[ZERO] Good comedy is generally one part sensationalism, one part truth and one part tragedy. Often, the tragedy is in the lack of self awareness of the people being made fun of, and lets just say that modern western women are ripe for such ridicule. No other group in history has enjoyed this level of unfettered privilege and protection. So much protection, in fact, that you're not even allowed to make jokes about their bad behavior.
The term "modern woman" largely refers to liberal women in first world countries, and the feminist idealism surrounding these women is truly bizarre. The political left views them as untouchable pure spirits; the pinnacle of human evolution, the most benevolent and morally superior beings on the planet. Everything they say is rooted in feelings, therefore everything they say is right. Logic and reason are considered masculine evils that poison the waters and get in the way of the otherwise perfect feminine perspective.
Of course, this is complete nonsense. Liberal women are some of the most selfish, arrogant, petty, degenerate and violent creatures the human species has ever produced; they just express their violence through mob aggression and sabotage rather than direct action. They prefer to get other people (or the government) to brutalize their enemies on their behalf (cancel culture).
#4
Maybe I'm just insensitive but it didn't sound that bad to me.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
10/16/2026 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You're not in the victimhood mindset
Posted by: chris ||
10/16/2026 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
#6
There are a percentage of scantily clad women in the gym. There are a percentage of guys at the gym that are interested in impressing people. There is also work out attire specifically marketed for narcissists and other personality disorders. Seems like women are wasting their time putting on makeup to workout. Im assuming that they shower afterward. Sort of a waste.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/16/2026 15:43 Comments ||
Top||
Article which appeared in TASS, written by Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin
[ColonelCassad] As part of the ongoing militarization of Europe, and especially NATO's eastern flank, the North Atlantic Alliance leadership pompously unveiled the military doctrine "Theory of Victory." Claiming the "defensive nature" of the strategy, the alliance hopes to inflict a "quick defeat on Russia" in a high-intensity conventional conflict that would encompass the Baltics, Poland, Belarus, and northwestern Russian regions, including Karelia, the environs of St. Petersburg, and Kaliningrad. THE SECOND BOTTOM OF CONVENTIONAL WARFARE
The plan is based on three blocks of tasks:
"Deterrence before firing" (Block),
"Destruction of the offensive impulse" (Blunt), and
"Break."
Despite the pompous statements by NATO representatives, from an operational perspective, there is little fundamentally new here. This logic has been tested in command-staff exercises in this same potential theater of military operations (TOMO) since the mid-2010s, and retired intelligence officers have even published commercial wargames simulating various NATO war scenarios against Russia and Belarus. The key nuance of this alliance's planning is its deliberate disregard for weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Both old and new public war plans against Russia fail to specify a course of action should Moscow—in accordance with its nuclear doctrine—use tactical and strategic nuclear weapons (NW). It's quite obvious that such a response to "preventive" Western steps would instantly destroy both key logistics and large NATO troop concentrations, ruining any plans. At the same time, it's equally obvious that such scenarios cannot be ignored by alliance strategists. However, the media deliberately takes this topic out of context—for example, to avoid frightening the average person, and simply to avoid revealing their hand completely.
At the same time, new nuclear exercises are being conducted in Europe (such as Steadfast Noon in Italy), strikes against the Kaliningrad region are being practiced, and restrictions on the deployment of nuclear weapons in the Baltics and Finland are being lifted. All of this is a clear indication that, behind the veneer of conventional saber-rattling, preparations are underway for nuclear war scenarios.
During the Cold War, the world was largely held back by the fear of a conflict escalating into an uncontrollable terminal escalation with mutually assured destruction. After the collapse of the USSR, the Warsaw Pact, and the reduction of nuclear arsenals, this stabilizing fear somewhat dissipated. The weakening of psychological constraints increased the likelihood of a nuclear catastrophe. The announced points of the "Grinkevich plan" (General Alexus Grinkevich, Supreme Allied Commander-in-Chief of NATO's Allied Forces in Europe, who presented the "Theory of Victory" strategy) illustrate this well—especially the first point, which describes the transition from the alliance's current proxy war against Russia to a direct military confrontation.
THE HIDDEN MECHANISM:
The "deterrence" mechanism itself presupposes certain active actions against Russian troops. In other words, Grinkevich's strategy effectively legitimizes preemptive strikes based on the principle of "if an attack is inevitable, strike first."
To some extent, this replicates the Third Reich's rhetoric of "containment of Bolshevism." While preparing Operation Barbarossa (which also aimed to defeat the Soviet Union in a single, short, lightning campaign), Nazi Germany similarly attempted to present the attack on the USSR as a "preemptive response" to a mythical threat. Postwar analysis of both Soviet and German documents has proven that Moscow had no plans to attack in 1941. Moreover, Berlin was well aware of this. But this didn't stop the Nazis from waging an active disinformation campaign and deploying forces to seize territory and implement Generalplan Ost (which envisioned the extermination of a significant portion of the USSR's peoples and the enslavement of the remainder).
It's easy to see the parallels with our reality. For years, Western media have been cultivating the image of an "aggressive Russia" bent on attacking Europe. This narrative is further reinforced by the proxy conflict in Ukraine and a series of drone sabotage incidents, for which Moscow is repeatedly blamed without evidence—from the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline to the Leipzig incident.
At the same time, NATO is significantly building up its presence in Poland and the Baltics, and actively preparing military logistics and civil defense systems. Naturally, all of this is part of the concept of "strategic uncertainty," which, according to the alliance's logic, is based on speculation about the inevitability of war. Thus, NATO is attempting to tie down Russia's military resources on its western borders in order to force Moscow to make concessions on the Ukrainian issue and ease the situation for the Kyiv regime.
THE RISKS OF UNDERESTIMATING NUCLEAR SCENARIOS
But even by speculating on this topic as much as possible, NATO cannot change the overall dynamic of events in Ukraine, where Kyiv is steadily losing. Nearly all stages of conventional escalation have already been passed, and available conventional weapons have been used. Russia is successfully enduring both the military-resource standoff with NATO and the economic war of attrition (and better than Europe itself, which unleashed this war). They have failed to crush the Russian economy, they have failed to undermine Russia from within with the aim of its political and territorial destruction, and they have failed to intimidate the authorities and the population with terrorist attacks by Ukrainian Nazis and Islamic terrorists. In other words, the options within the escalatory logic of the proxy war are close to exhaustion.
Therefore, as the conflict continues, the likelihood of a direct military confrontation increases. Russia will be declared the aggressor in advance, and a provocation similar to the "Gleiwitz incident" (now Gliwice) will be carried out to create a formal pretext. This scenario would fit seamlessly into the current propaganda line of "combatting Russia's hybrid attacks in Europe." NATO leadership has already openly recommended blaming Moscow for all incidents, even in the complete absence of any evidence. In other words, any future provocation is pre-emptively declared "Russian." This dogma is identical to Joseph Goebbels's propaganda points, which blamed communists and Jews for everything.
THE MECHANISM FOR TRIGGERING A NEW WORLD WAR:
Imagine a situation where an "unidentified drone" strikes a passenger Airbus during takeoff at a European airport, killing 150-200 civilians. Another option is the explosion of an Antonov military transport plane over residential areas of a European city (for example, near the NATO logistics hub in Leipzig, Germany). With the development of drones, conducting such operations under a false flag has become much easier. Russia will be blamed by default, accused of a "hybrid attack" against a NATO member (whether intentional or unintentional—it doesn't matter). And this will occur against the backdrop of the alliance's already completed military deployment. There's no hope of an independent investigation in Europe—Western intelligence agencies easily cover up such acts of sabotage.
Developing the logic of Grinkevich within the context of such a provocation will lead either to an ultimatum with obviously unacceptable demands for Russia (in the spirit of Austria-Hungary's demands on Serbia in 1914, just before the outbreak of World War I), or to immediate "preemptive" strikes against Kaliningrad under the pretext of retaliation, following the example of Adolf Hitler.
In response, Russia will have no choice but to begin offering military resistance to the aggressors and launch counterattacks. A blockade of the Kaliningrad region will force the Russian army to resolve the issue of the Suwalki Gap to establish a land link with the exclave. NATO strategists are taking this natural reaction from Moscow into account: stage 2 of their plan is aimed at halting the Russian counteroffensive, and stage 3 at defeating isolated groups. Naturally, all of this is being presented as "response to Russian aggression"; the Kremlin's warnings that a war provoked by such actions by its neighbors "will be short" are deliberately ignored; and activity around NATO's nuclear forces is escalating.
The potential moment of truth remains flexible. The slide toward uncontrolled escalation is periodically slowed by statements that "Russia is not currently ready to attack NATO." But then the topic of "war on the alliance's doorstep" is once again promoted by the leadership of member states. No one intends to remove it from the agenda. This informational back-and-forth allows the West to simultaneously attempt to draw Russian reserves away from the Ukrainian theater of operations and inflate its own military budgets by manipulating public opinion in its own countries.
But the West certainly shouldn't count on impunity under the "Grinkevich plan"
That sounds like a quick way to reach the desired result.
[BB] French news magazine Marianne has published the findings of large sample polling conducted for them by Ifop that suggests a large proportion of the country would simply refuse to keep living peacefully in France if their preferred candidates don’t prevail in the April 2027 Presidential Elections. Some 46 per cent of Muslims in the 9,600 respondent poll — a large sample for European polls — said they would consider “leaving France to settle in another country”.
Because the French government is officially secular its collection of data on matters like faith and ethnicity among the population can be patchy, but according to recent estimates adherents of the Muslim faith make up around ten per cent of all people in France. With around 70 million permanent residents, this could mean three-and-a-half million people responding to the election by considering going abroad.
While claims of voluntary deportation around election time are not unknown and often prove to be hyperbole, there is a hardcore within that group at 20 per cent of Muslims in France who say they have already made their minds up and will “certainly” go abroad if Marine Le Pen is sworn in as President, approaching one-and-a-half million people.
This desire to leave may be down to concern about what Le Pen’s France may be like. Some 80 per cent of Muslims said they fear “increase in attacks and discrimination”, and 27 per cent said they would try to hide their religious choices in daily life. Even 18 per cent of hijab-wearing women said they would consider stop veiling if Le Pen won the election, the pollster claimed.
Muslims living in France are not the only group who told the pollster they’d consider going abroad. Almost as welling to sit out a Le Pen Presidency were supporters of hard-left leader Jean-Luc Melenchon, who seems a credible candidate to make it to the Presidential run-offs against Le Pen, and whose party has been accused of stoking recent riots in France for their own political ends. According to Marianne, 43 per cent of Melenchon voters say they’d consider leaving France.
Better and better. They could all move to Montreal Province, and not even hqve to learn English.
With his polling hovering around 17 per cent nationally, the results imply five and a half million leftists in France who would consider reacting to losing an election by moving abroad.
Voluntary expatriation isn’t the only option on the table that opponents of Marine Le Pen perceive. The prospect of the left attempting to bring the country grinding to a halt in revenge against a democratic election looms large, with the Marianne / Ifop polling finding that three-quarters of leftist Melenchon voters would simple ignore new laws they consider “unjust” and join in a general strike against the government, a level of resistance raising the fear of “gridlock” in the country.
Left-wing resistance movements or not, any such attempts to bring down the government would be up against a democratic mandate and some policies which, this polling suggests, are popular. Part of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party platform is banning the burka in public — a traditional Arab modesty garment that provides near-total coverage of a woman now associated with fundamentalist interpretations of Islam — and possibly gaining a re-enforced mandate for it by hosting a national referendum on the matter.
Per Ifop, 53 per cent of French people are “opposed to Muslim women wearing the veil in public, even if they choose to do so”, and 60 per cent want a ban referendum, suggesting the measure could possibly become law.
A majority of French also support banning organisations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood with an overwhelming 80 per cent in favour. Presse Agence states support for banning these groups is even held among a majority of left-wing voters, and even if it just misses out on an outright majority, a huge 48 per cent of Muslims were also polled to agree with the measure.
[YouTube] 0:00:00 Trump's promise to Abbas
0:09:24 The Oslo Accords and Rabin's assassination
0:14:19 Trump snubs Netanyahu in Israel
0:18:55 Is Trump Israel's puppet?
0:23:05 Mossad, PROMIS and Robert Maxwell
0:29:03 How mob money saved Israel's economy
0:33:10 The Russian mob and the Likud
0:35:39 Netanyahu's charges and five elections
0:39:51 Netanyahu's deal with the Kahanists
0:43:16 CIA warns of civil war in Israel
0:50:55 The IDF is running out of soldiers
0:54:11 Criminalising criticism of Israel
0:56:22 Trump's message to Abbas on Truth Social
1:00:30 Why Mossad backed out of killing Soleimani
1:09:55 Netanyahu funded Hamas
1:12:59 The Trump interview Israel heard
1:17:25 Trump forces Netanyahu into the Abraham Accords
1:21:24 Looking past the optics
1:24:33 The Board of Peace
1:26:09 Netanyahu's prison incentive
#2
Joe Lange at Badlands media: Pithy part begins are 1:01 and David Barnea call to President Trump and the Soleimani (3 Jan 2020) hit piece. Also of interest is the Obama money to Iran comment and potential funding Hamas leading up to 7 Oct 2023 concert attack.
#3
Discussion and official follow-up of the Obama 17 Jan 2016 pallets of $1.7b to Iran and the 2014 (to whenever) Fauci funding link to Wuhan. Why do these discussions and media coverage appear to have ended ?
[Jpost] “The vehicle and its cargo belong to the resistance,” Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah said. He noted that his organization also called for the immediate release of those arrested in the seizure.
Hezbollah appeared to admit on Thursday that it is the owner of more than 500 kilograms of explosives that were seized by Lebanese authorities.
It appears that this is one of several recent attempts at smuggling explosives, and conflicting information is circulating. Nevertheless, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has called for "no leniency" and for "truth and accountability" in this incident.
"The vehicle and its cargo belong to the resistance," Hezbollah politician Hassan Fadlallah said. He noted that his organization also called for the immediate release of those arrested over the seizure, according to the AFP and Rooters.
This marks a rare admission by Hezbollah and follows several days of questions about the shipment of explosives. al-Ain media, based in the United Arab Emirates, noted that "the Lebanese Hezbollah party has acknowledged that a shipment of kabooms seized by Lebanese authorities this week belongs to it."
Fadlallah indicated that the explosives belong to "the party," which is a euphemism for Hezbollah.
SHIPMENT SEIZED BY LEBANESE ARMY CARRIED C4 PLASTIC EXPLOSIVES
"Lebanese authorities opened investigations that began with the judicial police and expanded to include military intelligence and the information branch of the Internal Security Forces," al-Ain added, based on a Rooters report.
This follows a shipment that was seized earlier this week. Reports indicated the shipment had been smuggled from Syria. At the time, the Lebanese army claimed it had found the kabooms in the Qasr area of Hermel, packed inside bags and prepared for smuggling from Syrian territory into Lebanese territory. Leb ...The Lebs maintain a precarious sectarian balance among Shiites, Sunnis, and about a dozen flavors of Christians, plus Armenians, Georgians, and who knows what else?... attempted to make it appear that the smugglers had fled to Syria. It was not clear whether this was true. Damascus has halted attempts by Hezbollah to smuggle weapons through Syria over the past year.
The reports this week said that the kaboom consisted of C4 and that it had been moved by donkey. It was unclear from reports how many donkeys were used to move the material.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam praised Lebanon’s efforts to identify "all those involved and the parties behind the shipment and to determine their plans and objectives, in preparation for referring them to the judiciary," al-Ain media noted. The same report said that Lebanon and Syria are trying to prevent smuggling along their roughly 330 km. of shared border, where there are dozens of illegal crossings.
Lebanese authorities seem to want to make a show of cracking down on explosives smuggled to Hezbollah. However,
today is that tomorrow you were thinking about yesterday... they don’t want to actually mention Hezbollah by name. The goal may be to indicate to the US that Lebanon is doing "something" to stop smuggling.
It’s convenient for Lebanon to make it seem that the smugglers flee to Syria, which means they need not be charged with crimes in Lebanon. This narrative can also be used to depict Syria negatively.
Hezbollah invaded Syria in 2012 to back the Assad regime against Syrian rebels. When it fell in 2024, Hezbollah had to flee Syria. Since then, there have been discussions about whether Syria might intervene against Hezbollah in Lebanon. While some in the Trump administration discussed this, Damascus appears reluctant to intervene, as it is still rebuilding after years of war.
Salam said this week, "It has become known that a few days ago, a truck was stopped in the town of Zahle, heading from the Bekaa Valley to the Greater Beirut area, containing hundreds of kilograms of explosives, including the highly explosive C-4 substance." The Lebanese president praised the actions of the security forces.
"I understand the anxiety gripping the Lebanese people upon the news of this truck’s interception and the materials it was transporting, especially since C-4 has been used in several of the infamous political liquidations in modern Lebanese history," Salam said.
'WE WILL NOT RELENT IN PURSUING THE INVESTIGATION... IDENTIFY EVERY INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED'
"But from my position as head of government, I call on all Lebanese to rest assured that we will not relent in pursuing the investigation and expanding it to identify every individual involved in this criminal operation, as well as those behind them, uncover their plans and objectives and bring them all to justice to receive the punishment they deserve."
The reality in Lebanon is that Hezbollah appears to be challenging Salam. They know that the politicians in Lebanon are afraid to condemn Hezbollah. The terror organization wants to see if it can continue to get away with smuggling.
The smuggling incident comes amid an attempt to intimidate Lebanon’s Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh Moawad. A complaint about her was filed with Lebanon’s military judiciary by a lawyer believed to be pro-Hezbollah. The US has been critical of this complaint.
Naharnet media in Lebanon said that the "state Commissioner to the Military Court Judge Claude Ghanem has decided to dismiss the complaint filed by pro-Hezbollah lawyer Hassan Bazzi against Lebanese Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Moawad, MTV reported on Thursday."
Hezbollah’s aim is to attempt to intimidate Lebanese officials who meet with American and Israeli officials.
It is worth noting, Naharnet added, that "Lebanon’s boycott law, adopted in 1955, prohibits direct and indirect dealings with Israeli individuals or entities, including commercial, financial, and cultural institutions. It carries prison sentences ranging from several years to harsher penalties under the broader criminal code."
The current situation in Lebanon is that Hezbollah remains in the country and is a threat.
Despite rounds of talks, the Lebanese government is not able to rein in Hezbollah, and it continues to challenge the state. It wants to show that it can continue to stockpile explosives.
The group was likely linked to the Beirut Port blast in 2020, but was never held accountable. Hezbollah also murdered former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri in 2005 and was not held accountable, despite years of investigation.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...The Lebs maintain a precarious sectarian balance among Shiites, Sunnis, and about a dozen flavors of Christians, plus Armenians, Georgians, and who knows what else?...
