Another day, another transsexual mass shooting

From the frozen wastes of the Great No-longer-white North, Agent 3 reports that the Canajan lickspittle meeja were so busy downplaying the chosen gender identity of the tranny who mudered 9 people (including his mother and himself) in Tumbler Ridge BC, that it completely omitted to report a similar mass shooting which occurred yesterday in Rhode Island.

In Pawtucket RI (home of the Pawtucket Patriot Ale), a gunperson who was born male but identified as a woman killed two people and injured three others at a high school hockey match at the Dennis M. Lynch Areana, before turning the gun on himself.

According to local police chief, 56-year-old, the birth name of the shooter was Robert Dorgan, but "We have also learned that the person does go by the name of Roberta and also uses the last name of Esposito."

Mr/Ms/Whatever Dorgan, believed to have been the father of one of the hockey players, sat at the back of the stands on the home team's side during the hockey match before moving to the front and opening fire on four family members and one family friend. He/she/whatever died as a result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The mother of a student hockey player died inside Lynch Arena, while her child died later at the hospital. Three victims were in critical condition as of last night.

The motive has not been officially established, but police believe it was a targeted shooting that stemmed from a family dispute. Police have not identified the victims, but a different official source told Fox News that the gunman killed his wife and shot three of his children. The similarity with the mass murder in Canada is notable. Not that all transsexuals don't gert along with their families, of course, but... just sayin'.

Another similarity with the Canadian story is the reluctance of the American controllede media to inform their audiences that the shooter was a transsexual. The ultra-liberal-left New York Times, for example, spends 800 words without using the word. The only clue their five (count `em, 5) reporters give us is the quote from the police chief.

Why is the NYT so diffident? Breitbart's John Nolte says that their "lie of omission" of the unpleasant fact -- he calls it "as good as spreading disinformation" --  is due to their desperate desire not to offend their shrinking subscriber base, which (he says) "is made up mostly of intolerant leftists who will cancel their subscription should the Times begin to report truths that make them in any way uncomfortable.

"New York Times readers 1) don’t want to be exposed to anything that makes them uncomfortable, 2) do not want facts published that go against leftist narratives, and 3) do not want the Times to publish any truth that might hurt the leftist cause."

Of course the NYT is not the only media outlet turning a blind eye to the painful truth. Forget about the mainstream media. Before drinking their liberal Kool-Aid [Yes, we know it was actually "Flavor Aid". Ed.] check alternative sources... like WWW. The truth is out there. You just have to look for it.

VIDEO: Scott Adams deserves an award for courage

Early in 2023, Scott Adams, creator of the super-popular Dilbert comic strip, said the quiet part out loud. 

In a YouTube comment on a Rasmussen Reports poll in which black people were asked to agree or disagree with the phrase "It's OK to be white", Mr Adams, who is white, said that black people who disagreed with the statement were a "hate group." He added, "I would say, based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people…because there is no fixing this." 

The PC police, led by the Washington Post and the New York Times, accused Mr Adams of racism, and that his remarks "promoted segregation." Imagine that! In the opinion of many, including yr obdt servant, what he said wasn't racism, but realism. 

The knee-jerk reaction of the Los Angeles Times, the USA Today group, and almost all the papers in which Dilbert appeared was to cancel the strip, effectively cancelling Scott Adams' career. He predicted that most of his income would be gone within weeks. by next week. 

Mr Adams refused to be silenced, and started a vlog called "Coffee With Scott Adams", published on Rumble and, more recently, on YouTube. It was on his vlog that he announced, last May, that he had been diagnosed with Stage 4 metastatic prostate cancer. The cancer has spread to his bones. It is only treatable, not curable. 

Scott Adams is effectively under a death sentence, but he is keeping up the vlog, now known as "No Coffee With Scott Adams", even while undergoing -- and that's surely the right word -- radiation treatment. His livestream offers a candid hospital update, along with discussions on current events and personal reflections. Here's today's instalment.

No matter what one thinks of Mr Adams' political views, it's impossible to watch him struggle to keep keep talking, smiling (as best he can) through his tears, without feeling sympathetic. IMHO he deserves an award of some kind. The only award we have at WWW is the Wally, but that's not appropriate, so we offer instead our thoughts and prayers... seriously.

American Hero!

This excellent meme and the accompanying story were made up by the drollsters at the Babylon Bee, which is on Walt's daily reading list. Their headline is:

Media Scrambles To Fact-Check Image Of Trump

Riding Hero DogInto Massive Space Battle

The story is that the hair of the never-Trumpers at the New York Times, WaPo and CNN was set on fire by the meme, supposed tweeted by Still-President Trump, and went into a frenzy of fact-checking to portray Mr Trump as a liar and braggart yada yada yada. I don't want to reprint the whole article, but have to share this excerpt.

"Looks like we've got a live one, boys," said one editor [of the Times]. "Err--I mean, non-gender-conforming persons. Let's fact-check this puppy." An army of fact-checkers then got to work, running the image through advanced fact-checking software.... Sure enough, many of the pixels seemed not to line up quite right, plus fact-checkers discovered that several elements of the image were entirely fictional.

"The presence of a Cylon Basestar in the image casts doubt on its authenticity right away," said Bart Tucker, head fact-checker at the Washington Post. "We were also able to trace the image of the sandworm to the cover of Avalon Hill's 1979 board game Dune, so we can discredit that element of the space battle in any case."

Further historical research suggested that nearly every element of the picture was fake, from TIE fighters and the Death Star to the looming Borg Cube. "This president is trying to mislead the people with this meme," said a CNN spokesperson. "We are only OK with politicians who mislead people with regards to the effects of their healthcare policies or their Native American heritage, not presidents who tell jokes and have fun."

Thanks sooo much to the folks at the Bee for brightening our Blue Monday and setting the proper tone of skepticism for this week's lamestream media reports on the impeachment witchhunt.

VIDEO: Tucker Carlson and Mark Steyn on "resisters"' wishful thinking

It's been some time since we shared a Mark Steyn video. Mr Steyn hasn't been very active for the last few months, but reappeared this week on Fox News "Tucker Carlson Tonight" to give a quick (and scathing) opinion on Bob Woodward's latest and worst book, and its suggestion (repeated in the treasonous op-ed piece in the New York Times) that POTUS is verging on insanity for asking when America is going to start winning some wars. [Could you please curb those run-on sentences? How do you expect me to edit that? Ed.] Here's the 4-minute clip. (Ed., that OK? Walt.)



Further reading:
"Woodward Book, Anonymous NYTimes Op-Ed Reveal Trump's Done Nothing Wrong", by John Nolte, Breitbart News, 6/9/18.
"Trump loves to say the media treat him unfairly. In the case of the NYT op-ed, he's right", by Robyn Urback, CBC News [Seriously?! Ed.] 7/9/18.

Image scraped from Blazing Cat Fur. Love that site!

Some dare call it treason!

Walt's agent in Washington -- so anonymous that he doesn't even have a number! -- reports that Jeff Bezos, owner of the WaPo, was like the fly on the rim of the toilet bowl yesterday, when he was told that the anonymous, gutless traitor inside the White House had gone to the New York Times with his/her/zer story -- and that's the right word -- of how a brave cabal in the administration was protecting America from President Trump. Walt trusts Mr Bezos feels better seeing that the NYT op-ed piece has been met with less than universal approval.

Speculation is rife as to the authorship of this amateurish, scandalos, scurrilous POS. Wouldn't it be funny if there is no patriotic anti-Trumper working his/her/zer ass off to undermining POTUS from a rathole somewhere in the West Wing? Suppose that the piece is the fabrication of a committee of "resisters" who got too deeply into the sauce in the NYT boardroom in an orgy of wishful thinking? Until a name is put on the piece, we have to regard that as a possibility.

But it's also a possibility that there is a real person, or a group of people, who are, as the article says, "working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations." Perhaps he/they are sincere, having drunk deeply of the Koolaid ladled out by the Prez, Mr and Mrs Clinton, and of course the Times itself. Even so, Walt asks, whatever happened to the concept of fidelity to the oath one takes on assuming high office? Whatever happened to loyalty? Does all that go out the window if you find yourself with a boss you don't like?

Yesterday evening POTUS tweeted a one-word comment on the article.

The lefties immediately put their fine legal minds to that tweet, and concluded that (as usual) President Trump was lying, because Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States provides two fairly narrow definitions of "treason" -- "aid and comfort" and "levying war" -- and publishing an attack in a newspaper doesn't fit either of them. But, dear "resisters", that's not what we're talking about. Here's a broader, more apt definition.

Treason: (1) the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
(2) the action of betraying someone or something. Synonyms: treachery, disloyalty, betrayal, faithlessness.
That's what POTUS meant, I'm sure, and that's what I mean when I ask "Whatever happened to loyalty?" If you disagree with the person to whom your loyalty is owed, the first thing to do is confront him in person -- not anonymously -- with your concerns. If he won't respond or won't even listen -- as in the case of Pope Francis and the dubia -- you might publish your questions, but if you wish them to be taken seriously, you have an obligation to identify yourself. And finally, if no satisfactory response is forthcoming, the honourable thing to do is resign.

The phrase "none dare call it treason" first appeared in an epigram by Elizabethan writer John Harington:
Treason doth neuer prosper? What's the Reason? for if it prosper none dare call it treason.
In other words... if everyone agrees with what you say, no-one will call it treasonous. But not everyone agrees with the unsigned hatchet job which appeared in the Times. It is not "prospering". POTUS calls it treason. I call it treason. What do you call it?

Further reading:
"Kavanaugh hearings, Times op-ed, Woodward book make it official -- Washington elites have gone mad", by Steve Hilton, Fox News, 6/9/18.
None Dare Call It Treason, by Rev. John Stormer, Liberty Bell Press, 1964, argued that America was losing the Cold War due to domestic subversion by Communists. Click here to read the full text.
"Funerals as 'acts of resistance' portend coming civil war", WWW 4/9/18.

UPDATED + VIDEO ADDED: Washington Post reveals its true colours

The "greats" of the lamestream media, such as the New York Times and the Washington Post, make a big deal out of proclaiming their neutrality when "reporting" (read: writing opinion pieces described as news reports) on American politics. Since last year's presidential election, no-one with any smarts at all believes them, but it's still good to see proof of their pro-Democrat/anti-Trump bias every now and then.

Here, for your delectation, is an excerpt from an "analysis" (read: you have to believe this because I'm smarter than you are) piece by (((Kayla Epstein))) headed "Trump’s Twitter deactivation couldn’t have come at a worse political moment for the platform", published today, 4/11/17. Except for the substitution of "Twitter" for "the platform") in the first line, I have copied it exactly as it appears online. You can look it up.

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) raised the question of [Twitter]’s political neutrality during a Senate Judiciary hearing with Facebook, Twitter, and Google on Oct. 31. The purpose of the hearing was to investigate malicious Russian activity on these platforms during the 2016 election, but Cruz took the conversation further.

“Given the percentage of news and political information that Americans receive online through social media or through other online avenues, the prospect of Silicon Valley companies actively censoring the speech or the news content is troubling to anyone who cares about a Democratic process with a robust First Amendment,” Cruz told representatives from the tech giants.

Cruz cited specific controversial incidents involving Google, Facebook, and Twitter, including Facebook’s Trending news team, and a temporarily suspended Twitter ad by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a candidate for Senate.

Did you catch the play? I'll bet you Ted Cruz didn't mean to say "Democratic" with a capital D. More likely he meant "democratic", as in having a choice between competing ideologies or parties. Lifetime pct .993.

VIDEO ADDED 10/11/17: Chris Wallace (American television anchor and political commentator who is the host of the Fox Broadcasting Company/Fox News Channel program Fox News Sunday) admits that when he says the media are biased against him "Trump may have a point".

FURTHER READING (ADDED 24/11/17): "Washington Post reporter caught plotting liberal agenda with billionaire George Soros", Fox News 24/11/17.