- Joined
- Dec 13, 2022
Tucker Carlson did an interview with Patrick Lancaster
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I watched the original longer video and yeah, he really said that they were bravely fighting alongside russian forces.
The thing is, earlier Russia said that north koreans are not fighting directly on the frontline, but serve mostly as logistical support. That allowed to free some russian hands to support frontlune. And in the video it is hard to tell what exactly north koreans did. But in my opinion ukies could not capture any north koreans because on the front line there were none.
Patrick is great, glad to see he's getting some love.Tucker Carlson did an interview with Patrick Lancaster
Well yes - that's the point of Russia wanting it agreed to in any peace deal. I'm not sure who you're explaining this to but I'm worried if it's me. My point is very simple - that there's a difference between standing your ground over land that is historically yours and where your people live; and over land that historically hasn't been and where your people don't live. Crimea is filled with Russians who want no part of Ukranian rule. If China occupied Florida, there would be a moral argument for America trying to reclaim it for Americans. In Crimea, Russia has annexed an area filled with... Russians. That historically has been Russian. And the people there themselves don't like you.The issue isn't around Ukraine actually having that land, the issue is about Russia wanting Ukraine to admit Crimea isn't its land. Subtly different, but it ensures Crimea will never be Ukrainian land at any point in the future. I can see how that could be difficult because Ukraine will have its eye on getting back parts of the East that are predominantly Russian but were part of the original Ukrainian State. If they admit that Crimea is Russian, Russia can easily point to the East's demographics and historically Russian populace and compare it with Crimea to justify keeping it in negotiations.
I can pass judgement if you like. Sacrificing hundreds of thousands of conscripted soldiers and your nations economy in order to retain political control over a group of people who hate you and who you denied drinking water to for daring to resist that control, is wrong. There, judged.I'm not for, against or passing judgement, that's just how Ukraine will see it and why it's a sticking point in negotiation.
What's it meant to be and what is blasphemous about it? Genuine question.He's a jew, why would he have any respect for the Pope in death, or Catholics in general? Remember, he gave this blasphemous icon to the Pope when they first met, and expected to be lauded for it.
It's an icon of the Madonna and Child, a famous religious art genre. The image of our Blessed Virgin Mary and the baby Jesus Christ have been venerated by Roman Catholics for hundreds of years in this specific form, and to depict the Virgin, a saint, holding an empty space where Jesus Christ, the manifestation of our Heavenly Father on earth should be, is sacrilegious and offensive; a deliberate mockery of core Roman Catholic beliefs.What's it meant to be and what is blasphemous about it? Genuine question.
While the state of the Vatican does indeed have some bizarre modernist structures, keep in mind that building is merely one of many among churches and chapels in Vatican City.@Feline Supremacist Thanks. I recognised the Madonna and Child composition of the picture but I didn't know what it was trying to say or symbolise. So the blacking out of the child Jesus is the point. Bizarre.
But then the Pope carried out his sermons in a building shaped like a serpents head and with this hideous piece of sculpture behind him depicting what looks to me like Christ in Hell. Or possibly the wall piece from The Devil's Advocate. So maybe Pope Francis didn't mind it.
View attachment 7281489
View attachment 7281488
View attachment 7281490
I've never seen it but considering the text at the bottom says "Т Р А Т А", I assume the first letter is У and the full word is "УТРАТА" (loss), and I assume the blacked out child is symbolizing the "kidnapped children" narrative that was being pushed.What's it meant to be and what is blasphemous about it? Genuine question.
That last sculpture literally looks like shit splattering like hot lava. Isn't that in the Jewish book about Jesus in hell in a pool of boiling shit?@Feline Supremacist Thanks. I recognised the Madonna and Child composition of the picture but I didn't know what it was trying to say or symbolise. So the blacking out of the child Jesus is the point. Bizarre.
But then the Pope carried out his sermons in a building shaped like a serpents head and with this hideous piece of sculpture behind him depicting what looks to me like Christ in Hell. Or possibly the wall piece from The Devil's Advocate. So maybe Pope Francis didn't mind it.
View attachment 7281489
View attachment 7281488
View attachment 7281490
Well, for a practicing Roman Catholic who believes, that is blasphemous since the Pope is considered the literal representative of Christ on Earth. Talking to the Pope is like speaking to God.Presenting it to the literal Pope is like getting to meet, IDK, someone very important and blowing your load by telling him a "Your Mama" joke
almost as cringe as the gold plated pager. that one at least wasnt blasphemous. not like anyone cares nowadays, including the late pope.He's a jew, why would he have any respect for the Pope in death, or Catholics in general? Remember, he gave this blasphemous icon to the Pope when they first met, and expected to be lauded for it.
View attachment 7280913
Then he added him to the hohol kill list when the Pope said everyone involved should work for peace.
It may not be blasphemous but it does come across as a threat, given Mossad had recently used pagers as mass assassination devices.almost as cringe as the gold plated pager. that one at least wasnt blasphemous.
^^^ The conclusion of the matter, everything [of relevance] having been heard.Sacrificing hundreds of thousands of conscripted soldiers and your nations economy in order to retain political control over a group of people who hate you and who you denied drinking water to for daring to resist that control, is wrong. There, judged.
I would be willing to entertain it if Ukraine was actually saying that to the real invaders currently taking over their country. Instead the gnome is doing the opposite. Zelensky is currently mass liquidating SOEs (publicly owned enterprises), selling off their REMs and auctioning off their arable land to the highest bidders. Those bidders are usually non-Ukrainians located in the west. So in other words, he is welcoming the invasion and has done so before the SMO.I'd be more willing to entertain Kiev's "never surrender" attitude if they were actually being invaded and conquered by a true foreign entity and culture, but the people of Crimea don't want to be part of Ukraine.
not gonna happen. this only works in slava ukraini because of the average numbers of feds vs civilians and it being slav vs slav.Yes, but also these numbers won't matter much if these countries roll out conscription similar to Ukraine. Your "conscientious objector" status will be kindly noted and disregarded as you are shoved into a trench.
even more funny is that back then it was russian, so the russian spelling is correct. same way constantinople was the capitol of the eastern roman empire, not fucking istanbul.Imposed? Russia didn't impose that spelling on me, as a Brit, it's the spelling we picked when converting moon-runes to a proper alphabet. I'm not changing my language to please a bunch of nationalists. See also: Kiev, and that gay ass name for Turkey that has a letter that doesn't even exist in English because the roach is upset about Poultry jokes.