Wiki-plead-ia

If you happen to go to Wikipedia nowadays, you’re confronted with this banner:

Neutral and verified information?  And yet, time and time again we’re faced with situations like this:

Since the election of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Wikipedia editors have been downplaying or removing mention of controversies from her page. This has included minimizing mention of antisemitism controversies over her comments about Israel and its supporters, excluding mention of personal scandals, and censoring details about Turkish lobbying ties. Editors have meanwhile given considerable attention to alleged mistreatment of her by others, particularly President Donald Trump who editors tied to threats Omar received.
Omar’s treatment on Wikipedia regarding antisemitism, where editors have kept such allegations out of her page’s introduction in favor of more benign descriptions of her views on Israel, stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of various Republican officials.

And there are more, much more examples.  Even one of their founders thinks they’re full of shit.

So to the Wikipedia people who want my money:  fuck you.  I hope you dance the wokey-pokey.

Quote Of The Day

I have an uneven response to Taki writer David Cole’s articles:  sometimes I want to punch him in the face, and others he makes me howl with laughter.  This is one of the latter occasions, to whit:

I’m not a man who speaks in absolutes, but here’s one I’ll stand by: If a bus full of black people enters an upscale area and nobody on board is wearing a [sports] jersey, it’s bad news.

His description of a bunch of BLM mopes encountering resistance in the form of Persian Jews is equally funny:

Blacks have gotten far too used to dealing with Woody Allen Jews—weakling, neurotic nebbishes of European descent, people who are either Marxist or have Marxists in their family tree.
Persian Jews are cut from a different cloth entirely. It’s a healthy and virile community that categorically rejects racial guilting and socialist wealth redistribution. So the protesters were met by a bunch of Persian Jewish neighbors who stood against them with zero fear.

“Woody Allen Jews”… [exit, laughing]

Read the whole thing.

Familiar Road

We’ve seen all this before, yea even upon this very website.  From Insty’s link comes this silliness:

Leaving aside the self-contradiction — if Socialists are all about wealth redistribution, they should have no problem with richer states supporting the poorer states, yes? — any partition of North America is more likely to look like this:

And I’ve taken the liberty of renaming the respective nation-states;  denizens of the PSSA will be called “Pissahs” (New England pronunciation) while the Constitutional Republic’s citizens will be known as “Crappies” (after the fish).

I jest, but only a little.  Some comments:

Note that in my map — which is a lot more realistic than the first one — Pennsylvania, Illinois and indeed California / Oregon / Washington will likely divide themselves up, leaving Philadelphia, Chicago and the West Coast respectively to remain the bastions of socialism they’ve become (Austin remains a blueberry in the Texan bowl of tomato soup, and Denver / Boulder would retain their joint title of “Rocky Mountain LA”).  Northern Virginia, like Chicago, can be excised from the rest of its mostly-conservative state.

As for New Mexico:  several people have told me that the “Africa of America” (cf. Doc Russia) is really more conservative than presidential elections would suggest.  I disagree.  Too much of the state is either sucking on the government’s tit (Indians) or wants to (i.e. most of its Mexican immigrants), or else they don’t give a fuck because they’re always high on peyote, so into the PSSA they go.

Finally:  I am assured by almost all my Canucki Readers that non-Vancouver B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and that other prairie state (Manitoba?) would really prefer to be part of the Constitutional Republic as drawn.  As our Socialists / Greens hate oil so much, this would relieve them of the oil sands and fracking fields contained in those erstwhile provinces, not to mention all those icky gun-loving knickledraggers who are more like Middle Americans (whom the Left likewise despise).  Me, I say “Welcome aboard!”  I would most certainly not extend that welcome to people from Ontario (unless they split themselves away from Toronto), and as for the Frog Quebeckers, fuck ’em and their strange un-American language.  I don’t care aboot the hundred or so people who live in Nova Scotia;  they can decide for themselves.

Feel free to disagree with my hypothesis in Comments.

Dept. Of Righteous Shootings

So you and three of your compadres / homeboys / members of the choir decide to get together for a little undocumented property redistribution.  What happens next?

Hey, it’s Louisiana, baby:

A homeowner in Lacombe, Louisiana, shot and killed two alleged intruders Tuesday morning and sent two others to the hospital with gunshot wounds.

While some may think that a 50% kill rate is a little low, I think that putting all four down — especially during what seems to have been a gun battle — is quite laudable.  Note that the two who didn’t snuff it will now face the death penalty anyway, so there’s that.

Damn… this ammo shortage may force me to use my new Savage .22 rifle to celebrate the Happy Dance, instead of the customary AK-47.

These are tough times we live in.  A little less tough than if we were burglars in Lacombe LA, though.

Still More Eco-Loony Bullshit

Are the Brits going stark, raving mad?  This would certainly seem to indicate so:

A dramatic report from the government’s Climate Change Committee laid out a swathe of measures to slash emissions over the next 15 years.
It urged moves including halting sales of gas boilers by 2033, banning new fossil-fuelled cars – including hybrids – by 2032, and encouraging people to cut the amount of meat and dairy they eat by a fifth in the next decade.

None of this is going to happen, of course.  They might as well try to end murder by making it illegal… oh, wait.

Basically, all this amounts to a government increasing its hold over the population by ratcheting the screws ever tighter.

Of course, there is a way to fix this tyranny:

…but no doubt someone is going to have a problem with my suggestion.

And?

Sometimes, I just wanna shoot people.  Here’s one reason:

The world’s wealthiest 1% account for more than twice the carbon emissions of the poorest 50%, a new UN report has found.

And what, exactly, are we supposed to do with that information?

FFS:  The world’s wealthiest 1% also account for about 75% of new job creation, about 99% of the world’s yachtbuilding industry, all the top end car / watch / jewelry / etc. business.  They drive cars, fly around the world (on business, mainly — business which helps sustain the poor and gives them jobs), and as a result of their industry, the world is a far better place than it was in the Middle Ages, for instance.

I know:  the hidden meaning behind this “study” is that we should take away their wealth so they can’t emit carbon or whatever.

I would also like to point out that the poorest 50% of the world’s population account for about 90% of all terrestrial and maritime pollution (i.e. garbage) and if you don’t believe me, take a trip anywhere in the Third World:  look at the garbage carried out to sea at the river mouths of the Ganges, Congo, Yangtze and Amazon — to name but some — and drive for any distance outside the major cities to see how the Pore & Starvin just fucking trash the place.

The sooner we defund or otherwise destroy the United Nations, the better off we’ll all be.  Ask me which is my preference.