of Islam, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a victim of female genital mutilation and of death threats for apostasy, <b>‘I wish I could take their vaginas away — they don’t deserve to be women.’</b> So she’s a pussy-grabber too. She has since deleted the tweet.

This is an extract from Matt Ridley’s Diary, which appears in this week’s issue of the Spectator

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/02/9751112/

Now bearing in mind Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a victim of genital mutilation, I think Sarsour is already favourite for this year's Cunty:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3IIAdcW8AAI8sC.jpg

I suspect 'nazi' is being thrown around indiscriminately as an insult because it's the only one left after ableism, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and anti-elitism have filtered out the juicy ones.
You can't insult someone's intelligence, so the rich vein of addle-pated idiots, morons, cretins, stupid, dumb etc are out of play.
Likewise, their looks are off limits, so no use of ugly, fat, or even fish-faced wobble-gutted hag (no matter how well it captures the essence of Svanness) will be tolerated.
Disabilities - likewise. No one is permitted to be cross-eyed, limp-dicked or to smell like a baboon's armpit. I am no longer a deaf git (which I would be very glad to hear if only I could make out what they're saying. Eh? What?)
Sex, gender, gender identity, gender presentation and sexual preferences are right out, along with fetishes and perversions. No fags, homos, pillow-biters, players of the pink trombone, dykes, trannies. No playing for the other team and no kink-shaming either. One exception: it's open season on pædophiles.
Race? All insults there were placed out of bounds many years ago, and nationality isn't that insulting anyway. Anti-semitism has had it's day.
What's left? Wealth? Ill-mannered (oops! Not criticising your social norms!) to point out in either direction. Bodily wastes and dirt in general are still allowed.

Seems to me that the only slur a right thinking SJW can hurl at someone without fear of offending any identity that might be valued by somebody somewhere is 'Nazi scum! Fascist kiddy-diddling shit!' It's like there was an unwritten couplet Niemöller's poem:

Then they came for the Nazis, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Nazi.

The nazi's have no defenders, so they make for a perfect easy breezy splashback-free insult. The only reason why we don't hear 'stalinist' and 'maoist' chucked around must be the remaining sympathy they have for those ideologies. I don't think a world where insult is nearly impossible to utter is particularly interesting, and I'm put in mind of Newspeak. We are told that during the Two Minute's Hate there is hissing, shouting, exclamations of rage, but significantly, the only verbatim word we are given as being said by a participant is 'swine'. I think that might have been Orwell's little inside joke. He was obviously a doubleplusungood kind of person. if not a literal nazi pædophile shit. After all, what else can I say? :twatson:

Shatterface wrote:Now bearing in mind Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a victim of genital mutilation, I think Sarsour is already favourite for this year's Cunty:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3IIAdcW8AAI8sC.jpg

I think Ayaan Hirsi Ali's grandmother already started on that procedure....

Was out today and passed the march against Trump walking down Haymarket towards Trafalgar Square (and passing the blue plaque on the building where Ho Chi Min once worked - as a waiter I think). Plenty of signs condemning racism and islamaphobia - as if Trumps sudden death would end either. (Attributing so much power to him would seem to fit in with his messiah complex though).

I suspect many British people are beginning to regret voting for him...

Article IV... "the only limit to the exercise of the natural rights of woman is the perpetual tyranny that man opposes to it"

PERPETUAL tyranny = 3 years. Feminists, then & now, like to pretend men had voting rights going-back to time-immemorial. Nope.

Declaration of Rights of Man: 1789
Declaration of Rights of Woman: 1791

Kirbmarc wrote: That echoes the articles of the declaration of rights of men, where rights are natural too and the only limit is the perpetual tyranny of other men opposed to it. Kind of weak to argue it's the same thing as "The Patriarchy" theory.

It does echo the Declaration of Rights of Men. Nearly word for word. So much so... that we can attribute nearly all of the Declaration of the Rights of Woman to the original authors: General Lafayette & Thomas Jefferson. ONLY the few words that differ are truly Olympe De Gouge's own original work. And those are NOT the parts about equality for all. Those are the Men Oppress Women parts. Inequality for all was and is a problem. Feminism has always been a defective solution.

Let me put this way: women and men had ... unequal rights before the law

MOST men had equal rights to women: "the vote was granted to approximately 4.3 million Frenchmen.[24] out of a population of around 29 million.[25]" Few men were deemed "Active Citizens". Most men were deemed "Passive Citizens" alongside women. In some ways, men had it worse than women-- such as it being legal to kidnap & press-gang men into dangerous servitude on sea ships.

If feminism fights for men, too, the majority of men shouldn't have been vilified by De Gouge as oppressors. She should have campaigned on their-behalf, too. She should have included those men in her Declaration. Except she clearly speaks of all men as a united conspiracy against women. That's patriarchy theory.

Which is exactly what Karen Straughan said in the video. IF feminism meant equality-for-all, she would probably be a feminist. But it has always included this fatal patriarchy theory brainfart.

Fighting to get those equal rights was initially called feminism, and it's what, for example, islam needs (along with all the other changes that came with liberal democracies).

No. Islam-controlled nations do NOT need to replicate feminism's wrong-turns & dead-ends. You said this: "there's also a fetishization of the US constitution, which was a great step forward, especially for its times, but not the last and final word on the development of liberal democracy." But you insist on fetishizing an imaginary good-old-days of Feminism, and this defective woman Declaration document.

Straughan and the Honeybadgers muddle the waters, arguing that limitations of rights (like the limitation of driving rights for women in Saudi Arabia) are actually privileges. I don't known if they're doing this just to contrarians or because they genuinely believe that women are privileged in islam (LOL), but it's inaccurate and counterproductive.

Karen & Allison Tieman didn't set-out to be Islam-apologists. They began by looking-back... to evolution & history... seeking an accurate understanding of males & females... to contrast against Feminism's distortions of the truth. I think they've done a great job. And one reason I don't fault them, if their theories remain imperfect... is an utter failure of critics to stipulate the parts the honeybadgers got right... & then debug any wrong-bits + build more atop that foundation. Aneris & you are doing it, too: dismissing them as mere mirror-images of Feminism's flaws/ categorically rejecting them, rather than parsing what they got right & wrong.

When the conversation shifted from evolution & history to Islam-- the honeybadgers expressed skepticism about the "Islam elevates men and oppresses women" narrative. Essentially, they argued that they've seen a distortion of history so-many times before-- BadMen Oppress DamselWomen Patriarchy Theory-- that it seems highly likely that the same broken analysis is being applied to today's islam: a superficial appearance of Male Power and Female Oppression actually conceals a more mixed-bag of benefits & harms for both groups. And many people pointing fingers of accusation at islam have unwholesome agendas.

I think the most-dubious assertions the honeybadgers have made were loose speculation-- thinking-out-loud livechat conversations, which they made public. As opposed to the more-grounded things they publish in formal essays & video essays. It's a bad idea to point to those exercises & declare 'gotcha!' It's counterproductive to the marketplace of ideas yielding the best ideas & sorting-out bad ideas.

Shatterface wrote:Now bearing in mind Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a victim of genital mutilation, I think Sarsour is already favourite for this year's Cunty:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3IIAdcW8AAI8sC.jpg

2011.

Certainly deserving behavior but not recent enough.

Fun fact: when Olympe de Gouge published her Declaration, France was ruled by a Queen. A female.

Sunder wrote:

Shatterface wrote:Now bearing in mind Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a victim of genital mutilation, I think Sarsour is already favourite for this year's Cunty:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3IIAdcW8AAI8sC.jpg

2011.

Certainly deserving behavior but not recent enough.

From 2014, 2015 and 2016:

For those enjoying Fallout 4, here's a very nice homemade trailer set to Imagine Dragons' Radioactive.

[youtube][/youtube]

Very well done, I think! Makes me want to go back and replay, after I'm done with Witcher 3. Can someone remind me of the F4 mod which allows one to not be Sean's parent.

Lsuoma wrote:

Mothra's Dentist wrote: Here is an example of the good "professor's", a lecturer at MOMA btw, art:
[youtube][/youtube]

Boy, this needs wider distribution - if people see that they are paying "professors", often with tenure, to produce this shit, the pitchforks would (justifiably) be broken out with stunning rapidity.

From the video's comments section: "4chan is here. I hope you're ready :^)"

Rebecca Goyette bears a strong resemblance to a certain other Rebecca:

Problem Glasses B|

screwtape wrote:I suspect 'nazi' is being thrown around indiscriminately as an insult because it's the only one left after ableism, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and anti-elitism have filtered out the juicy ones.
You can't insult someone's intelligence, so the rich vein of addle-pated idiots, morons, cretins, stupid, dumb etc are out of play.
Likewise, their looks are off limits, so no use of ugly, fat, or even fish-faced wobble-gutted hag (no matter how well it captures the essence of Svanness) will be tolerated.
Disabilities - likewise. No one is permitted to be cross-eyed, limp-dicked or to smell like a baboon's armpit. I am no longer a deaf git (which I would be very glad to hear if only I could make out what they're saying. Eh? What?)
Sex, gender, gender identity, gender presentation and sexual preferences are right out, along with fetishes and perversions. No fags, homos, pillow-biters, players of the pink trombone, dykes, trannies. No playing for the other team and no kink-shaming either. One exception: it's open season on pædophiles.
Race? All insults there were placed out of bounds many years ago, and nationality isn't that insulting anyway. Anti-semitism has had it's day.
What's left? Wealth? Ill-mannered (oops! Not criticising your social norms!) to point out in either direction. Bodily wastes and dirt in general are still allowed.

Seems to me that the only slur a right thinking SJW can hurl at someone without fear of offending any identity that might be valued by somebody somewhere is 'Nazi scum! Fascist kiddy-diddling shit!' It's like there was an unwritten couplet Niemöller's poem:

Then they came for the Nazis, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Nazi.

The nazi's have no defenders, so they make for a perfect easy breezy splashback-free insult. The only reason why we don't hear 'stalinist' and 'maoist' chucked around must be the remaining sympathy they have for those ideologies. I don't think a world where insult is nearly impossible to utter is particularly interesting, and I'm put in mind of Newspeak. We are told that during the Two Minute's Hate there is hissing, shouting, exclamations of rage, but significantly, the only verbatim word we are given as being said by a participant is 'swine'. I think that might have been Orwell's little inside joke. He was obviously a doubleplusungood kind of person. if not a literal nazi pædophile shit. After all, what else can I say? :twatson:

I think you're right with one possible addition-I think the regressive left, Trump-enablers have been wanting to go violent for a while, like frustrated toddlers denied their way. What is one person it's always okay to use violence with? A Nazi. They've watched too many superhero movies and want an excuse to pound someone, or watch their side pound someone.

They're called MoonGlampers! :evil:

paddybrown wrote: It's more than that. Just the other week the entire online left talked itself into thinking that it was fine to use violence against Nazis. That's step one. Step two is convincing yourself that everyone you don't like is a Nazi. Then they're fair game.

A parallel. In the 1960s in Northern Ireland there was a civil rights movement demanding electoral reform and the end to discrimination against Catholics. Loyalists convinced themselves it was a front for the long-dormant IRA. This justified them meeting peaceful demonstrations with violence. The result? The return of the IRA.

The left is letting Antifa call the shots, and has opened the door to political violence. If they don't get it shut again pretty quickly, it will get much worse.

Oh I agree with that, but I think that's been the schtick all along - to use boo words to sic people on people.

It's more the "punch a Nazi" meme that's escalated the violence, the desperate use of Fascist/Nazi as an epithet came a bit before.

The Rebecca Goyette vid has been removed. Please tell me somebody saved it to their h/d :)

Service Dog wrote:

Article IV... "the only limit to the exercise of the natural rights of woman is the perpetual tyranny that man opposes to it"

PERPETUAL tyranny = 3 years. Feminists, then & now, like to pretend men had voting rights going-back to time-immemorial. Nope.

Declaration of Rights of Man: 1789
Declaration of Rights of Woman: 1791

Kirbmarc wrote: That echoes the articles of the declaration of rights of men, where rights are natural too and the only limit is the perpetual tyranny of other men opposed to it. Kind of weak to argue it's the same thing as "The Patriarchy" theory.

It does echo the Declaration of Rights of Men. Nearly word for word. So much so... that we can attribute nearly all of the Declaration of the Rights of Woman to the original authors: General Lafayette & Thomas Jefferson. ONLY the few words that differ are truly Olympe De Gouge's own original work. And those are NOT the parts about equality for all. Those are the Men Oppress Women parts. Inequality for all was and is a problem. Feminism has always been a defective solution.

Let me put this way: women and men had ... unequal rights before the law

MOST men had equal rights to women: "the vote was granted to approximately 4.3 million Frenchmen.[24] out of a population of around 29 million.[25]" Few men were deemed "Active Citizens". Most men were deemed "Passive Citizens" alongside women. In some ways, men had it worse than women-- such as it being legal to kidnap & press-gang men into dangerous servitude on sea ships.

If feminism fights for men, too, the majority of men shouldn't have been vilified by De Gouge as oppressors. She should have campaigned on their-behalf, too. She should have included those men in her Declaration. Except she clearly speaks of all men as a united conspiracy against women. That's patriarchy theory.

Which is exactly what Karen Straughan said in the video. IF feminism meant equality-for-all, she would probably be a feminist. But it has always included this fatal patriarchy theory brainfart.

Fighting to get those equal rights was initially called feminism, and it's what, for example, islam needs (along with all the other changes that came with liberal democracies).

No. Islam-controlled nations do NOT need to replicate feminism's wrong-turns & dead-ends. You said this: "there's also a fetishization of the US constitution, which was a great step forward, especially for its times, but not the last and final word on the development of liberal democracy." But you insist on fetishizing an imaginary good-old-days of Feminism, and this defective woman Declaration document.

Straughan and the Honeybadgers muddle the waters, arguing that limitations of rights (like the limitation of driving rights for women in Saudi Arabia) are actually privileges. I don't known if they're doing this just to contrarians or because they genuinely believe that women are privileged in islam (LOL), but it's inaccurate and counterproductive.

Karen & Allison Tieman didn't set-out to be Islam-apologists. They began by looking-back... to evolution & history... seeking an accurate understanding of males & females... to contrast against Feminism's distortions of the truth. I think they've done a great job. And one reason I don't fault them, if their theories remain imperfect... is an utter failure of critics to stipulate the parts the honeybadgers got right... & then debug any wrong-bits + build more atop that foundation. Aneris & you are doing it, too: dismissing them as mere mirror-images of Feminism's flaws/ categorically rejecting them, rather than parsing what they got right & wrong.

When the conversation shifted from evolution & history to Islam-- the honeybadgers expressed skepticism about the "Islam elevates men and oppresses women" narrative. Essentially, they argued that they've seen a distortion of history so-many times before-- BadMen Oppress DamselWomen Patriarchy Theory-- that it seems highly likely that the same broken analysis is being applied to today's islam: a superficial appearance of Male Power and Female Oppression actually conceals a more mixed-bag of benefits & harms for both groups. And many people pointing fingers of accusation at islam have unwholesome agendas.

I think the most-dubious assertions the honeybadgers have made were loose speculation-- thinking-out-loud livechat conversations, which they made public. As opposed to the more-grounded things they publish in formal essays & video essays. It's a bad idea to point to those exercises & declare 'gotcha!' It's counterproductive to the marketplace of ideas yielding the best ideas & sorting-out bad ideas.

Great post Service Dog. It's become more and more apparent to me that a massive amount of stuff has been shoved down the memory hole with all this - and that being an MRA (with all due sceptical caution, ofc), even if only vocally/passively in support, is probably the most revolutionary stance one could take in these times.

The nice thing though, is that actually the HoneyBadgers analysis does give due honour to Feminism for kicking off the gender discussion - after all gender relations are tremendously foundational to society, being the root of the very perpetuation of our species.

Final post of the evening: what Jan said above re. scepticism about Trump got me wondering: what does the esteemed assembly think is the essence or main feature or whatever, of scepticism, is it:-

1) An endlessly questioning stance, or

2) Testing to destruction, but accepting whatever's left standing as provisionally true?

Im sure you all have heard of the Jian Ghomeshi affair and the Greg Allan Elliot court case. But i guess none of you have heard of Gerry Sklavounos vs Alice Paquet (damn language barriers).

In shorts, a sjw activist accused an elected member of the Quebec government of rape. The story of course was all over the news and was the talk of the town for several months.

Problem is, it did not take long for journalist to find big holes in her story. Alice Paquet did not help her case by continuously using social media and sometime newspapers opinion pages to answer those holes. She had to changed her story several time, trying to make the newly found evidences that were working against her fit into her own narrative and in the process of course, creating more holes and unanswered questions. At one point she had to admit she lied on some facts.

You can imagine that the "we believe her" mentality was on full display all this time, even as contradictions and holes emerged.

Anyway, a couple days ago, after months of investigation, the police and the crown closed the dossier for cause of "no criminal acts have been committed". The "we believe her" crowd went with the narrative that the crown just did not have enough evidences to trial the accused, rape culture, bla bla bla, and in the following days, i have seen no one in the media trying to correct that false assertion.

Until yesterday. A well respected and very competent LaPresse journalist specialized in laws and court affairs decided to write about it. What is more interesting is that the journalist in question, when he's talking about social problems and not about laws, often sound closer to a sjw than say a centrist. As such, many sjw have a high opinion of him.

In other words, yesterday Yves Boivert failed the purity test and many sjw probably shed a tears.

Once again its a french article translated using Google: https://translate.google.ca/translate?s ... edit-text=

[youtube][/youtube]

violent tantrum porn
[youtube][/youtube]

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

It's almost as though he doesn't quite understand how the government works or something.

gurugeorge wrote:Final post of the evening: what Jan said above re. scepticism about Trump got me wondering: what does the esteemed assembly think is the essence or main feature or whatever, of scepticism, is it:-

1) An endlessly questioning stance, or

2) Testing to destruction, but accepting whatever's left standing as provisionally true?

Or both, depending on the subject of scepticism.

I work about a mile from where the Superbowl is happening. I'm no expert, but it looks like a Blackhawk helicopter is doing low sweeps around the stadium area. I assume that security will be ramped up but what does a Blackhawk have to offer in that line that regular police copters don't?

dogen wrote:For those enjoying Fallout 4, here's a very nice homemade trailer set to Imagine Dragons' Radioactive.

[outube][outube]

Cool vid, really captures the feel of the game.

I'm currently in OCD/Modding-hell - I only got the game a week ago (roughly) and am up to 132 mods and have re-started the campaign about 10 times. I'm torn between the post-nuke "rough" looking settlement design and my squaddie obsession for neatness, straight lines, cleanliness and highly polished surfaces. I'm also fixated on Sanctuary Hills (starting settlement) and hate having to deal with the smaller camps spread around the Commonwealth.

At the moment, I have two buildings (yup, a whopping two whole buildings) and have cleared everything within the limits of the settlement - there's nothing, literally nothing, cluttering up the place or making it look untidy. The two structures I have (both pre-war houses) are neat, tidy and are decorated to the 9's. Now, because of my fixation, I'm struggling to house/employ my settlers so I think it might be time for a third house.

It's driving me mental!

dogen wrote:Can someone remind me of the F4 mod which allows one to not be Sean's parent.

I just done a quick search on the Nexus and drew a blank. However, I do remember a YT content provider talking about a mod which removes the parent/Shaun link. The two YT content providers I watch (listen to in the background) are:

1) Oxhorn (think it was this guy, he does lots of lore and mod reviews)
2) Norespawns (mainly does settlement builds etc but it might have been him)

I'd look myself but there are tons of videos and I'm about to pop out to dinner. If you have no luck, I'll have a sniff around when I get back.

http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/?

gurugeorge wrote:OMG, guys, guys, you have GOT to see this:-

[youtube][/youtube]

That's awesome. What a moron.

Look at steve's eyes after he reads the letter. He totally believes that this shit is happening on a regular basis all over the place. Why didn't he tell the letter writer to call the police?

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

It's almost as though he doesn't quite understand how the government works or something.

Or he understands too well .....

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

Muskrat's really milking his 15 minutes of fame, I see.

Total tangent, but I happened across that one xkcd comic again. You know the one. "Showing you the door." The one that essentially argues that it's not censorship if non-govt. entities engage in it.

Which today made me wonder that if that's the case, then what's the big deal with net neutrality?

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

How else can he be expected to defend article 12 of the constitution!?

Sunder wrote: Total tangent, but I happened across that one xkcd comic again. You know the one. "Showing you the door." The one that essentially argues that it's not censorship if non-govt. entities engage in it.

It always makes me raise a wry and disdainful eyebrow when those of the left raise this point...before they then go on to complain about how much control right-wingers have of UK newspapers.

Old_ones wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

How else can he be expected to defend article 12 of the constitution!?

Article XII used to exist, but then Obama repealed it after the Bowling Green Massacre, and then memory-holed all records of it.

So, my favorite narcissistic lolcow, Dr Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, is at it again.
Yet only a few days ago she bragged in Twatter that she was boycotting US science conferences. See, e.g., her name on this list:

https://www.science-undivided.org/signatures/

Anyone (Brive?) fancy tweeting her to point out this inconsistency?

Easy J wrote:I work about a mile from where the Superbowl is happening. I'm no expert, but it looks like a Blackhawk helicopter is doing low sweeps around the stadium area. I assume that security will be ramped up but what does a Blackhawk have to offer in that line that regular police copters don't?

http://www.chron.com/business/amp/Black ... 904434.php?

Bhurzum wrote: I'm about to pop out to dinner.

No I'm not.

No plan, first contact, meh.

Sunder wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:

Trump clearly does need an enablement act to provide a recourse against illegitimate opposition to his law making agenda.

Muskrat's really milking his 15 minutes of fame, I see.

Total tangent, but I happened across that one xkcd comic again. You know the one. "Showing you the door." The one that essentially argues that it's not censorship if non-govt. entities engage in it.

Which today made me wonder that if that's the case, then what's the big deal with net neutrality?

If you're stuck in argument-via-comic mode, this one is a good response.

[Fuck-off huge image not included here, you wouldn't be able to read it without going to the link anyway]

I really, really hate how people go straight to "it ain't censorship unless Uncle Sam does it, and there's no concept of free speech or expression outside of the First Amendment to the US Constitution".

Easy J wrote:I work about a mile from where the Superbowl is happening. I'm no expert, but it looks like a Blackhawk helicopter is doing low sweeps around the stadium area. I assume that security will be ramped up but what does a Blackhawk have to offer in that line that regular police copters don't?

I think what you see are black helicopters that are part of a UN attack to overthrow Pres. Trump and establish shariah law.

Really? wrote:

gurugeorge wrote:OMG, guys, guys, you have GOT to see this:-

[youtube][/youtube]

That's awesome. What a moron.

Look at steve's eyes after he reads the letter. He totally believes that this shit is happening on a regular basis all over the place. Why didn't he tell the letter writer to call the police?

I don't know. I have trouble extracting any fun from it, the worm even had a big "I AM A BAIT" and it played a tune "YOU'RE BEING FUCK WITH, JESUS" when you tugged the line. He still took it.

rayshul wrote:

I can't believe no one's had sex or sat down for a dressed up meal for 2 yet on that feed yet. What the fucks up with NY!

Dicky Semen is still doing the dance around how the "university press" published his "peer-reviewed" book.
Should Carrier really be playing this card?

gurugeorge wrote:The Rebecca Goyette vid has been removed. Please tell me somebody saved it to their h/d :)

The Vimeo ones still are up (for now)

Mothra's Dentist wrote:[…]

Ha ha, love your nickname.

Mothra's Dentist wrote:

gurugeorge wrote:The Rebecca Goyette vid has been removed. Please tell me somebody saved it to their h/d :)

The Vimeo ones still are up (for now)

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/14/143b9f28 ... fa3275.jpg

If you're for a mindless fun tonight,

[youtube][/youtube]

Look out, Nazis. You're fucked. Why? This badass motherfucker is on the case.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/82 ... 00x400.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JUQ7m5f_xpU/maxresdefault.jpg

FEAR HIM, you fascist pieces of shit.

Easy J wrote:I work about a mile from where the Superbowl is happening. I'm no expert, but it looks like a Blackhawk helicopter is doing low sweeps around the stadium area. I assume that security will be ramped up but what does a Blackhawk have to offer in that line that regular police copters don't?

PR for military recruiters.

Really? wrote:https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JUQ7m5f_xpU/maxresdefault.jpg

FEAR HIM, you fascist pieces of shit.

I've decked three or four guys like him just to get into a fight.

Not that I'm a fascist, mind...also, internet hardman.

Fuck it, back to FO4.

https://i.redd.it/fyn7crei6gdy.png

Bhurzum wrote:

Really? wrote:https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JUQ7m5f_xpU/maxresdefault.jpg

FEAR HIM, you fascist pieces of shit.

I've decked three or four guys like him just to get into a fight.

Not that I'm a fascist, mind...also, internet hardman.

Fuck it, back to FO4.

Nice one, Begby.

Brive1987 wrote:http://i.imgur.com/lgvHUye.jpg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... 84-h384-nc

:lol: :lol:

After posing in bedhead and ripe laundry for weeks, she's suddenly wearing enough makeup to freak her camera into Kabuki mode.

Gee, would it be unseemly of us to notice?

I wonder if she realizes the soft gauzy look is a hallmark of Penthouse magazine?

http://imgur.com/1Hw2rTA.jpg

http://imgur.com/guysIWY.jpg

Ape+lust wrote:

Easy J wrote:Could the Democrat party look at these juvenile public tantrums as an accurate gauge of where their constituency is at? Instead of shying away from this, could we see a candidate that panders to it in 2020?

FWIW, 2020 is the year Millennials become the largest voting bloc in the US.

Which is why they should be preventively culled.

So, I was scrolling through this thread and by repeatedly pressing 'page down' stopped two thirds of the way down the picture of "Miss Corinne Alphen". The Commander's blood immediately started to flow. Then, imagine my shock and dismay as I press 'page down' again......

.....well, you wouldn't believe how quickly you can lose a boner. Lie a hot needle popping a balloon. Thanks Ape+Lust.

CommanderTuvok wrote:So, I was scrolling through this thread and by repeatedly pressing 'page down' stopped two thirds of the way down the picture of "Miss Corinne Alphen". The Commander's blood immediately started to flow. Then, imagine my shock and dismay as I press 'page down' again......

.....well, you wouldn't believe how quickly you can lose a boner. Lie a hot needle popping a balloon. Thanks Ape+Lust.

classic hard-off

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:

Easy J wrote:I work about a mile from where the Superbowl is happening. I'm no expert, but it looks like a Blackhawk helicopter is doing low sweeps around the stadium area. I assume that security will be ramped up but what does a Blackhawk have to offer in that line that regular police copters don't?

http://www.chron.com/business/amp/Black ... 904434.php?

Cool. So that thing is really armed. Maybe it'll cull some of those drones that are are always buzzing around.

I guess terrorists will be limited to a Truck of Peace attack in a cramped area rugs trying to get a shot of two off before being venalated.

*or

Re: Nazis,

http://img.pr0gramm.com/2017/02/04/ae86c40c1c404996.jpg

Ape+lust wrote:http://imgur.com/QM9bQ9q.jpg

I knew Ape wouldn't be able to resist a Shives shoop!