Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:48 am
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/
World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 amWould it be that bad if there was WW3? Sure millions would die and millions more would be condemned to a life of radiation sickness misery, half of the earth would be uninhabitable for centuries, the ash clouds could spark another ice age but would it be so bad? really? I see it more as a reboot than the end.
Go Trump. :violence-guntoting:
World War Two did indeed likely happen because Hitler was given too much wiggle room. But World War One happened because of a long buildup of geopolitical tensions between superpowers created a n armosphere of tension where many near misses eventually led to a spark which made the entire system explode.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 amWould it be that bad if there was WW3? Sure millions would die and millions more would be condemned to a life of radiation sickness misery, half of the earth would be uninhabitable for centuries, the ash clouds could spark another ice age but would it be so bad? really? I see it more as a reboot than the end.
Go Trump. :violence-guntoting:
Victor Davis Hanson, whatever you might think of him, argues that Germany was clearly unable to match the resources of Britain and the US and if the latter two had displayed the confidence to send Adolf to the dog box early on in the game he would never have risked war with them. We keep forgetting this lesson because it is an unpleasant fact to have to face. Limited ugliness now is always preferable to lots of it later, but the modern world has deluded itself into the belief that the old rules no longer apply. It would be luvverly if despotic bullies could be persuaded to undergo extensive therapy, but that isn't likely to happen so we either let them steal our sandwiches or whack them with our lunchbox.
If they were honest, the Opening Remarks on "Staying Relevant as a Movement" would be that they are not relevant, and then everyone could go home.HoneyWagon wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:58 pmThe Orbit-Con is just around the corner folks!
I do hope they will find the space to discuss David Silverman. Maybe they can shoe-horn him in when they discuss the wrong-think if Steven Pinker.
https://the-orbit.net/orbitcon/2018/04/ ... -schedule/
https://i.imgur.com/OrqEf1G.png
I think there is a difference between what Hitler and Assad were/are doing (from the perspective of the outside world and what they were responding to). Hitler was attempting to expand the size of Germany at the expense of his neighbors, whereas Assad is "merely" attempting to stay in power of the whole of existing Syria. So Germany was a threat to other nations, whereas Syria is not.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑ World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.
Victor Davis Hanson, whatever you might think of him, argues that Germany was clearly unable to match the resources of Britain and the US and if the latter two had displayed the confidence to send Adolf to the dog box early on in the game he would never have risked war with them. We keep forgetting this lesson because it is an unpleasant fact to have to face. Limited ugliness now is always preferable to lots of it later, but the modern world has deluded itself into the belief that the old rules no longer apply. It would be luvverly if despotic bullies could be persuaded to undergo extensive therapy, but that isn't likely to happen so we either let them steal our sandwiches or whack them with our lunchbox.
How about we suggest additional panels?HoneyWagon wrote: ↑ The Orbit-Con is just around the corner folks!
I do hope they will find the space to discuss David Silverman. Maybe they can shoe-horn him in when they discuss the wrong-think if Steven Pinker.
https://the-orbit.net/orbitcon/2018/04/ ... -schedule/
I hear the Silver membership has been abandoned.
So soopergenius Hornbeck is going to take down Pinker a notch. Who wouldn't want to see that?HoneyWagon wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:58 pmThe Orbit-Con is just around the corner folks!
I do hope they will find the space to discuss David Silverman. Maybe they can shoe-horn him in when they discuss the wrong-think if Steven Pinker.
https://the-orbit.net/orbitcon/2018/04/ ... -schedule/
https://i.imgur.com/OrqEf1G.png
True honesty would be Steph Zsvan on all fours in front of a trough, her fat face inhaling burgers and fries while an endless queue of blue-haired women and weedy cucks poured in bucketfuls of fresh food and whispered their deepest secrets into her porcine ears.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑If they were honest, the Opening Remarks on "Staying Relevant as a Movement" would be that they are not relevant, and then everyone could go home.HoneyWagon wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:58 pmThe Orbit-Con is just around the corner folks!
I do hope they will find the space to discuss David Silverman. Maybe they can shoe-horn him in when they discuss the wrong-think if Steven Pinker.
https://the-orbit.net/orbitcon/2018/04/ ... -schedule/
https://i.imgur.com/OrqEf1G.png
I'll offer a tentative counter to that explanation of WW1. The dominant power of the time, Britain, was declining which left no-one to crack the whip. The Germans were hopeful that Britain wouldn't want to go to war over Belgian sovereignty. The house of cards fell because it wasn't clear to all parties that war would be a very bad idea. If the major powers had reason to fear the consequences they would have told the Serbs and Austro-Hungarians to SFU and stand in their corners facing the wall, instead they all thought they could sneak an advantage. Problem was nobody with enough power to keep everyone in line and perceived weaknesses in the opposition.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:13 amWorld War Two did indeed likely happen because Hitler was given too much wiggle room. But World War One happened because of a long buildup of geopolitical tensions between superpowers created a n armosphere of tension where many near misses eventually led to a spark which made the entire system explode.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 amWould it be that bad if there was WW3? Sure millions would die and millions more would be condemned to a life of radiation sickness misery, half of the earth would be uninhabitable for centuries, the ash clouds could spark another ice age but would it be so bad? really? I see it more as a reboot than the end.
Go Trump. :violence-guntoting:
Victor Davis Hanson, whatever you might think of him, argues that Germany was clearly unable to match the resources of Britain and the US and if the latter two had displayed the confidence to send Adolf to the dog box early on in the game he would never have risked war with them. We keep forgetting this lesson because it is an unpleasant fact to have to face. Limited ugliness now is always preferable to lots of it later, but the modern world has deluded itself into the belief that the old rules no longer apply. It would be luvverly if despotic bullies could be persuaded to undergo extensive therapy, but that isn't likely to happen so we either let them steal our sandwiches or whack them with our lunchbox.
So I guess that interventions are a crapshoot.
A couple of deep historical analyses.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑I'll offer a tentative counter to that explanation of WW1. The dominant power of the time, Britain, was declining which left no-one to crack the whip. The Germans were hopeful that Britain wouldn't want to go to war over Belgian sovereignty. The house of cards fell because it wasn't clear to all parties that war would be a very bad idea. If the major powers had reason to fear the consequences they would have told the Serbs and Austro-Hungarians to SFU and stand in their corners facing the wall, instead they all thought they could sneak an advantage. Problem was nobody with enough power to keep everyone in line and perceived weaknesses in the opposition.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:13 amWorld War Two did indeed likely happen because Hitler was given too much wiggle room. But World War One happened because of a long buildup of geopolitical tensions between superpowers created a n armosphere of tension where many near misses eventually led to a spark which made the entire system explode.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 amWould it be that bad if there was WW3? Sure millions would die and millions more would be condemned to a life of radiation sickness misery, half of the earth would be uninhabitable for centuries, the ash clouds could spark another ice age but would it be so bad? really? I see it more as a reboot than the end.
Go Trump. :violence-guntoting:
Victor Davis Hanson, whatever you might think of him, argues that Germany was clearly unable to match the resources of Britain and the US and if the latter two had displayed the confidence to send Adolf to the dog box early on in the game he would never have risked war with them. We keep forgetting this lesson because it is an unpleasant fact to have to face. Limited ugliness now is always preferable to lots of it later, but the modern world has deluded itself into the belief that the old rules no longer apply. It would be luvverly if despotic bullies could be persuaded to undergo extensive therapy, but that isn't likely to happen so we either let them steal our sandwiches or whack them with our lunchbox.
So I guess that interventions are a crapshoot.
The London police.... bringing sticks to a knife fight.
Hopefully Siggy will perform his triangle solo.
I was legitimately worried about the prospect of him nuking North Korea. By now we have a pattern in place - he does more kicking and screaming than anything else. It's not impossible that he would do something rash, but he does seem to have some sense of which actions to stay away from for the sake of self-preservation. Who knows, though, maybe Bolton will talk him into it. Or maybe he'll do it to distract people while he fires his entire justice department to keep them away from his
Might be worth reading this:ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑I'll offer a tentative counter to that explanation of WW1. The dominant power of the time, Britain, was declining which left no-one to crack the whip. The Germans were hopeful that Britain wouldn't want to go to war over Belgian sovereignty. The house of cards fell because it wasn't clear to all parties that war would be a very bad idea. If the major powers had reason to fear the consequences they would have told the Serbs and Austro-Hungarians to SFU and stand in their corners facing the wall, instead they all thought they could sneak an advantage. Problem was nobody with enough power to keep everyone in line and perceived weaknesses in the opposition.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:13 amWorld War Two did indeed likely happen because Hitler was given too much wiggle room. But World War One happened because of a long buildup of geopolitical tensions between superpowers created a n armosphere of tension where many near misses eventually led to a spark which made the entire system explode.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑World Wars tend to happen when superpowers go isolationist, rogue despots begin to get ideas beyond their station and conflicts are allowed to fester.. Trump has the right idea in this regard. He is not afraid of reminding twerps like Kim Jong-un where their place in the pecking order is. His delivery needs work though.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 amWould it be that bad if there was WW3? Sure millions would die and millions more would be condemned to a life of radiation sickness misery, half of the earth would be uninhabitable for centuries, the ash clouds could spark another ice age but would it be so bad? really? I see it more as a reboot than the end.
Go Trump. :violence-guntoting:
Victor Davis Hanson, whatever you might think of him, argues that Germany was clearly unable to match the resources of Britain and the US and if the latter two had displayed the confidence to send Adolf to the dog box early on in the game he would never have risked war with them. We keep forgetting this lesson because it is an unpleasant fact to have to face. Limited ugliness now is always preferable to lots of it later, but the modern world has deluded itself into the belief that the old rules no longer apply. It would be luvverly if despotic bullies could be persuaded to undergo extensive therapy, but that isn't likely to happen so we either let them steal our sandwiches or whack them with our lunchbox.
So I guess that interventions are a crapshoot.
Why does Peez hate transpeople? Why hasn't he changed his old pieces to reflect that Danielle is a woman?Ape+lust wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:59 am:lol:
Dave Takes Peez's Money and Goes to CPAC - a heartbreaking tale of betrayal.
Wily Dave, making conservadroids think he's sincere:
https://imgur.com/RrAgST0.png
Hah! See? That's my boy.
http://news.met.police.uk/news/statemen ... een-302509I do not want anyone to feel intimidated or that they are not being allowed to respond in a dignified way to a tragic death.
Metropolitan Police, the enforcement arm of the Muslim Council of Britain.
We get the job done.John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
Thinning the herd?Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑We get the job done.John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
When you take out the innocent youfs of color that get shot by racist police the stats are pretty much equal.John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
0.236 murders with firearms per million compared with 32.5. Yeah, it's like a warzone over here.John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
Heh. Tell me about it. My local area is presently being plagued by a scum of the earth baghead who has been causing no end of trouble. The police - well, most of the time it appears to be PCSOs - have been dragging their heels over it, in typical fashion. For a country that's so often been described as a police state, they do seem remarkably unenthusiastic about it all. It says much when you actually feel you'd be better off with one of those muzzbot sharia patrols working the area. Thanks, UK, ur doing great!Drugs > Opiates use 0.9%
Ranked 1st. 58% more than United States
I assume the pit is part of some prolonged acid flashback that I'm unaware of having. Maybe I'm sleeping in alleyways and under bridges on the left bank while subsisting on handouts of duck confit, Brillat-Savarin cheese, and Armagnac. I've always gotten along well with deranged Eastern European kitchen workers.Service Dog wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:33 pmMe neither. I think it might be Mr. X, Indeed's imagination.katamari Damassi wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 3:30 pmI'm not that imaginative.ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑ The more I see and hear from Service Dog, the more I believe he isn't real, but in fact is just a Matrix-type program making bits of katamari's imagination manifest themselves on the Pit.
No evidence.....but Russia at the UN denied the chance for investigators to get that evidence.... Why would they do that? It's a mystery! /sarcasm
Bolton is going to be a problem.Old_ones wrote: ↑Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:41 amI was legitimately worried about the prospect of him nuking North Korea. By now we have a pattern in place - he does more kicking and screaming than anything else. It's not impossible that he would do something rash, but he does seem to have some sense of which actions to stay away from for the sake of self-preservation. Who knows, though, maybe Bolton will talk him into it. Or maybe he'll do it to distract people while he fires his entire justice department to keep them away from hismoney launderingreal estate business.
https://media.tenor.com/images/18ae86fc ... /tenor.gifCommanderTuvok wrote: ↑George Galloway is still a cunt, I see.
People worried about replacement will launch a revolution, and so our 2 parties have a policy of alignment. To replace.The prospect of constant sniping from Tony Abbott on migration is more proof of the lust for destruction within a federal Coalition that is struggling so badly to offer the “stable government” it promised at the last election.
No issue has the power to divide Australians like a call to turn away migrants. Anxiety about population growth is a force that cannot be contained once it is unleashed. Knowing this, the political leaders of the past agreed on bipartisan policy for decades.
Brive1987 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:28 amNeedless to say virtually all migrants hit dirt in Sydney or Melbourne. Hence these pivotal centres really do experience population replacement and cease to be Australian by any meaningful measure.
Seriously. Check these maps out.
https://www.bobinoz.com/blog/17428/who- ... an-cities/
So far so good?If the people will not change, I will change the people
40% are rich Chinese and Indians taking advantage of our globalised city. And this isn’t factoring in second-gen migrants.Responding to the ABS findings, Ku-ring-gai mayor Jennifer Anderson said that despite the ABS’ judgement of Ku-ring-gai’s privilege, the LGA still has much to do.
“Around 40 per cent of our residents are migrants and many of these are non-English speaking, needing our help to build their lives here,” Ms Anderson said.
https://in.reuters.com/article/saudi-eu ... N1?rpc=401&We believe that European countries, where there is much debate now, and other countries around the world ... need to enhance national assimilation programmes and criminalise hatred and contempt for adherents of religions because this threatens the safety of the community
We basically don't have the death penalty either. If you get a death sentence you get a bunch of chances to get it reversed in the appellate courts, and it takes a long time (tens of years in some cases) for them to actually carry it out. We also constantly have arguments over whether the contemporary method of execution is "cruel and unusual" and therefore unconstitutional. We also have a reasonable number of states who have done away with the death penalty entirely.Shatterface wrote: ↑0.236 murders with firearms per million compared with 32.5. Yeah, it's like a warzone over here.John D wrote: ↑ Crime stats are tricky, but this source suggests that, while there is a much higher murder rate in the US, there are higher assault and total crime victim rates in the UK.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-inf ... ates/Crime
We may have a higher crime rate but since our crimes include dogs giving Nazi salutes that's hardly surprising.
Also, how come the US has only 3% more executions per year than the UK, a country which doesn't have the death penalty?
It's rich of a man who has promoted religious hatred for nonbelivers or non-muslims or Shia or Ahmadi or Ba'hai to now tut-tut at Western democracies because according to him the criticism of islam is so "hateful".shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ You will assimilate, resistance is futile.
https://in.reuters.com/article/saudi-eu ... N1?rpc=401&We believe that European countries, where there is much debate now, and other countries around the world ... need to enhance national assimilation programmes and criminalise hatred and contempt for adherents of religions because this threatens the safety of the community