March 20, 2006
Federal Ban of Military Funeral Protests Proposed
Disgusted by the antics of the Westboro Baptist Church hate cult, US Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI) will introduce legislation that would prohibit protests an hour before or after a funeral and keep protesters at least five hundred feet away from family members of the deceased.
more...
Posted by: Bluto at
12:12 AM
| Comments (37)
| Add Comment
Post contains 189 words, total size 2 kb.
1
This seems like an acceptable and judicious limitation on protests. In my opinion, this wouldn't infringe on any first amendment rights, as I would not consider these demonstrations "peaceable" assembly.
Posted by: The Gentle Cricket at March 20, 2006 01:09 AM (USZUJ)
2
Rep. Mike Rogers would do well to write this legislation to include all the funerals the Phelps followers target with their hateful protests. They don't just protest at military funerals. They also go after the funerals of victims of AIDS and hate crimes.
Posted by: Oyster at March 20, 2006 05:22 AM (YudAC)
3
There is no decency left in America, and it's about time to start busting heads to teach people some manners.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 20, 2006 05:43 AM (0yYS2)
4
I agree with such legislation in principle, but it is probably unconstitutional.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 07:31 AM (bfkgE)
5
Time for local and federal law enforcement to declare these hatemongers as 'invisible' and 'non-existant', and let the brothers-in-arms of the deceased take care of the matter as they see fit.
Posted by: Charlie at March 20, 2006 07:44 AM (DwY9A)
6
Or, to treat them like barracks thieves.
You know: "If the funeral of your loved one is marred by the presence of these morons, detain them and bring them to the Police. Under no circumstance are you to harm them in any way; but if they happen to fall down a couple of flights of stairs on the way in, it's not your fault that they are clumsy."
You know: "If the funeral of your loved one is marred by the presence of these morons, detain them and bring them to the Police. Under no circumstance are you to harm them in any way; but if they happen to fall down a couple of flights of stairs on the way in, it's not your fault that they are clumsy."
Posted by: Charlie at March 20, 2006 07:48 AM (DwY9A)
7
I don't know about it being unconstitutional. Free speech does have limits. This would not silence or censor them. They're just being told to move the platform. There is a level of irony here. They assert their freedom of speech, but protest against other freedoms like career choice and lifestyle.
Posted by: Oyster at March 20, 2006 07:54 AM (YudAC)
8
I agree with you, Oyster, on the irony here, and I think these protectors are bottom feeders who deserve to be shot. But their speech is constitutional.
Their speech is political. Abhorrent, yes, but political. Political speech (as opposed to commercial speech) is given the highest protection under the US Constitution. A military funeral is speech, and arguably political speech. In the context of this war, it is therefore a political event, and, like any other political event, the protestors are free to come with counterspeech.
I'm not saying I agre with the Christian Taliban protestors here, but I don't see how such a law can comply with the Constitution.
Their speech is political. Abhorrent, yes, but political. Political speech (as opposed to commercial speech) is given the highest protection under the US Constitution. A military funeral is speech, and arguably political speech. In the context of this war, it is therefore a political event, and, like any other political event, the protestors are free to come with counterspeech.
I'm not saying I agre with the Christian Taliban protestors here, but I don't see how such a law can comply with the Constitution.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 08:57 AM (bfkgE)
9
ProCynic - I would argue that this speech, coming at a funeral, could be considered "fighting words" or "provoking speech". Therefore, limiting the time and place is permissable under the Constitution.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at March 20, 2006 09:14 AM (WOQ34)
10
You can argue that, Airdale, but I don't think it will win, given the current jurisprudence. The courts tend to give the greater weight to the political element of the speech.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 09:27 AM (bfkgE)
11
I could be wrong but, I think the young man on the right in the p-shop pic is a protest warrior from the NYC chapter.
Posted by: Babs at March 20, 2006 10:04 AM (iZZlp)
12
ProCynic: I would argue that these funerals are private events. The military is participating only at the request and with the permission of the grieving family members.
Therefore, what you call political speech is actually harrassment. I'd like to see the church members charged, as often as possible, to keep them busy with other things.
I'd also like the ban to cover ALL funerals, not just military ones.
Therefore, what you call political speech is actually harrassment. I'd like to see the church members charged, as often as possible, to keep them busy with other things.
I'd also like the ban to cover ALL funerals, not just military ones.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 20, 2006 10:34 AM (RHG+K)
13
I'm not saying I agre with the Christian Taliban protestors
I'll point this out, each time people say it. Read up Fred Phelps past, and who are the members of his "Church" His "Church" is his house, he is a disbarred Lawyer, most of his children are lawyers, and are attendees.
Do you see the big picture:
chant evil, vile things at funerals, get assaulted sue municipality.
Calling them "Christian" and saying they're making a political statement is ignorant of the facts -- also look at the 7 million dollar lawsuit he has against a city in regards to his protests.
I'll point this out, each time people say it. Read up Fred Phelps past, and who are the members of his "Church" His "Church" is his house, he is a disbarred Lawyer, most of his children are lawyers, and are attendees.
Do you see the big picture:
chant evil, vile things at funerals, get assaulted sue municipality.
Calling them "Christian" and saying they're making a political statement is ignorant of the facts -- also look at the 7 million dollar lawsuit he has against a city in regards to his protests.
Posted by: davec at March 20, 2006 10:41 AM (CcXvt)
14
DPB:
First of all, thanx for responding to my comment directly. I am honored honor, particularly since Jawa Report has become daily reading for me.
I think characterizing military funerals as private events is possible but problematic at best. The first issue would be the definition of the cemetery. Is the cemetery a public forum? That would not necessarily depend on whether the cemetery is publicly or privately owned. If the cemetery is considered a traditional public forum, then you have a major problem trying to get a military funeral considered a private event in this public forum.
And could the cemetery be considered a public forum? Very easily. Political statements are made at funerals all the time. Paul Wellstone and CSK come to mind. Counter protesting outside the church on a public street is legitimate and constitutional. Political statements are made at cemeteries all the time. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address arguably fits into this bill. That would be my first argument in any brief I was writing opposing such a law.
What you're arguing for is a content-based restriction on political speech. A time, place and manner restriction this ain't, because it is the funeral itself that gives the protestors, they would argue, the opportunity to be heard by people who disagree with them, which is why you can protest a political convention or a presidential visit.
Again, I think these protestors are the scum of the earth, and their abuse of the First Amendment may end up limiting it for all of us, but even I could put together an argument that would sway the court that their despicable actions are still constitutional. And if I could do it, the vile Laurence Tribes of the world certainly could.
First of all, thanx for responding to my comment directly. I am honored honor, particularly since Jawa Report has become daily reading for me.
I think characterizing military funerals as private events is possible but problematic at best. The first issue would be the definition of the cemetery. Is the cemetery a public forum? That would not necessarily depend on whether the cemetery is publicly or privately owned. If the cemetery is considered a traditional public forum, then you have a major problem trying to get a military funeral considered a private event in this public forum.
And could the cemetery be considered a public forum? Very easily. Political statements are made at funerals all the time. Paul Wellstone and CSK come to mind. Counter protesting outside the church on a public street is legitimate and constitutional. Political statements are made at cemeteries all the time. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address arguably fits into this bill. That would be my first argument in any brief I was writing opposing such a law.
What you're arguing for is a content-based restriction on political speech. A time, place and manner restriction this ain't, because it is the funeral itself that gives the protestors, they would argue, the opportunity to be heard by people who disagree with them, which is why you can protest a political convention or a presidential visit.
Again, I think these protestors are the scum of the earth, and their abuse of the First Amendment may end up limiting it for all of us, but even I could put together an argument that would sway the court that their despicable actions are still constitutional. And if I could do it, the vile Laurence Tribes of the world certainly could.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 12:01 PM (bfkgE)
15
ProCynic,
Just out of curiosity, since you've demonstrated how a basic argument could be formed to defend the protesters, how would you argue it for the other side?
Just out of curiosity, since you've demonstrated how a basic argument could be formed to defend the protesters, how would you argue it for the other side?
Posted by: Oyster at March 20, 2006 12:39 PM (g9UJq)
16
Oyster,
It would be difficult to do, but both DPB and I have outlined some possibilities here.
1. The funeral is a private event, so only private invitees are allowed into the premises.
2. While political speech is a fundamental right, the government has a compelling interest in protecting already grieving relatives from further trauma.
3. Beause of this compelling interest, the law would be a permissible time, place and manner restriction. The protestors can express their opinions, but not in a time, place or manner that would further exacerbate the grief of the survivors.
4. Finally, and don't underestimate the impact of this argument, what the protestors are doing is just wrong. It's hurtful, and it's intended to be hurtful, to people who are already hurt beyond imagination. It is such abuses of the First Amendment that cause people to lose respect for the First Amendment.
It would be difficult to do, but both DPB and I have outlined some possibilities here.
1. The funeral is a private event, so only private invitees are allowed into the premises.
2. While political speech is a fundamental right, the government has a compelling interest in protecting already grieving relatives from further trauma.
3. Beause of this compelling interest, the law would be a permissible time, place and manner restriction. The protestors can express their opinions, but not in a time, place or manner that would further exacerbate the grief of the survivors.
4. Finally, and don't underestimate the impact of this argument, what the protestors are doing is just wrong. It's hurtful, and it's intended to be hurtful, to people who are already hurt beyond imagination. It is such abuses of the First Amendment that cause people to lose respect for the First Amendment.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 01:07 PM (bfkgE)
17
I must have misread the constitution, did I miss the section about "Freedom to harrass" via "Freedom of Speech" ? How is protesting a funeral with a sign saying "Thank God for IED's" or "America turned itself over to Fags, now he's sending them home in bodybags" political speech? against whom? the dead body?, or the family of the victim?
It's harrassment, pure and simple. There are laws to protect you from harrassment via the medium of communication: telephone, written word and internet.
I guarantee if the KKK turned up at a black persons funeral with a sign with racial slurs on it, there would be an end to this tomorrow.
It's harrassment, pure and simple. There are laws to protect you from harrassment via the medium of communication: telephone, written word and internet.
I guarantee if the KKK turned up at a black persons funeral with a sign with racial slurs on it, there would be an end to this tomorrow.
Posted by: davec at March 20, 2006 01:58 PM (CcXvt)
18
Unfortunately I know one of these men that are getting "rallied" against. Knowing the bible as I do, though I would have to say this it does not show a connection to soldiers and to homosexuality. Mind you I am all for the rights of every human being and how they are to live their own life, that is why we are in America. I thought though in the bible we are to love each other as we would ourselves. God's teachings are about love and respect for fellow man. Jesus lead an army through the desert, he fought against his enemies, was his army all "fags". I find theses people and their statements very hypocritical. They as many radical groups find one small section of the bible and focus on that aspect, while ignoring the rest of the ENTIRE book. At least I know that I will die with God's true words and the people who spread hate as these people do, know not GOD and surely will be damned for it. In the end to all this raving, I do have to agree that it is harassment, invasion of privacy, and in no way peaceful. It is a hate demonstration and agreeing with Dvec if KKK held up chantings and posters it would be just that a hate crime. This should not be for just the soldiers, but for all funerals gay, straight, black, white, male, female, young, old. Funerals are sacred in ALL religions, not just christianity. Some people celebrate it, some mourn. But none blasphemy it. It is revolting!
Posted by: Jennifer at March 20, 2006 02:14 PM (zhJYx)
19
Davec,
Political speech and hate speech are not one and the same. Harrassment can only be acted upon in certain circumstances that are case specific and typically limited to an individual.
"Thank God for IED's" is disgusting, but is political speech -- opposition to the war. It's also not directed at an individual, but at an event.
Political speech and hate speech are not one and the same. Harrassment can only be acted upon in certain circumstances that are case specific and typically limited to an individual.
"Thank God for IED's" is disgusting, but is political speech -- opposition to the war. It's also not directed at an individual, but at an event.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 02:19 PM (bfkgE)
20
Political speech? Identify the recipients of the message?
Can you tell me the political message of the sign "Thank God for dead Miners" in regards to the Sago mining accident, how about "God hates fags" and "Matthew Shepard is in Hell" held up at his funeral? Political message please?
You see, just because the recipient was a Military person does not mean it is political in nature, it is harrassment pure and simple.
There is no church at Westbourogh, the church is held in Phelps basement, inside a military like compound, and consists mainly of his family [mostly lawyers] and himself [disbarred lawyer].
Irony is, if he just purchased weapons, Clinton would have burnt him down.
Can you tell me the political message of the sign "Thank God for dead Miners" in regards to the Sago mining accident, how about "God hates fags" and "Matthew Shepard is in Hell" held up at his funeral? Political message please?
You see, just because the recipient was a Military person does not mean it is political in nature, it is harrassment pure and simple.
There is no church at Westbourogh, the church is held in Phelps basement, inside a military like compound, and consists mainly of his family [mostly lawyers] and himself [disbarred lawyer].
Irony is, if he just purchased weapons, Clinton would have burnt him down.
Posted by: davec at March 20, 2006 02:33 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 20, 2006 03:31 PM (D2g/j)
22
Actually, every protest they engage in is based on the tolerance of gays. They picket military funerals not because of war, but because of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Their picketing of the funerals of gays and victims of AIDS is obvious. Any funeral they protest otherwise, ike the miners, they claim is because the deaths were retribution from God for tolerating gays. They're literally obsessed with homosexuality.
And ProCynic, thanks for your reply.
And ProCynic, thanks for your reply.
Posted by: Oyster at March 20, 2006 03:57 PM (g9UJq)
23
davec,
These guys are not the only group protesting military funerals. Anti-war protestors show up at funerals a lot as well. That was my primary frame of reference. But if gay activists can speak up in favor of rights, sometimes obnoxiously -- a cause with which I agree, BTW -- then I don't see why this group can't argue against it with equal obnoxiousness. At least from a constitutional standpoint. Reprehensible? Yes. Should these guys be aborted retroactively? Absolutely. But just because something is wrong does not make a prohibition thereof constitutional.
These guys are not the only group protesting military funerals. Anti-war protestors show up at funerals a lot as well. That was my primary frame of reference. But if gay activists can speak up in favor of rights, sometimes obnoxiously -- a cause with which I agree, BTW -- then I don't see why this group can't argue against it with equal obnoxiousness. At least from a constitutional standpoint. Reprehensible? Yes. Should these guys be aborted retroactively? Absolutely. But just because something is wrong does not make a prohibition thereof constitutional.
Posted by: ProCynic at March 20, 2006 04:53 PM (Ffvoi)
24
I find it irreprehensible how some people will fight for evil, if it's wrapped in the blanket of "freedom"
I find it important to note that "Freedom of Speech" has been used to defend the possession of child porn, and sedition both, does this make either worthy of protection?
It's very easy for people to let bad things happen to good people, when you're not a recipient of such actions, you might reconcider such behavior if those people attended the funeral of one of your family with signs like "Thank god for cancer" or "The wages of sin, are death" just because you have the freedom to do something, doesn't mean you shouldn't excise good judgement and decorum.
It is morally ambiguous to use "Freedom of speech" to defend people doing evil things, when it is against the spirit of the document, and the authors who penned it.
I find it important to note that "Freedom of Speech" has been used to defend the possession of child porn, and sedition both, does this make either worthy of protection?
It's very easy for people to let bad things happen to good people, when you're not a recipient of such actions, you might reconcider such behavior if those people attended the funeral of one of your family with signs like "Thank god for cancer" or "The wages of sin, are death" just because you have the freedom to do something, doesn't mean you shouldn't excise good judgement and decorum.
It is morally ambiguous to use "Freedom of speech" to defend people doing evil things, when it is against the spirit of the document, and the authors who penned it.
Posted by: davec at March 20, 2006 05:19 PM (CcXvt)
25
As a side note, the Constitution does not prohibit making fun of mentally challenge children, common decency however does. This is why this type of decision should be weighed like the "Fighting Words" doctrine
:
The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as granted in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution In its 9-0 decision, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine and held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech [of which] the prevention and punishment of...have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."
The decision has to be weighed as such:
Would banning protests at funerals create a totalitarian Government, or remove a valid means of protest against the Government? or should the rights of the family members, who are already suffering be paramount?
Does being a Postman, and thus employed by the Government also mean people should be able to protest at their funeral, does the act of protesting a funeral injure or enlighten the attendants?
Just because something is not prohibited in the Constitution does not mean that we should not pass laws against it, I don't believe for one minute the Founding Fathers would have allowed it to be used as a tool to extend the suffering, and inflict harm against grieving families, even if said deceased person was in the employ of the U.S Government.
Unless you can think why that is not the case?
Posted by: davec at March 20, 2006 06:30 PM (CcXvt)
26
Just spray them with a mixture of skunk oil limburger cheese,rotten eggs,and other foul smelling stuff like cow manure
Posted by: sandpiper at March 20, 2006 08:59 PM (JtcRt)
27
What lovely political philosophies! However, screw all of that and just nuke the bastards! It'time to take back our country and have Waco family Bar-B-Q II! Case closed! You're welcome!
Posted by: JZ at March 20, 2006 09:19 PM (Nej3c)
28
"Your rights end where mine begin."
The sad thing about this country is, if you're and asshole, but don't do anything illegal, you can spend your entire life being an asshole.
There used to be a time where if you were an asshole, someone could smash your face in to teach you a lesson.
When you CHOOSE to live in a particular society, you agree to follow it's rules, laws and customs. We enjoy free speech... but we're also bound by civil decency. If they want to protest, they can do it at a respectable distance... otherwise, let the pissed off family tear loose on them, and claim temp. insanity.
The sad thing about this country is, if you're and asshole, but don't do anything illegal, you can spend your entire life being an asshole.
There used to be a time where if you were an asshole, someone could smash your face in to teach you a lesson.
When you CHOOSE to live in a particular society, you agree to follow it's rules, laws and customs. We enjoy free speech... but we're also bound by civil decency. If they want to protest, they can do it at a respectable distance... otherwise, let the pissed off family tear loose on them, and claim temp. insanity.
Posted by: Hardwyre at March 21, 2006 10:12 PM (Rxra/)
29
Ok...hmmm. I am currently in Iraq. I personally feel a lot of pain when I see this kind of thing going on. The real problem is that it is a media-stunt and an act constructed to create confrontation, thereby allowing for lawsuits, and the gain of monies from the winnings. These idiots relish in their media time and they further enjoy and encourage confrontations.
I have many funerals to attend when I get back to the US. I think that this law should be passed. Quite simply, in order to protect the protestors from due harm. After spending a year in Ramadi I think I just might act a little aggressively to someone chanting and spitting on one of my young Marines bodies moving to his final resting place. The irony is that the Marine died protecting the very right to protest.
If it were my son or brother, I would call his unit and have the entire Battalion or Company attend the funeral. If they were too far away then I would go to the local National Guard or a Reserve Center, find someone who wears a uniform. When these protestors show up simply march up to them, online, and stand nose to nose, with military discipline, and HOLD THE LINE. Let them know how truly insignificant and pathetic they are. When, if, I get back to California, this will be the solution for me and my Marines and their families.
I think most of the commentary on this board is accurate though. This will be a constitutional debate. I think under the fighting words clause this could gain some traction, simply due to when I first read about these anti-Americans, I wanted to kill them. I wanted to go to their home and plant an IED in their living room and remove their infection from the earth. Then I could leave a letter on a sign saying this explosion was GODS RETRIBUTION. And today, as I stand over the body of a fellow Marine, 18 years old, with no lower torso due to an IED blast, I am reminded that he was a devout Christian with a wife and a new baby boy and that he doesn’t and will never deserve this kind of disrespect.
The first amendment is a honorable thing and should be upheld at the cost of human life. So should the freedom to practice religion, a Christian burial, also be protected. Something is always being infringed upon. It is up to us, the voting public, to decide when enough is enough. How far will we let things go? When is it TOO far?
I am a simple man with simple ways, but I know this; these people have caused a lot of pain to good American people. Sooner or later…what goes around, comes around!
The Gunny
I have many funerals to attend when I get back to the US. I think that this law should be passed. Quite simply, in order to protect the protestors from due harm. After spending a year in Ramadi I think I just might act a little aggressively to someone chanting and spitting on one of my young Marines bodies moving to his final resting place. The irony is that the Marine died protecting the very right to protest.
If it were my son or brother, I would call his unit and have the entire Battalion or Company attend the funeral. If they were too far away then I would go to the local National Guard or a Reserve Center, find someone who wears a uniform. When these protestors show up simply march up to them, online, and stand nose to nose, with military discipline, and HOLD THE LINE. Let them know how truly insignificant and pathetic they are. When, if, I get back to California, this will be the solution for me and my Marines and their families.
I think most of the commentary on this board is accurate though. This will be a constitutional debate. I think under the fighting words clause this could gain some traction, simply due to when I first read about these anti-Americans, I wanted to kill them. I wanted to go to their home and plant an IED in their living room and remove their infection from the earth. Then I could leave a letter on a sign saying this explosion was GODS RETRIBUTION. And today, as I stand over the body of a fellow Marine, 18 years old, with no lower torso due to an IED blast, I am reminded that he was a devout Christian with a wife and a new baby boy and that he doesn’t and will never deserve this kind of disrespect.
The first amendment is a honorable thing and should be upheld at the cost of human life. So should the freedom to practice religion, a Christian burial, also be protected. Something is always being infringed upon. It is up to us, the voting public, to decide when enough is enough. How far will we let things go? When is it TOO far?
I am a simple man with simple ways, but I know this; these people have caused a lot of pain to good American people. Sooner or later…what goes around, comes around!
The Gunny
Posted by: The Gunny at March 22, 2006 02:08 PM (UItaE)
Posted by: The Gunny at March 22, 2006 02:13 PM (UItaE)
31
Thank you for your service Gunny. My respects to any fallen fellow Marines.
G-D's speed to you Gunny, and any active duty Marine.
G-D's speed to you Gunny, and any active duty Marine.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 22, 2006 05:20 PM (D2g/j)
32
Thanks,Leatherneck and if I am reading your call-sign correctly, Semper Fidelis.
Posted by: The Gunny at March 23, 2006 03:05 AM (UItaE)
33
Amendment I
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.â€
Do people actually know what the first amendment says?
The Gunny said it right; the protestors in question are infringing on the first sentence of the First Amendment. The establishment of religion and the free exercise thereof. Every funeral I have been to, have been religious in nature and the protesting is affecting the "spiritual healing" that takes place. Is it condonable for a one constitutional freedom to affect another?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.â€
Do people actually know what the first amendment says?
The Gunny said it right; the protestors in question are infringing on the first sentence of the First Amendment. The establishment of religion and the free exercise thereof. Every funeral I have been to, have been religious in nature and the protesting is affecting the "spiritual healing" that takes place. Is it condonable for a one constitutional freedom to affect another?
Posted by: Jacobite at March 23, 2006 03:24 AM (UItaE)
34
Regarding Jacobite's post above, I think that this argument won't work because *private citizens* (i.e. the protesters) are prohibiting the free exercise of religion, not the *government*.
The post by davec on March 20th is probably the key to this. I don't think this "church" has any interest in actually making a point, but rather they want to be restricted, beaten up, arrested, etc. Then, they can sue. This is a money-making venture, not a political statement.
What is the penalty for wrongful citizen's arrest? Suppose that well-meaning citizens detained the protesters and took them to jail. I think a strong case could be made by the citizens that they did this simply by their interpretation of hate crime laws. It might actually not even be illegal. I mean, how is it that the statements the protesters make are not assault? Aren't there laws on the books regarding this?
JT
The post by davec on March 20th is probably the key to this. I don't think this "church" has any interest in actually making a point, but rather they want to be restricted, beaten up, arrested, etc. Then, they can sue. This is a money-making venture, not a political statement.
What is the penalty for wrongful citizen's arrest? Suppose that well-meaning citizens detained the protesters and took them to jail. I think a strong case could be made by the citizens that they did this simply by their interpretation of hate crime laws. It might actually not even be illegal. I mean, how is it that the statements the protesters make are not assault? Aren't there laws on the books regarding this?
JT
Posted by: Jonas Tesla at April 04, 2006 02:05 PM (G/OqP)
35
I'm no fan of Howard Stern, but why is it that offensive speech is protected for these bozos and not Stern? That's a minor aside.
Okay... I think I've got it. I'm pretty sure that those "protesters" are in it for money. Perhaps the way to fight this is simply to pass a federal law that prohibits people from monetary compensation from lawsuits that allege restriction of free speech unless they can prove that there was a financial loss due to the restriction. Better yet, suppose that a law was passed that any monetary damages from awarded in restriction-of-freedom-of-speech lawsuits would have to be donated to fund AIDS research! That covers both bases... eh?
Ha!
JT
Okay... I think I've got it. I'm pretty sure that those "protesters" are in it for money. Perhaps the way to fight this is simply to pass a federal law that prohibits people from monetary compensation from lawsuits that allege restriction of free speech unless they can prove that there was a financial loss due to the restriction. Better yet, suppose that a law was passed that any monetary damages from awarded in restriction-of-freedom-of-speech lawsuits would have to be donated to fund AIDS research! That covers both bases... eh?
Ha!
JT
Posted by: Jonas Tesla at April 04, 2006 02:18 PM (G/OqP)
36
I attended one of the fallen soldiers funerals last month. I'm in no way religious and I'm against war, but the vicous nature of the Westboro Baptist Church & their protests tore me apart inside. The WBC never showed up, but the Patriot Guard Riders did. I held flags with men, women and children to honor the grieving families and their recent tragedy. As friends and family made their way from the funeral service to the cemetary on a flag-lined road, mostly all of them were crying. They waved at us, mouthing the words 'thank you' & 'god bless'. I know I did the right thing.
I'm working on a paper about Fred Phelps & the WBC for a world religions class. I wanted to thank everyone involved with this discussion. You really helped me to understand the issue at hand.
I'm working on a paper about Fred Phelps & the WBC for a world religions class. I wanted to thank everyone involved with this discussion. You really helped me to understand the issue at hand.
Posted by: just a girl at April 25, 2006 08:18 PM (EIO3f)
37
Hey folks,
I've never posted here before. I applaud the passing of this act. Having grown up a military dependant, I've been to lots of funerals, and I think people need space to heal.
However, as a member of the LGBT community (and a Christian) I can't help but feel slighted by our legislature. Somehow, it has been perfectly okay for the Phelps cult to hate and hurt our community at funerals for years, but now that dominant culture folks have to deal with him, it's a horrible thing? My only grace in this is that there are LGBT folks who serve in our military, and should they die in service to our country, at least they won't have to put up with Phelps at their funeral.
I'm glad this happened to the Phelps crew, but I wish the very awesome veterans group who protects the grieving families from this cult would come to protect all of us.
Have a good day.
I've never posted here before. I applaud the passing of this act. Having grown up a military dependant, I've been to lots of funerals, and I think people need space to heal.
However, as a member of the LGBT community (and a Christian) I can't help but feel slighted by our legislature. Somehow, it has been perfectly okay for the Phelps cult to hate and hurt our community at funerals for years, but now that dominant culture folks have to deal with him, it's a horrible thing? My only grace in this is that there are LGBT folks who serve in our military, and should they die in service to our country, at least they won't have to put up with Phelps at their funeral.
I'm glad this happened to the Phelps crew, but I wish the very awesome veterans group who protects the grieving families from this cult would come to protect all of us.
Have a good day.
Posted by: Lincoln Rose at May 31, 2006 11:43 AM (J5EJp)
March 14, 2006
ACLU Rides to the Rescue of Veterans' Funeral Desecraters
Yesterday I wrote about the disgusting inbred gaggle of hicks who make up the Westboro Baptist Church, and get their sick kicks picketing the funerals of soldiers killed in the War on Terror.
more...
Posted by: Bluto at
12:42 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I can't believe so much time and interest is spent on this wacky little CULT that apparently has lost Jim Jones special brew recipe.
Posted by: hondo at March 14, 2006 12:56 PM (9pQ6D)
2
Amazingly there are people who still believe the ACLU is a fine, upstanding pro-America legal association.
I notice when they're suing the Government for percieved separation of Church and State cases they make the news, while their defense of Gitmo detainee's, NAMBLA and now GHF/Westborough doesn't get anywhere near the attention.
I notice when they're suing the Government for percieved separation of Church and State cases they make the news, while their defense of Gitmo detainee's, NAMBLA and now GHF/Westborough doesn't get anywhere near the attention.
Posted by: davec at March 14, 2006 01:02 PM (CcXvt)
3
No big surprise. The ACLU attacks mainstream America and fights for vile repugnant scum like this.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 14, 2006 01:16 PM (8e/V4)
4
In 1998, Fred Phelps ran for governor as a DEMOCRAT! I shit you not. Perhaps thats why the ACLU likes this guy!
Posted by: Jimmy the Dhimmi at March 14, 2006 01:41 PM (+BgKd)
5
There is also photographs all over the Internet of Fred Phelps taken with Al Gore.
Posted by: davec at March 14, 2006 01:45 PM (CcXvt)
6
Gore and Phelps. Isn't that special?
Posted by: Oyster at March 14, 2006 02:12 PM (g9UJq)
Posted by: hondo at March 14, 2006 03:28 PM (9pQ6D)
8
Leave it to the lowlife sidewinders at the SAN FRANCISCO based ACLU Atheists.Communists,and Lunatics.Underground to came to the aid of these scum the ACLU is americas AL QUEDA who uses lawyers rather then bombs to get what they want
Posted by: sandpiper at March 14, 2006 03:29 PM (O2c+K)
9
Just like my grandmother used to say, "Birds of a feather flock together."
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 14, 2006 03:31 PM (rUyw4)
10
I hate to defend these scumbag protesters - not to mention the ACLU - but these people do have a First Amendment right to say stupid things in public. I'm not a big fan of time, place, and manner restrictions and that is what these law amount to - classic First Amendment case. As a wise man once said, the proper remedy is more speech not restricting speech.
But then again, I'm a bit of a First Amendment absolutist.
But then again, I'm a bit of a First Amendment absolutist.
Posted by: KG at March 14, 2006 03:50 PM (SZsz5)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 14, 2006 04:16 PM (8e/V4)
12
And there is also no problem with local lawmakers passing ordinances placing buffer zones around cemetaries and such places. They don't have a problem passing laws that keep bars so many feet away from churches. And alcohol is not against the law. The problem is that local goverments are too lax in protecting their constituents from scum like the Phelps family and too busy trying to seize property for the tax benefit.
What kills me is that the ACLU an others have no problem imagining a privacy clause in the Constitution for abortion, but not for families trying to bury their dead.
What kills me is that the ACLU an others have no problem imagining a privacy clause in the Constitution for abortion, but not for families trying to bury their dead.
Posted by: Oyster at March 14, 2006 04:51 PM (YudAC)
13
So, the ACLU stands up for gay-haters who protest the funerals of soldiers, but not for gay-haters who protest at gay festivals? Typical.
Posted by: RepJ at March 14, 2006 06:15 PM (y6n8O)
14
I think I remember people who misused the word of God for their own purpose that was ungodly. What where they? Oh yes, know I remember, Pharisees!
Posted by: Catholicgauze at March 14, 2006 11:15 PM (UA1kS)
15
Why don't we get 421 lawyers and go help out ACLU. I'll be security.
Posted by: forest hunter at March 15, 2006 05:52 AM (Fq6zR)
16
I am sad to say that I attended the wake and funeral of a Marine LT. about 18 months ago. There were at least 100 men in uniform at the funeral, most of them Marines. I would think that for the safety of the protesters a buffer should be established. I have no problem imagining the Marines stomping the protesters into little piles of puke on the sidwalk...
I would argue that their protest is nothing more than an attempt to incite a riot. Be careful of what you wish for because you just might get it.
I would argue that their protest is nothing more than an attempt to incite a riot. Be careful of what you wish for because you just might get it.
Posted by: Babs at March 15, 2006 07:03 AM (iZZlp)
17
JC, I said I'm a bit of an absolutist, I didn't say there was an absolute right under the First Amendment (shouting fire in a crowded theather and the like). But this is political speech, dispicable political speech, but political speech nonetheless. Oyster, the buffer zones you talk about with bars and churches has to do with zoning laws, an entirely different issue from First Amendment rights.
My problem is the notion of "free speech zones". We're seeing it more and more, you have something that might offend somebody, then you can say it, just not where anyone can hear it. And yes, I know there is no right to be heard, but what is the point of having the right to speak if there is no one to hear you?
As I said before, what these people are doing is wrong - but that doesn't make it illegal. As far as the ACLU goes, well, I have to keep it PG-13, so nevermind.
And again, I think the best thing people can do is find out where the pukes are protesting and line up on the other side of the street (or even better, in front of them) and let the families know that there are plenty of people out there that support them and thank them for their sacrafice.
My problem is the notion of "free speech zones". We're seeing it more and more, you have something that might offend somebody, then you can say it, just not where anyone can hear it. And yes, I know there is no right to be heard, but what is the point of having the right to speak if there is no one to hear you?
As I said before, what these people are doing is wrong - but that doesn't make it illegal. As far as the ACLU goes, well, I have to keep it PG-13, so nevermind.
And again, I think the best thing people can do is find out where the pukes are protesting and line up on the other side of the street (or even better, in front of them) and let the families know that there are plenty of people out there that support them and thank them for their sacrafice.
Posted by: KG at March 15, 2006 11:09 AM (SZsz5)
18
KG
I tend to agree - it is free speech - but like shouting fire in a theater there is another term for this speech - it's called fighting words.
Maybe we should discuss the right to use "fighting words" and the right to fight. Seems this group and the ACLU is obsessed with the right to use "fighting words" in an attempt to prevoke that reaction - but then want to pussy out and want protection to prevent that reaction. Where's the freedom in that?
Actions are a form of free speech! I know this because "Liberal courts" have told me so!
That's the problem with the new left - they want to act, look, and be tough - but then go limp and start to whine on 'bout being "passive" "civil" etc.
It's Freedom baby! Put'em up or shut up! Gotta love freedom and free speech!
I tend to agree - it is free speech - but like shouting fire in a theater there is another term for this speech - it's called fighting words.
Maybe we should discuss the right to use "fighting words" and the right to fight. Seems this group and the ACLU is obsessed with the right to use "fighting words" in an attempt to prevoke that reaction - but then want to pussy out and want protection to prevent that reaction. Where's the freedom in that?
Actions are a form of free speech! I know this because "Liberal courts" have told me so!
That's the problem with the new left - they want to act, look, and be tough - but then go limp and start to whine on 'bout being "passive" "civil" etc.
It's Freedom baby! Put'em up or shut up! Gotta love freedom and free speech!
Posted by: hondo at March 15, 2006 12:27 PM (9pQ6D)
19
That chick in the photo - yeah - I think I can pop her in the kisser - I'm givin' about 30 years n' she's probably in better shape than I.
Wow! Spewin' disgusting fighting words about my fallen brothers AND HOMOSEXUALS! Hell! I'd smack her! - for both! Guess that makes me kinda liberal for a day.
Wow! Spewin' disgusting fighting words about my fallen brothers AND HOMOSEXUALS! Hell! I'd smack her! - for both! Guess that makes me kinda liberal for a day.
Posted by: hondo at March 15, 2006 12:34 PM (9pQ6D)
20
KG, I understand. It was a bad analogy. But there still needs to be a solution. Simply citing the Constitution does little to solve a real problem. This isn't just cartoons in a newspaper hurting delicate sensibilities.
We enjoy free speech, but we are not guaranteed a platform for it anywhere we want.
We enjoy free speech, but we are not guaranteed a platform for it anywhere we want.
Posted by: Oyster at March 15, 2006 01:41 PM (g9UJq)
21
Oyster
I have some reservations about hitting a woman - would you punch out that bitch for me - please?
I have some reservations about hitting a woman - would you punch out that bitch for me - please?
Posted by: hondo at March 15, 2006 03:08 PM (9pQ6D)
22
Let me at her!
Posted by: Oyster at March 15, 2006 06:46 PM (YudAC)
March 12, 2006
When Madness Masquerades As Religion
Not Islamists this time, but creatures who claim to be Christians.
From Agence France Presse:
Hecklers harass families of US soldiers killed in IraqThis is nothing but a game to gain publicity for the so-called "Westboro Baptist Church", which is really a cult run by Fred Phelps and his family. Maybe they'll eventually take the route of the Jim Jones cult. One can only hope.Five women sang and danced as they held up signs saying "thank God for dead soldiers" at the funeral of an army sergeant who was killed by an Iraqi bomb.
For them, it was the perfect way to spread God's word: America was being punished for tolerating homosexuality.
The good news...while the Westboro Baptist cult has about 100 members, the bikers of The Patriot Guard Riders are now 16,000 strong.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
01:03 PM
| Comments (31)
| Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Whats the difference between a cult and a religion?
I suppose its that a cult pisses you off.
Anyway, gogo atheism etc. One question, though - isn't a funeral held on private property? Why wern't these people asked to leave and then arrested for trespassing?
I suppose its that a cult pisses you off.
Anyway, gogo atheism etc. One question, though - isn't a funeral held on private property? Why wern't these people asked to leave and then arrested for trespassing?
Posted by: MiB at March 12, 2006 01:07 PM (VeYWn)
2
Even more insidious than a Cult, most of the WBC family are Lawyers (Fred is disbarred).
Now I wonder, how could they get themselves assaulted in order to sue a municipality.
Now I wonder, how could they get themselves assaulted in order to sue a municipality.
Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 01:09 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 01:17 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 12, 2006 01:20 PM (8e/V4)
5
This exceeds the decent bounds of free speech by any measure; they all need their heads busted and left lying on the side of the road. And I hope they sue me over this comment, because then, I'll know where to find them.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 12, 2006 01:26 PM (0yYS2)
6
For once I agree with you Max. That's scary. .
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 01:58 PM (CnDtU)
7
Cue Twilight Zone music.
Posted by: Max Power at March 12, 2006 01:59 PM (CnDtU)
8
>>>For once I agree with you Max. That's scary.
Notice it takes the word "christian" to get a Leftwing moonbat to agree with Maxie wanting to bust heads. Replace that with "muslim" and the same moonbat goes all pacifist on us. My god you people are so easy to figure out.
Notice it takes the word "christian" to get a Leftwing moonbat to agree with Maxie wanting to bust heads. Replace that with "muslim" and the same moonbat goes all pacifist on us. My god you people are so easy to figure out.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 12, 2006 02:20 PM (8e/V4)
9
We don't appreciate sock puppets here - Bluto
Posted by: A Young Man of Exquisite Grace at March 12, 2006 02:23 PM (y+196)
Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 02:27 PM (CcXvt)
11
Again shut the fuck up. I was telling Max that I agree that we shouldn't insult our soldiers that are dying out there. We should be honoring them My father was in them military for many years. He almost went to Vietnam. Stop calling me a liberal you stupid ass motherfucker.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 02:45 PM (CnDtU)
12
There is no warrior for christ in this blog. Perhaps I should speak english. I'm a catholic. My Dad was a Marine for many years so I sympathise with you. All I've been saying was that not all muslims want to kill people. I knew several arabs personally when I was in school. My doctor is an Indian. I'm not looking for any trouble. I didn't call Bush Hitler like that teacher. I'm not like those stupid CPT hostages that want to hug the terrorists. Jesus Christ, I can't say anything on this blog without being called a far left moonbat.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 02:51 PM (CnDtU)
13
Robert:
My post was to "Marine Father" who's post is exactly on the same level as the posts made to this site by "Warrior for Christ" and "USA Patriot" (nicknames) I was not referencing your post.
My post was to "Marine Father" who's post is exactly on the same level as the posts made to this site by "Warrior for Christ" and "USA Patriot" (nicknames) I was not referencing your post.
Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 02:55 PM (CcXvt)
14
Oh, well I wasn't cursing at you Davec. I was cursing at the asshole Jesusland carlos who keeps calling me a moonbat. I have to stop posting on political blogs. I end up being called a moonbat. I also get told to fuck off. Maximus might also want to rape my corpse like he told the last kid who posted here. My dear mom might be called a whore. What a life I live. At least Rusty is cool. That's why I visit this blog.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 03:03 PM (CnDtU)
15
Robert: are you sure he wasn't calling Jill Carroll a moonbat?
I did not get the feeling he addressed you as a moonbat. perhaps I am mistaken.
I did not get the feeling he addressed you as a moonbat. perhaps I am mistaken.
Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 03:07 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Don Miguel at March 12, 2006 03:10 PM (UAn5X)
17
Yeah, you are. He called me a moonbat because I agreed with Maximus. In any case anyone who calls Jill Carroll a moonbat is a retard who should be shot on site. She's going through enough right now. Insulting her political views is not the right thing to do.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 03:13 PM (CnDtU)
18
Also disagreeing with Maxie is a death sentence. I avoid him at all costs.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 03:14 PM (CnDtU)
19
This isn't even my real name. I just thought it up.
Posted by: Robert Savage at March 12, 2006 03:17 PM (CnDtU)
20
Yeah if you go through many aliases. No one knows who you are.
Posted by: Max Power at March 12, 2006 03:19 PM (CnDtU)
21
Oh no, you can disagree with me all you like, but you'd better have a good argument armed and ready.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 12, 2006 03:58 PM (0yYS2)
22
Robert, don't worry about it. Continue to comment and say what you truly believe. I would rather know someone who is honest and who I might disagree with occasionally than know someone who is a fake and agrees with me all the time. And I think most people on this blog feel the same way.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 12, 2006 04:04 PM (rUyw4)
23
>>>Jesus Christ, I can't say anything on this blog without being called a far left moonbat.
hahaha! That was too funny!
hahaha! That was too funny!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 12, 2006 04:07 PM (8e/V4)
24
I think WFC may have been one of them. We've done several posts on these giant walking rectums now. Speaking of Fred's bunch of course.
Posted by: Howie at March 12, 2006 04:28 PM (D3+20)
25
These jerks need to have someone spray them with skunk oil and limburger cheese and garlic and onion this would realy make them show up in a crown especialy the smell they would leave
Posted by: sandpiper at March 12, 2006 07:39 PM (D9h75)
26
As a Christian, I repudiate Westboro's actions. Like Wafa said, "You can worship stones as long as you don't throw them at me."
Posted by: RepJ at March 12, 2006 08:31 PM (oHw0S)
27
Yes, all Phelps' gang are lawyers who are itching for someone to assault them so they can sue...
SO, (not that I'm advocating anything, you understand), If someone WERE to do something to these idiots, I'd suggest a quick-maximum-damage-hit-and-egress so they won't have anyone to litigate against.
If cops ask for witnesses, just have some planted buddies in the crowd describe Andrew Sullivan.
SO, (not that I'm advocating anything, you understand), If someone WERE to do something to these idiots, I'd suggest a quick-maximum-damage-hit-and-egress so they won't have anyone to litigate against.
If cops ask for witnesses, just have some planted buddies in the crowd describe Andrew Sullivan.
Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at March 13, 2006 05:06 AM (maXzk)
28
SOTG, that's a pretty good strategy. Why don't *I* ever get the good ideas?
Posted by: Oyster at March 13, 2006 06:34 AM (YudAC)
29
These people are repulsive
Posted by: sandpiper at March 13, 2006 09:28 AM (7/75z)
30
SonOf:
They would just sue the city they're hosted in, for failing to protect them during the protest.
They don't want to sue the individual that assaults them, they're chickenfeed -- they want to be assaulted to sue the deep pockets: cities, police forces, etc.
They would just sue the city they're hosted in, for failing to protect them during the protest.
They don't want to sue the individual that assaults them, they're chickenfeed -- they want to be assaulted to sue the deep pockets: cities, police forces, etc.
Posted by: davec at March 13, 2006 12:06 PM (CcXvt)
31
Do these idiots have those PRACTICE TOLERENCE stickers in the car windows? or those stupid ones which reads WAR IS NOT HEALTHY FOR CHILDREN AND OTHER LIVING THINGS with the sissy pink flower on it?
Posted by: sandpiper at March 14, 2006 09:21 AM (b1Fi6)
March 03, 2006
Cherry Creek School District Student Comments on Jay Bennish
Just when you thought Conservative Thinking couldn't build on the Jay Bennish story anymore here comes another doozie from the Cherry Creek School District. It's not an official of the district and it's probably not a teacher but more than likely a student of Cherry Creek Schools.
"Sam" left a comment today on one of our Jay Bennish articles. Apparently, Mr. Bennish doesn't inspire free thinking like he and his supporters believe:
I think people are over Exaugurating something little,let the guy have his freedom of speech, hes just teaching the kids to think for themselves and giving his own oppinions. All you damn people are to stupid to realize bush is like hitler
Emphasis mine. However, the reason I think it's a student that wrote this is due to the horrific grammar and spelling skills (apparently too much time spent on "geography" and not English).
This is quite disturbing for two reasons, 1) apparently the Jay Bennish indoctrination program is working and 2) my daughter will be in the Cherry Creek School District this fall.
The details on "Sam" as far as IP address go are as follows:
Translated Name: ccsd-26-214.ccsd.k12.co.us
IP Address: 166.113.26.214
I'm going to send this along to the Cherry Creek Schools to voice my concern on my daughter's behalf.
Originally Posted at 
Posted by: Chris Short at
06:59 PM
| Comments (39)
| Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.
1
He's smart enough to know "bush is like hitler", but he isn't smart enough to put together a grammatically correct sentence. I weep for the future.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 07:22 PM (8e/V4)
2
Before you do that, I would encourage you to try and find out about the school's 'Acceptable Use' policy. As a former school district technology director, I can tell you that most schools place a very strict code of conduct when using the school district's computers by both the students and the staff. Since this obviously came from one of their machines, try to see if any of the comments were in violation of the policy. The policy is usually posted on the school district website. Depending on the severity, the results can be either expulsion for a student or termination for an employee. Either way, school districts really, really dislike things like this in the news.
If that doesn't work out to your satisfaction, you can usually find a pretty good watchdog group that would love to hear from you. Those groups exist to cause school districts the most amount of grief possible.
One last place to try is the local paper. This is especially helpful if it is a smaller town and not a large city. Those smalltown newspapers almost always appoint themselves as an informal watchdog group through their editorial pages.
There are always lots of taxpayers who will jump all over things like this because they don't like administration to begin with and think too much money is being wasted so they are always looking for a good cause.
If that doesn't work out to your satisfaction, you can usually find a pretty good watchdog group that would love to hear from you. Those groups exist to cause school districts the most amount of grief possible.
One last place to try is the local paper. This is especially helpful if it is a smaller town and not a large city. Those smalltown newspapers almost always appoint themselves as an informal watchdog group through their editorial pages.
There are always lots of taxpayers who will jump all over things like this because they don't like administration to begin with and think too much money is being wasted so they are always looking for a good cause.
Posted by: slug at March 03, 2006 07:24 PM (vQoK9)
3
I sent an e-mail to the school district's "CARELINE". We'll see how that turns out but their AUP is something that they should be policing and not me.
You're welcome to check for yourself though and if there is a violation please feel free to send them a note.
The paper's here in Aurora, CO are hardcore liberal rags. Denver isn't too much better either.
You're welcome to check for yourself though and if there is a violation please feel free to send them a note.
The paper's here in Aurora, CO are hardcore liberal rags. Denver isn't too much better either.
Posted by: Chris Short at March 03, 2006 07:29 PM (0OCQY)
4
I just sent the school district an email too:
Your students are smart enough to know "bush is like hitler", but they aren't smart enough to put together a grammatically correct sentence. I weep for the future.
Do your friggin jobs.
Your students are smart enough to know "bush is like hitler", but they aren't smart enough to put together a grammatically correct sentence. I weep for the future.
Do your friggin jobs.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 07:43 PM (8e/V4)
5
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loos
Any true American who watches the above, free video will recognize the fact that Bush committed 9/11 the same as his grandfather's client, Adolf Hitler(Google "Prescott Thyssen Auschwitz"), committed the Reichstag Fire.
Inarguably, Bush is Hitler-redux.
Schoolteacher Jay Bennish is simply putting forward thoughts that any who claim spiritual descent from the Jeffersonian Whig Founders of the United States of America should have been realizing right after they heard GHW Bush's public statement confirming his "inability" to recall his whereabouts upon hearing of President Kennedy's assassination: W's only "qualification" for office.
Death for Treason
Any true American who watches the above, free video will recognize the fact that Bush committed 9/11 the same as his grandfather's client, Adolf Hitler(Google "Prescott Thyssen Auschwitz"), committed the Reichstag Fire.
Inarguably, Bush is Hitler-redux.
Schoolteacher Jay Bennish is simply putting forward thoughts that any who claim spiritual descent from the Jeffersonian Whig Founders of the United States of America should have been realizing right after they heard GHW Bush's public statement confirming his "inability" to recall his whereabouts upon hearing of President Kennedy's assassination: W's only "qualification" for office.
Death for Treason
Posted by: Will Jones at March 03, 2006 07:52 PM (wToeY)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 07:59 PM (8e/V4)
7
Only a Bush deranged Leftist could possibly find a way to put Thomas Jefferson and the Kennedy assassination and Bush and Jay Bennish in the same sentence. I swear you people are mentally deranged!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 08:12 PM (8e/V4)
8
JC.. the future indeed looks grim. Just from my own observations, the kids I see walking around these days have a "dumbed-down" look about them. Can't really put my finger on it... kind of a dead, just-got-outta-prison look. It's all part of the dismal mass culture we're living in. I see these guys walking to school, and I just can't imagine them mastering biology, math.. anything. In L.A. here, somewhere around 50% of students don't graduate from high school. Now, it really doesn't take much to graduate from high school these days, and still... they can't handle it. What are these people going to do as they get older???
Posted by: Richard at March 03, 2006 08:21 PM (7KF8r)
9
I love that Will Jones comedy routine. But his joke aside, it's sad to think that there are people who think like that. Sadder still that some of them are allowed to teach such Orwellian rot to innocent children unchallenged.
It surely is a sad state of affairs when you consider what these kids are NOT being taught and what they ARE being taught.
The comment you posted above is just another example of the increasingly poor state of public education, the primary purpose of which is to provide the foundation for responsible citizenship.
Thank GOD student Sean Allen made that tape, othewise folks like your pal might be more convincing when he says this incident is "Exaugurat[ed]."
It surely is a sad state of affairs when you consider what these kids are NOT being taught and what they ARE being taught.
The comment you posted above is just another example of the increasingly poor state of public education, the primary purpose of which is to provide the foundation for responsible citizenship.
Thank GOD student Sean Allen made that tape, othewise folks like your pal might be more convincing when he says this incident is "Exaugurat[ed]."
Posted by: Mike's America at March 03, 2006 08:32 PM (SHL+1)
10
>>>Will Jones said "Death for Treason"
Yes Willy, that's a great phrase, but it's ours... You can keep that Dan Rather "Courage" one. By the look of your beliefs and political views, you're going to need it.
Yes Willy, that's a great phrase, but it's ours... You can keep that Dan Rather "Courage" one. By the look of your beliefs and political views, you're going to need it.
Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at March 03, 2006 09:03 PM (t8BiH)
11
Any true American who watches the above, free video will recognize the fact that Bush committed 9/11
As an immigrant to this country, I encourage you to leave.
There are a lot of people living in other countries who love America more than you do, who would kill for the chance to be here, not only that but they see less evil in this country than you evidently do.
If you're think the Government killed 3,000 citizens for $$cash$$ why are you still here?
As an immigrant to this country, I encourage you to leave.
There are a lot of people living in other countries who love America more than you do, who would kill for the chance to be here, not only that but they see less evil in this country than you evidently do.
If you're think the Government killed 3,000 citizens for $$cash$$ why are you still here?
Posted by: dave at March 03, 2006 09:41 PM (CcXvt)
12
Most of our country has been brainwashed into passivity. That is the truth. The question is, what are you going to do about it? Continue to spread around lies and false information? Stand up and do what's right?
Naw...just go back to watching Star Wars.
Naw...just go back to watching Star Wars.
Posted by: Ficus at March 03, 2006 09:53 PM (HDTwe)
13
dave, he has no reason to leave. I'm sure he's sucking at the teat of the American taxpayer for his income. He's either collecting welfare or has a cushy government job. Before my job as a technology director, mentioned above, I worked in technology for the Justice Dept. I quit because they couldn't keep me busy and I was bored out of my skull. I was one of 5 developers who spent their day doing a lot of coffee-drinking and wondering if we would get something to work on. To a lot of those people, the only thing worse than being that bored is the thought of having their job cut because of all the dead weight. This certainly wasn't specific to the technology people at all.
Chris, thanks for referring me to the AUP but I think I'll pass. I had to go thru about 50 committee meetings reading a hundred other district's AUP before going thru about 200 iterations of our own. I'm a technical guy who fell into management by being the person employed there the longest so you may be able to guess that this won't get a lot of attention from me. Thought it might give you useful insider information but I've never even read the one where I work now even though I've signed a piece of paper that says I did. It certainly isn't your job to do the policing but I had hoped it would you some ammunition if you wanted to raise a stink over it.
This is why I have my kids in a private Christian school.
Chris, thanks for referring me to the AUP but I think I'll pass. I had to go thru about 50 committee meetings reading a hundred other district's AUP before going thru about 200 iterations of our own. I'm a technical guy who fell into management by being the person employed there the longest so you may be able to guess that this won't get a lot of attention from me. Thought it might give you useful insider information but I've never even read the one where I work now even though I've signed a piece of paper that says I did. It certainly isn't your job to do the policing but I had hoped it would you some ammunition if you wanted to raise a stink over it.
This is why I have my kids in a private Christian school.
Posted by: slug at March 03, 2006 10:05 PM (vQoK9)
14
This type story will bring them out - but never lose sight how ineffective this teacher is in spreading his gospel. The new left judges its "successes" by our reaction - rather than whether they were actually successful. They are a pathetic lot once you get past the anger they sometimes bring out in some of us.
Performance art on a classroom stage - that's all it is. So a few students seem "suduced" - forget'em and notice that the overwhelming majority just yawn and stroll away.
Performance art on a classroom stage - that's all it is. So a few students seem "suduced" - forget'em and notice that the overwhelming majority just yawn and stroll away.
Posted by: hondo at March 03, 2006 10:20 PM (fyKFC)
15
>>>The new left judges its "successes" by our reaction
Truly a mark of their patheticness. Just like PETA knows we think they're a total joke, but they don't care as long as they can get a rise out of people. PATHETIC. It's almost like they revolve around us for their existence, like the Earth revolving around the Sun or something like that. They define themselves by being opposed to us, not by having any real core. That's how they can march for "peace", but also support terrorists! They have no core.
Truly a mark of their patheticness. Just like PETA knows we think they're a total joke, but they don't care as long as they can get a rise out of people. PATHETIC. It's almost like they revolve around us for their existence, like the Earth revolving around the Sun or something like that. They define themselves by being opposed to us, not by having any real core. That's how they can march for "peace", but also support terrorists! They have no core.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 10:34 PM (8e/V4)
16
Slug, you and I work in the same field. I personally enjoy the challenges that arise in the tech field, and just like you would be bored if I had nothing to do 
Posted by: dave at March 03, 2006 10:41 PM (CcXvt)
17
I sent off an email too and also told my friends at work how they should do this as well.
Thanks for your posting about this.
Thanks for your posting about this.
Posted by: Wild Thing at March 03, 2006 10:49 PM (tj1zH)
18
If anyone can present a convincing argument as to why liberals should not all be rounded up and hanged, I would love to hear it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 03, 2006 11:12 PM (0yYS2)
19
It'd be a big mess.
Posted by: Chris Short at March 03, 2006 11:18 PM (0OCQY)
20
>>>If anyone can present a convincing argument as to why liberals should not all be rounded up and hanged, I would love to hear it.
lmao! Love it.
But I know some very nice Liberals who probably would agree that this Bennish fellow is a disgrace. It's really the Left that I hate. Libs just annoy me, like a fly or mosquito annoys me. Leftists, on the other hand are like roaches. Vile creatures. Those are the ones you chase around the kitchen floor trying to squash. No mercy.
lmao! Love it.
But I know some very nice Liberals who probably would agree that this Bennish fellow is a disgrace. It's really the Left that I hate. Libs just annoy me, like a fly or mosquito annoys me. Leftists, on the other hand are like roaches. Vile creatures. Those are the ones you chase around the kitchen floor trying to squash. No mercy.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 03, 2006 11:38 PM (8e/V4)
21
"However, the reason I think it's a student that wrote this is due to the horrific grammar and spelling skills"
Nice work ace!
Nice work ace!
Posted by: foo at March 03, 2006 11:55 PM (/m4ss)
Posted by: dave at March 04, 2006 12:30 AM (CcXvt)
23
Carlos, difference or no, I hate them all for gross, negligent stupidity if nothing else; they should be removed from the gene pool for the sake of humanity.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 04, 2006 05:39 AM (0yYS2)
24
Thanks dave; I didn't get time yesterday evening, and don't this morning either now, but this evening is all mine, and so is the little bitch mason.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 04, 2006 05:42 AM (0yYS2)
25
I listened to the audio of TEACHER CAUGHT IN BUSH RANT, with great interest. Also, with sadness.
My name is Michael Class. I live in the Seattle area with my wife and two children. I am a retired "dot-com" executive turned author, photographer, and publisher.
I was appalled at how some teachers presented American history to my children. My son and daughter learned that Thomas Jefferson had slaves—before they learned that he wrote the document articulating our rights and duties as free people. European settlers killed Native Americans with blankets infected with smallpox, they found out. That allegation upstaged the stories of courage, perseverance, and curiosity that defined the pioneers. My children knew that more than a hundred thousand people died when the atomic bomb was dropped on Japan, but they were not made to understand the moral context and the enormous scale of the conflict called World War II in which the atomic bomb story fit.
With a curriculum seemingly designed to instill guilt and shame, I wondered, how will my kids ever discover the lessons of history that inspire greatness and noble aspirations? Will they ever believe that they can make a difference? Will they have any heroes left at all? Then, I wondered: What would the heroes of America’s past say to the children of today?
I wrote, photographed, and published a book designed to set the record straight, to properly prepare our children for the future. My book is called Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame.
If anyone knows where I can reach 10th-grader Sean Allen, I will gladly send him a FREE copy of my book. He did the right thing.
My book specifically rebuts the positions taken by teacher Jay Bennish - because I have heard his arguments so many times before. My book tells the truth about capitalism, the War on Terror, and places them in historical perspective.
In the book, my real-life son, twelve-year-old Anthony, time-travels into the great events of the 20th century. Digital photographic “magic†places Anthony in the cockpit of the Spirit of St. Louis with Charles Lindbergh, on the moon with Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, in the laboratories of Thomas Edison and Jonas Salk, and on Normandy beach on D-Day. It looks as though Anthony really did meet Thomas Edison, Jonas Salk, FDR, Lou Gehrig, Charles Lindbergh, and Audie Murphy. And it’s all historically accurate: Even Anthony’s conversations with America’s heroes are based on things they really said.
While writing and photographing the book, I spoke with relatives of famous scientists and inventors, Holocaust survivors, award-winning biographers, and others who could help me ensure that the facts of the book were both accurate and vivid.
But the book goes beyond a simple recitation of historical facts: the book presents the moral lessons of American history. The chapter about Lindbergh’s flight is really about choosing one’s destiny. The story of Lou Gehrig is one of a virtuous life. The chapter about Thomas Edison is really about business. The story of Apollo 11 is about wonder, taking risks, and courage. The story of Dr. Jonas Salk and the cure for polio is really about dedicating one’s life to a higher purpose. When Anthony “meets†his immigrant great-grandfather at Ellis Island in 1907, it’s really a story about what it means to be an American. Anthony’s observation of D-Day and the liberation of the death camps during the Holocaust is a testament to the reality of evil and the need to fight it.
The book is meant to challenge the young reader. Many adults will find the book challenging, too. Anthony COMPARES the people and events of the past with the people and events of his own time. Anthony discusses the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, war and peace, what it means to be an American, honor and discipline, success and achievement, courage and destiny, marriage and family, God and purpose. Anthony’s observations prompt serious discussion of timeless moral questions. Anthony challenges the reader to think critically - to see the modern world in the light of the lessons of the past.
We can't afford to raise a generation of Americans who do not value their country, their heritage, and their place in the world. As Abraham Lincoln said: America is the "last best hope of earth."
Thank you.
Michael S. Class
Author / Photographer / Publisher
Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame: An American History Book for Right-Thinking Parents and Their Children
-----------------------
E-Mail: class@MagicPictureFrame.com
Web site: www.MagicPictureFrame.com
My name is Michael Class. I live in the Seattle area with my wife and two children. I am a retired "dot-com" executive turned author, photographer, and publisher.
I was appalled at how some teachers presented American history to my children. My son and daughter learned that Thomas Jefferson had slaves—before they learned that he wrote the document articulating our rights and duties as free people. European settlers killed Native Americans with blankets infected with smallpox, they found out. That allegation upstaged the stories of courage, perseverance, and curiosity that defined the pioneers. My children knew that more than a hundred thousand people died when the atomic bomb was dropped on Japan, but they were not made to understand the moral context and the enormous scale of the conflict called World War II in which the atomic bomb story fit.
With a curriculum seemingly designed to instill guilt and shame, I wondered, how will my kids ever discover the lessons of history that inspire greatness and noble aspirations? Will they ever believe that they can make a difference? Will they have any heroes left at all? Then, I wondered: What would the heroes of America’s past say to the children of today?
I wrote, photographed, and published a book designed to set the record straight, to properly prepare our children for the future. My book is called Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame.
If anyone knows where I can reach 10th-grader Sean Allen, I will gladly send him a FREE copy of my book. He did the right thing.
My book specifically rebuts the positions taken by teacher Jay Bennish - because I have heard his arguments so many times before. My book tells the truth about capitalism, the War on Terror, and places them in historical perspective.
In the book, my real-life son, twelve-year-old Anthony, time-travels into the great events of the 20th century. Digital photographic “magic†places Anthony in the cockpit of the Spirit of St. Louis with Charles Lindbergh, on the moon with Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, in the laboratories of Thomas Edison and Jonas Salk, and on Normandy beach on D-Day. It looks as though Anthony really did meet Thomas Edison, Jonas Salk, FDR, Lou Gehrig, Charles Lindbergh, and Audie Murphy. And it’s all historically accurate: Even Anthony’s conversations with America’s heroes are based on things they really said.
While writing and photographing the book, I spoke with relatives of famous scientists and inventors, Holocaust survivors, award-winning biographers, and others who could help me ensure that the facts of the book were both accurate and vivid.
But the book goes beyond a simple recitation of historical facts: the book presents the moral lessons of American history. The chapter about Lindbergh’s flight is really about choosing one’s destiny. The story of Lou Gehrig is one of a virtuous life. The chapter about Thomas Edison is really about business. The story of Apollo 11 is about wonder, taking risks, and courage. The story of Dr. Jonas Salk and the cure for polio is really about dedicating one’s life to a higher purpose. When Anthony “meets†his immigrant great-grandfather at Ellis Island in 1907, it’s really a story about what it means to be an American. Anthony’s observation of D-Day and the liberation of the death camps during the Holocaust is a testament to the reality of evil and the need to fight it.
The book is meant to challenge the young reader. Many adults will find the book challenging, too. Anthony COMPARES the people and events of the past with the people and events of his own time. Anthony discusses the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, war and peace, what it means to be an American, honor and discipline, success and achievement, courage and destiny, marriage and family, God and purpose. Anthony’s observations prompt serious discussion of timeless moral questions. Anthony challenges the reader to think critically - to see the modern world in the light of the lessons of the past.
We can't afford to raise a generation of Americans who do not value their country, their heritage, and their place in the world. As Abraham Lincoln said: America is the "last best hope of earth."
Thank you.
Michael S. Class
Author / Photographer / Publisher
Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame: An American History Book for Right-Thinking Parents and Their Children
-----------------------
E-Mail: class@MagicPictureFrame.com
Web site: www.MagicPictureFrame.com
Posted by: Michael Class at March 04, 2006 10:15 AM (uQ06v)
26
Thanx Michael. I just ordered your book. I have two young grandkids who will certainly need to be armed and ready when they start school.
Posted by: Oyster at March 04, 2006 10:56 AM (YudAC)
27
Have you thought of private school? Even if you aren't say, Catholic, private schools offer a better education and most don't ram religion down anyone's throat.
Posted by: Pka at March 04, 2006 11:29 AM (UA1kS)
28
Real student opinions of Jay Bennish:
http://www.ratemyteachers.com/schools/colorado/aurora/overland_high_school/jay__bennish
http://www.ratemyteachers.com/schools/colorado/aurora/overland_high_school/jay__bennish
Posted by: MPH at March 05, 2006 05:09 PM (ES09B)
29
Why would you subject your daughter to government schools? We are a people who aspire to freedom and the ideal of a limited government. What incentive do government schools have to teach these principals?
Home school your daughter or send her to private school. You have no higher earthly obligation than your children except to love their mother.
Home school your daughter or send her to private school. You have no higher earthly obligation than your children except to love their mother.
Posted by: Jericho at March 05, 2006 05:20 PM (5vEOE)
30
Jericho, who are you talking to? My daughter is 28. She has two small children not even in school yet.
Posted by: Oyster at March 05, 2006 08:50 PM (YudAC)
31
Why are so many of you afraid of exposing
high school students to the other side of
the story? Why are you so afaid of them
knowing about Jefferson's slaves? Do you
fear that truth will make them less
patriotic? Is patriotism based upon brain-
washing and lies?
For generations, kids "learned" from
texts and teachers who presented only one,
incomplete side of the story of our
country. How many people over the age of 25
ever saw a photo of a black soldier in
the Civil War, or in the World Wars?
That's one example of something kids weren't
taught in schools. At least we're making
progress.
Bennish might have crossed a line in his
attempt to get his students to think, but
only in the current political environment
of stifling opposing ideas (and truth) in
order
to prevent people from knowing too much and
perhaps questioning the current admin's
action would it be a crime for a teacher
to exhort his students to "think for
themselves."
Why aren't we hearing the same fuss over
conservative teachers who are using the
classroom to insist on THEIR agenda?
What is it about conservatives that they
go for blood in a situation like this?
high school students to the other side of
the story? Why are you so afaid of them
knowing about Jefferson's slaves? Do you
fear that truth will make them less
patriotic? Is patriotism based upon brain-
washing and lies?
For generations, kids "learned" from
texts and teachers who presented only one,
incomplete side of the story of our
country. How many people over the age of 25
ever saw a photo of a black soldier in
the Civil War, or in the World Wars?
That's one example of something kids weren't
taught in schools. At least we're making
progress.
Bennish might have crossed a line in his
attempt to get his students to think, but
only in the current political environment
of stifling opposing ideas (and truth) in
order
to prevent people from knowing too much and
perhaps questioning the current admin's
action would it be a crime for a teacher
to exhort his students to "think for
themselves."
Why aren't we hearing the same fuss over
conservative teachers who are using the
classroom to insist on THEIR agenda?
What is it about conservatives that they
go for blood in a situation like this?
Posted by: Brian at March 06, 2006 07:25 AM (MtlCh)
32
Brian, you're kidding, right? Did you listen to the rant? He wasn't encouraging students to think for themselves, but was doing just the opposite, trying to brainwash the kids with his own political dogma. How is this encouraging students to think for themselves?
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 06, 2006 08:57 AM (rUyw4)
33
Brian fully supports the positions and statements of Mr Bennish. To him Mr Bennish's positions and statements are gospel - pure fact - undeniable - and must be desiminated to all till they accept their truth. The fact that it is all part of a political philospophy under contention is irrelevant - and questioning it is same.
Problem is they can't seem to get enough people to listen and agree with them - so - they target the people's children in a controlled mandatory environment to preach their gospel without interference from those so annoying reactionary parents.
Intellectual pedophilia - it fits.
Problem is they can't seem to get enough people to listen and agree with them - so - they target the people's children in a controlled mandatory environment to preach their gospel without interference from those so annoying reactionary parents.
Intellectual pedophilia - it fits.
Posted by: hondo at March 06, 2006 01:47 PM (fyKFC)
34
Here we go, conservatives posting their
straw man lies and distortions to distract
from the truth.
Where did I say I completely support Mr.
Bennish's actions? Without all the facts
who can either fully support or fully
condemn? You are leaping on the Limbaugh
wagon, and thereby revealing your desire
to find a liberal to burn at the stake.
No one has addressed this from my earlier
message:
Why aren't we hearing the same fuss over
conservative teachers who are using the
classroom to insist on THEIR agenda?
What is it about conservatives that they
go for blood in a situation like this?
straw man lies and distortions to distract
from the truth.
Where did I say I completely support Mr.
Bennish's actions? Without all the facts
who can either fully support or fully
condemn? You are leaping on the Limbaugh
wagon, and thereby revealing your desire
to find a liberal to burn at the stake.
No one has addressed this from my earlier
message:
Why aren't we hearing the same fuss over
conservative teachers who are using the
classroom to insist on THEIR agenda?
What is it about conservatives that they
go for blood in a situation like this?
Posted by: Brian at March 06, 2006 03:33 PM (MtlCh)
35
Give me an example of a conservative trying to brainwash their students. I will condemn them.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 06, 2006 05:59 PM (rUyw4)
36
As a retired history and geography teacher, I am dismayed at the number of people who do not understand what the study of geography includes. A number of Americans seem to believe it is simply the study of landforms and maps. Bennish's overly passionate lesson was not outside the geography curriculum. Geography spans many fields including the physical world, including habitat, ecology, geology, and the environment. In addition, geography concerns technology, science, religion, literature, art, and, yes, even the political world.
The National Geography Standards were published in 1994 to guide geographic education in the United States. The eighteen standards shed light on what the geographically informed person should know and understand. The hope is that every student in America would become a geographically informed person through implementation of these standards in the classroom.
Here are the National Geographic Standards:
The World in Spatial Terms
1. How to use maps and other geographic representations, tools, and technologies to acquire, process, and report information.
2. How to use mental maps to organize information about people, places, and environments.
3. How to analyze the spatial organization of people, places, and environments on Earth's surface.
Places and Regions
4. The physical and human characteristics of places.
5. That people create regions to interpret Earth's complexity.
6. How culture and experience influence people's perception of places and regions.
Physical Systems
7. The physical processes that shape the patterns of Earth's surface.
8. The characteristics and spatial distribution of ecosystems on Earth's surface.
Human Systems
9. The characteristics, distribution, and migration of human populations on Earth's surface.
10. The characteristics, distributions, and complexity of Earth's cultural mosaics.
11. The patterns and networks of economic interdependence on Earth's surface.
12. The process, patterns, and functions of human settlement.
13. How forces of cooperation and conflict among people influence the division and control of Earth's surface.
Environment and Society
14. How human actions modify the physical environment.
15. How physical systems affect human systems.
16. The changes that occur in the meaning, use, distribution, and importance of resources.
The Uses of Geography
17. How to apply geography to interpret the past.
18. To apply geography to interpret the present and plan for the future.
Source: National Council for Geographic Education
The National Geography Standards were published in 1994 to guide geographic education in the United States. The eighteen standards shed light on what the geographically informed person should know and understand. The hope is that every student in America would become a geographically informed person through implementation of these standards in the classroom.
Here are the National Geographic Standards:
The World in Spatial Terms
1. How to use maps and other geographic representations, tools, and technologies to acquire, process, and report information.
2. How to use mental maps to organize information about people, places, and environments.
3. How to analyze the spatial organization of people, places, and environments on Earth's surface.
Places and Regions
4. The physical and human characteristics of places.
5. That people create regions to interpret Earth's complexity.
6. How culture and experience influence people's perception of places and regions.
Physical Systems
7. The physical processes that shape the patterns of Earth's surface.
8. The characteristics and spatial distribution of ecosystems on Earth's surface.
Human Systems
9. The characteristics, distribution, and migration of human populations on Earth's surface.
10. The characteristics, distributions, and complexity of Earth's cultural mosaics.
11. The patterns and networks of economic interdependence on Earth's surface.
12. The process, patterns, and functions of human settlement.
13. How forces of cooperation and conflict among people influence the division and control of Earth's surface.
Environment and Society
14. How human actions modify the physical environment.
15. How physical systems affect human systems.
16. The changes that occur in the meaning, use, distribution, and importance of resources.
The Uses of Geography
17. How to apply geography to interpret the past.
18. To apply geography to interpret the present and plan for the future.
Source: National Council for Geographic Education
Posted by: Mae at March 06, 2006 06:01 PM (q88zm)
37
Mae
Yes, I understand. I have an MA in the field. That aside,
what does your "above" have to do with the particulars of the Mr Bennish story?
If you wish to defend him - please do so - the above information is functionally irrelevant and serves no purpose unless you wish to sidestep the story.
Oh, I too am appalled at the lack of general understanding of the field of Geography - but this argument goes back over 30 years. Good argument - pity this is the wrong place for it.
Yes, I understand. I have an MA in the field. That aside,
what does your "above" have to do with the particulars of the Mr Bennish story?
If you wish to defend him - please do so - the above information is functionally irrelevant and serves no purpose unless you wish to sidestep the story.
Oh, I too am appalled at the lack of general understanding of the field of Geography - but this argument goes back over 30 years. Good argument - pity this is the wrong place for it.
Posted by: hondo at March 07, 2006 12:04 AM (fyKFC)
38
Pleez to you send me you address so we, er I can send to you delicious hamburger meal and many more beautiful gifts. We love to helping the little children and we have giant silo ( for to store the milk ) which is nearly finished building. When silo is finished building then we will end suffering for all the little children, and all of the peoples suffering everywhere. So please send to me you address and address of 10 friends. We will make sure that they are remembered. Thanks to you and Shalom! Er, I mean Later Dud! Please to excuse me spellbinding. I hav been very busy helping the poor little children and have not time to go to school to learn spellbinding.
Posted by: Children'sMilkFund at March 09, 2006 02:11 PM (Y2ILH)
39
What is the most important information I should know about Clonazepam?
• Use caution when driving, operating machinery, or performing other hazardous activities. Clonazepam will cause drowsiness and may cause dizziness. If you experience drowsiness or dizziness, avoid these activities.
• Use alcohol cautiously. Alcohol may increase drowsiness and dizziness while you are taking Clonazepam. Alcohol may also increase your risk of having a seizure.
• Do not stop taking Clonazepam suddenly. This could cause seizures and withdrawal symptoms. Talk to your doctor if you need to stop treatment with Clonazepam.
What is Clonazepam?
• Clonazepam is in a class of drugs called benzodiazepines. Clonazepam affects chemicals in your brain that may become unbalanced and cause seizures.
• Clonazepam is used to treat seizures.
• Clonazepam may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.
• Use caution when driving, operating machinery, or performing other hazardous activities. Clonazepam will cause drowsiness and may cause dizziness. If you experience drowsiness or dizziness, avoid these activities.
• Use alcohol cautiously. Alcohol may increase drowsiness and dizziness while you are taking Clonazepam. Alcohol may also increase your risk of having a seizure.
• Do not stop taking Clonazepam suddenly. This could cause seizures and withdrawal symptoms. Talk to your doctor if you need to stop treatment with Clonazepam.
What is Clonazepam?
• Clonazepam is in a class of drugs called benzodiazepines. Clonazepam affects chemicals in your brain that may become unbalanced and cause seizures.
• Clonazepam is used to treat seizures.
• Clonazepam may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.
Posted by: CLONAZEPAM at April 08, 2006 10:09 AM (LUNaJ)
February 26, 2006
British Judge Okays Baby's Death Over Parent's Objections
From the Telegraph:
The parents of Charlotte Wyatt have been told that doctors are to be allowed to let their profoundly ill baby daughter die if they feel it is in her best interests.This is happening in the UK, but how far down this slope has America slipped?A High Court judge yesterday lifted a previous ruling that she should always be resuscitated, on the grounds that the two-year-old was now on a "downward rather than an upward trend".
Mr Justice Hedley heard an emergency application from doctors treating her that she had developed an aggressive chest infection and was unlikely to survive any moves to keep her alive.
Via Stop the ACLU and Michelle Malkin.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
12:07 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Abominable. Why don't they simply instruct the doctors to slit the baby's throat instead of withholding life support? Oh yeah, I almost forgot, because that would make it too obvious what they're doing.
Posted by: reverse_vampyr at February 26, 2006 02:24 AM (r6z8D)
2
Sounds too me that these 'Doktors' trained at the 'Josef Mengele Mercy Hospital'.
They should haveb re-studied the Hippocratic oath, before deciding that both they and the Judge can decide too assume the title of God.
The 'Doktors' in this case, shouldn't be employed at a Hospital but at a slaughterhouse, there they can engage in butchering for a just cause and at the same time satisfy their bloodlust.
The judge can be compared with the Nazi Judges of the past, they too decided that the 'inferior' human specimen's should be butchered, until of course, the just put an end to their crimes against humanity.
They should haveb re-studied the Hippocratic oath, before deciding that both they and the Judge can decide too assume the title of God.
The 'Doktors' in this case, shouldn't be employed at a Hospital but at a slaughterhouse, there they can engage in butchering for a just cause and at the same time satisfy their bloodlust.
The judge can be compared with the Nazi Judges of the past, they too decided that the 'inferior' human specimen's should be butchered, until of course, the just put an end to their crimes against humanity.
Posted by: Ken at February 26, 2006 02:25 PM (CYeOT)
3
The judge should be sent to the TOWER OF LONDON and beheaded
Posted by: sandpiper at February 26, 2006 02:36 PM (1mdPR)
4
Too bad the baby wasn't Muslim, the judge would never had made such a decision, unless of course sharia allowed it, which it doesn't. Disgusting.
I wonder if it is too late for a Muslim conversion, or should I say reversion?
I wonder if it is too late for a Muslim conversion, or should I say reversion?
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 26, 2006 03:28 PM (rUyw4)
5
How can the US Taliban (PNAC Xians) exploit the private misery of families dealing with the death of their loved ones in this way?
Just as they exploited the Terri Schiavo case, and were found to be 100% wrong on all counts, so shall they very likely be found to be completely wrong about this.
These Xian pseudochristians stop at nothing! There is no fact they will not distort, nothing sacred they will not misuse (like the name Jesus), in their effort to come out on top by way of divide and conquer.
One need only notice their unflinching support for war and state executions, to put this clear case of heartless media exploitation into perspective.
Just as they exploited the Terri Schiavo case, and were found to be 100% wrong on all counts, so shall they very likely be found to be completely wrong about this.
These Xian pseudochristians stop at nothing! There is no fact they will not distort, nothing sacred they will not misuse (like the name Jesus), in their effort to come out on top by way of divide and conquer.
One need only notice their unflinching support for war and state executions, to put this clear case of heartless media exploitation into perspective.
Posted by: Natasha at February 26, 2006 05:13 PM (i6py+)
6
The family wants the world to know that their child is being put to death against their wishes, Natasha.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 26, 2006 09:28 PM (RHG+K)
7
Now it delares that docotrs and not parents have the say so about wheather a child lves or dies what a bunch of barbarians
Posted by: sandpiper at February 27, 2006 09:35 AM (AlCYT)
8
"The family wants the world to know that their child is being put to death against their wishes, Natasha."
If the media reports of this can be trusted (my media skepticism is showing) then of course I am 100% against that. Given that GB is a semi socialist police state. I am inclined to believe the story. Of course Blair's GB, the greatest Bush NWO ally, only shows the way we are headed also, and I for one do not look forward to that.
I wish the parents well and that their baby lives. I further wish to see the heartless medical deities (Md's) involved being thrown in jail and banned from practicing medicine. That's just me though.
If the media reports of this can be trusted (my media skepticism is showing) then of course I am 100% against that. Given that GB is a semi socialist police state. I am inclined to believe the story. Of course Blair's GB, the greatest Bush NWO ally, only shows the way we are headed also, and I for one do not look forward to that.
I wish the parents well and that their baby lives. I further wish to see the heartless medical deities (Md's) involved being thrown in jail and banned from practicing medicine. That's just me though.
Posted by: Natasha at February 28, 2006 01:46 PM (i6py+)
9
I also think the Judge should be both forced to resign and forced to pay damages to the parents he has so traumatized.
Posted by: Natasha at February 28, 2006 01:48 PM (i6py+)
10
I,ll bet that if this involved a rabid dog or wild critter that just killed someone the jerks at PETA would be over there protesting with PAMELA ANDERSON and a few dozen other hollywood celebery morons
Posted by: sandpiper at February 28, 2006 02:20 PM (162Hn)
February 24, 2006
London Mayor Suspended Over Nazi Crack
From the Guardian:
Ken Livingstone was today suspended from office for four weeks by a disciplinary tribunal for likening a Jewish Evening Standard reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard.Here's what Hizzoner said to reporter Oliver Finegold:
While being recorded, the mayor asked him: "Were you a German war criminal?" On being told the reporter was Jewish, he added: "Ah, well, you might be but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"The mayor's lawyer invoked a rather...questionable... defense:
"When John Profumo apparently slept with Christine Keeler and then committed the far more serious offence of lying to the House of Commons about it, he was compelled to resign, but no one could seriously think that that affected the reputation of the office of secretary of state for war. It reflected badly on John Profumo but not on his office.Ix-nay on the esign-ray stuff solicitor, right now the mayor's only being suspended."When David Blunkett was allegedly inappropriately involved in assisting an application for a work permit and he resigned, that could not be regarded by an informed observer as damaging the reputation and bringing into disrepute the office of home secretary."
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto .
Posted by: Bluto at
03:55 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"Red" Ken, waste of space, glad he is gone and pray they dont let him back.
Posted by: dave clarke at February 24, 2006 04:06 PM (TL20Q)
2
It seems not long ago I was under the impression problems of racism, dissention and hatred just didn't exist in multicultural, progressive no-guns England. After some time now reading media like the Guardian, BBC, Mirror, Independent etc., its easy to wonder how they haven't yet turned into a basket case.
Posted by: Javapuke at February 24, 2006 04:32 PM (B8Lwy)
3
Red Ken is the guy reponsible for inviting in the radical clerics who like to hang around on street corners and preach hate. This is what likely resulted in the London subway bombings. And he did it all with the noblest of intentions.. "tolerance and diversity". Another glaring example of socialist failure.
Posted by: Richard at February 24, 2006 04:37 PM (7KF8r)
4
It's only a precursor to then enforcing censorship for hate speech towards Islam.
After all if you do it for Jewish hate speech you then have to do the same for the Islam faith. This is no victory, it will become yet another tool to censor free speech, and surpress those that have no intention of paying a Dhimmi tax, or putting their wife in a Burka.
After all if you do it for Jewish hate speech you then have to do the same for the Islam faith. This is no victory, it will become yet another tool to censor free speech, and surpress those that have no intention of paying a Dhimmi tax, or putting their wife in a Burka.
Posted by: dave at February 24, 2006 04:42 PM (CcXvt)
5
London's mayor has been suspended from office on full pay for four weeks because he dare talk to a zionist journalist and this racist fascist zionist jew Flemming Rose is protected and supported just because he offend muslims,double standards,hypocrisy,unjustice,criminal zionist plots and conspiracies against muslims
Flemming Rose the responsable of the prophet cartoons born 3/14/1956 into a Jewish family in the Ukraine
Flemming Rose, a Jewish extremist supporter of Israel and close friend of Neocon Jewish extremist Daniel Pipes.
Either we in the West believe in Freedom of Speech or we don't. If we really have free speech then why is world-renowned historian David Irving sitting in a prison in Vienna right now facing up to 20 years imprisonment for having a dissenting opinion on some details of the Holocaust? Why was Germar Rudolf, a Chemist Doctoral Candidate, kept from receiving his degree and now sits in a dank prison meant for terrorists with a five year sentence for simply scientifically challenging some forensics of the Holocaust? Why has a pacifist Canadian, Ernst Zundel been in prison for 3 years and now faces trial in Mannheim, Germany for expressing his conscience on an historical period now over 50 years old! It should be obvious to all the fair-minded people that the pro-Israel, pro Clash of Civilizations, pro World War III cartel of media brazenly supports freedom only when it supports their own nefarious agenda, they cannot afford criticism or dissent.
Flemming Rose the responsable of the prophet cartoons born 3/14/1956 into a Jewish family in the Ukraine
Flemming Rose, a Jewish extremist supporter of Israel and close friend of Neocon Jewish extremist Daniel Pipes.
Either we in the West believe in Freedom of Speech or we don't. If we really have free speech then why is world-renowned historian David Irving sitting in a prison in Vienna right now facing up to 20 years imprisonment for having a dissenting opinion on some details of the Holocaust? Why was Germar Rudolf, a Chemist Doctoral Candidate, kept from receiving his degree and now sits in a dank prison meant for terrorists with a five year sentence for simply scientifically challenging some forensics of the Holocaust? Why has a pacifist Canadian, Ernst Zundel been in prison for 3 years and now faces trial in Mannheim, Germany for expressing his conscience on an historical period now over 50 years old! It should be obvious to all the fair-minded people that the pro-Israel, pro Clash of Civilizations, pro World War III cartel of media brazenly supports freedom only when it supports their own nefarious agenda, they cannot afford criticism or dissent.
Posted by: hansrussen at February 24, 2006 06:08 PM (8kpQK)
6
hanrussen,
the jailing of Irving and Zundel have one important thing in common. They were jailed by socialist countries where the state (not God) giveth and taketh away their freedoms. Today, the threats to freedom of speech are coming from the Left.
And yes, I agree with you that the hypocrisy is rank.
the jailing of Irving and Zundel have one important thing in common. They were jailed by socialist countries where the state (not God) giveth and taketh away their freedoms. Today, the threats to freedom of speech are coming from the Left.
And yes, I agree with you that the hypocrisy is rank.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 24, 2006 06:19 PM (8e/V4)
7
well JLC I see some of that coming from the right also. ALL bureaucrats want to hold onto whatever power they have. Islamofascist states comes to mind as examples.
Posted by: john ryan at February 24, 2006 08:58 PM (TcoRJ)
8
john ryan, care to elaborate on that? It didn't make any sense.
Posted by: Oyster at February 25, 2006 07:47 AM (YudAC)
9
Don't worry about it Oyster; he rarely makes sense.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 25, 2006 10:47 AM (0yYS2)
10
Wait a second. How can a mayor be suspeded from office in the first place? Some democracy they have, whereby an elected official can be suspended by a "three-man Adjudication Panel for England"
Also, as hansrussen points out, "Either we in the West believe in Freedom of Speech or we don't." Obviously they don't in the UK. I don't think many Americans realize that they don't have the same rights in most of Europe as we do here.
Also, as hansrussen points out, "Either we in the West believe in Freedom of Speech or we don't." Obviously they don't in the UK. I don't think many Americans realize that they don't have the same rights in most of Europe as we do here.
Posted by: Tom the Redhunter at February 25, 2006 11:12 AM (TcuR4)
11
>>>I don't think many Americans realize that they don't have the same rights in most of Europe as we do here.
Tom,
I would say that zero Liberals realize that, and that many conservatives do realize that.
Tom,
I would say that zero Liberals realize that, and that many conservatives do realize that.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 25, 2006 01:21 PM (8e/V4)
12
Then they should suspend WARD CHURCHILL over his remarks and what about ALEC BALDWIN?
Posted by: sandpiper at February 25, 2006 02:22 PM (AQZCQ)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 26, 2006 07:28 AM (0yYS2)
February 20, 2006
O! My Brothers and Sisters! I Sing the Jellyfish Uncaged!
Would that my powers of parody were such that I could create from my mind the discussion that follows. Alas! It is all true! Praise be to the Goddess Gaea that such sensitive young folk are poised to carry on for us.
Posted by: Bluto at
10:46 AM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 701 words, total size 5 kb.
1
I disagree with several of the major premises in that conversation, but one in particular. The key point I have an issue with is "they may not be as smart as us". I think jellyfish, given the opportunity, could hold up their end of the conversation with that bunch.
Posted by: HD Wanderer at February 20, 2006 11:10 AM (nA9AR)
2
Couldn't agree with you more, HD, and I know I have more respect for a typical jellyfish than I have for those jelly brains in that conversation. Does jelly come from jellyfish? Now that just about takes the cake!
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 20, 2006 11:36 AM (rUyw4)
3
Jellyfish Have Rights!!!
They're people too!!!
I thought the moron that thought jelly was made from jellyfish was especially funny. Wow, what great minds...
They're people too!!!
I thought the moron that thought jelly was made from jellyfish was especially funny. Wow, what great minds...
Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at February 20, 2006 11:41 AM (3smJS)
4
Oh, one more observation. I think it is safe to say that none of the people in question has ever picked grapes or muscadines, cooked the juice out of the fruit, added pictin and sugar, and made jelly. Or ever seen their mother or grandmother make jelly. They are so stupid that they think food just somehow appears at the supermarket. One wonders how people so stupid can make a living.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 20, 2006 11:43 AM (rUyw4)
5
"miss lotus: I agree with what perception wrote. I am against using any animal for any form of 'entertainment.'"
Now when I think of all the times I've made my dog roll over and speak for a pig ear, I feel such shame.
We're doomed you know.
Now when I think of all the times I've made my dog roll over and speak for a pig ear, I feel such shame.
We're doomed you know.
Posted by: Oyster at February 20, 2006 12:54 PM (sMLtC)
6
Eventually, they'll decide that Bacteria have rights, too, drink only untreated water, and and Darwin will have been served.
Posted by: ericj at February 20, 2006 12:59 PM (5PRM2)
7
Why can't we just squeeze a little jelly out of the jellyfish and let them free? That's what Spongebob does.
Honestly, these people have a right to live in their delusional little world where starfish and squids dance and have tea parties. But, the problem is that most of them believe jellyfish have more of a right to life than people.
Honestly, these people have a right to live in their delusional little world where starfish and squids dance and have tea parties. But, the problem is that most of them believe jellyfish have more of a right to life than people.
Posted by: Drew at February 20, 2006 01:10 PM (gFUqX)
8
One thing I noticed is the gentleman who stated that Goldfish can only remember for 3 seconds.
He only knows that fact because it's related to an argument these oh-so-sensitive freakballs use in abortion debates. That argument being that partial-birth abortion is okay because babi- er, fetuses are only as smart as goldfish at that stage.
He only knows that fact because it's related to an argument these oh-so-sensitive freakballs use in abortion debates. That argument being that partial-birth abortion is okay because babi- er, fetuses are only as smart as goldfish at that stage.
Posted by: celestial at February 20, 2006 01:20 PM (T2R9c)
9
Spoken from a goldfish swimming in his bowl:
"Just because I only have a three second memory, they think they can feed me the same goldfish flakes day after day .......... Oh boy, goldfish flakes!"
"Just because I only have a three second memory, they think they can feed me the same goldfish flakes day after day .......... Oh boy, goldfish flakes!"
Posted by: Oyster at February 20, 2006 02:32 PM (sMLtC)
10
I should ask the Californian Zoo's if they would be willing to let the Jellyfish go free, if Peta people transport them back in their underwear to the sea, after all:
Every living creature has rights-even jellyfish
I bet they might change their minds about how bad jellyfish have it, although seeing some of these Peta people they would probably kill a jellyfish by it just being in proximity of their underwear.
Every living creature has rights-even jellyfish
I bet they might change their minds about how bad jellyfish have it, although seeing some of these Peta people they would probably kill a jellyfish by it just being in proximity of their underwear.
Posted by: dave at February 20, 2006 02:54 PM (CcXvt)
11
Obviously I've been missing the signs that indicate that captive jellyfish are unhappy. What does an unhappy jellyfish look like? Does it swim in circles around its tank? Does it have a vacant stare? Does it fling jellyfish poo at visitors? I support Niru - clams do have feelings. Wait - Oh. I don't Niru's talking about the clams I was thinking of. My bad.
Posted by: Graeme at February 20, 2006 03:59 PM (jklQ8)
12
You have to believe that in a time of crisis where human life is at stake and in need of assistance, these people just might go for the dog or cat first.
Posted by: Javapuke at February 20, 2006 04:05 PM (0Mqhp)
13
You really can't make this stuff up. God we need a Biblical scale catastrophe.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 20, 2006 04:09 PM (0yYS2)
14
The part of this that's not one damn bit funny is, they have RIGHTS TO VOTE! Care to wager which party they're affiliated with. Survey says......
Posted by: forest hunter at February 20, 2006 05:57 PM (Fq6zR)
15
A discussion over jellyfish????? Jellyfish?????
Posted by: hondo at February 20, 2006 06:52 PM (fyKFC)
16
Maybe the jelleyfish's name is Jill Edwards, the senator idiot at the center of the UW sphincter council. I'd love to take 46 of those animals, fishin' in the Sound. Once. Do the dungies eat jellyfish?
Posted by: forest hunter at February 20, 2006 08:59 PM (Fq6zR)
Posted by: Son Of The Godfather at February 21, 2006 04:13 AM (maXzk)
18
I don't know about clams, but oysters have feelings.
Posted by: Oyster at February 21, 2006 06:46 AM (YudAC)
February 18, 2006
Alec Baldwin Reaffirms His Status...
...As An Imbecile
I love it when certain Hollywood types fly into snits and babble witlessly in public:
I love it when certain Hollywood types fly into snits and babble witlessly in public:
So, I suppose the question is...what kind of civil trial will we see, or not see, between Cheney and Whittington? Whittington is certainly no stranger to a court room and to civil litigation. Will Cheney pay him off, preemptively? Will they go to court? I would imagine if a guy with a few beers in him shoots you in the face on a hunting trip, how could you turn down that opportunity?Let's say there's a civil lawsuit filed...by the Veep against Alec and Arianna for malicious libel. But let's not interrupt Alec while he's busy showing his ass: more...
Posted by: Bluto at
12:41 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Didn't Alec Baldwin die with the rest when the compound was bombed by the Canadians?
Posted by: Rusty at February 18, 2006 01:37 PM (JQjhA)
2
A reafirmation of the left's weakesses. Imagine all the time effort and energy wasted on the lamest idiotic thing they can think of.
Posted by: hondo at February 18, 2006 01:54 PM (fyKFC)
3
You all know my position.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 18, 2006 02:12 PM (0yYS2)
4
I thought Alec Baldwin had immigrated to Cananda, or was that France? Regardless, ain't he a dandy?
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 18, 2006 02:21 PM (rUyw4)
5
Well, if Alec died that would explain is braindead post, now, wouldn't it?
One of these days I'm gonna head on out to that bar in Mattydale when I hear that Alec and his brothers are in town again.
One of these days I'm gonna head on out to that bar in Mattydale when I hear that Alec and his brothers are in town again.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 18, 2006 02:22 PM (RHG+K)
6
Still a antiamerican big mouthed jerk he was the one to said he would leave the country if bush was elected and this jerk is still here why dont he go live in a place far away from the USA a place where they would adore him like cuba,or why dont he go live and lick HUGO CHAVESS boots
Posted by: sandpiper at February 18, 2006 02:46 PM (QagY6)
7
I really enjoyed the part he played in Team America. Idiot actor wasn't it?
Posted by: Cindy at February 18, 2006 05:14 PM (n8Kkn)
8
What a bufoon.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 18, 2006 07:15 PM (xpnBq)
9
Some of his better acting roles are clearly the ones that draw out his natural sleaze. Where do you get your in (spit) eration Miss ter Baldwonnothing?
IM, do you like Blake Shelton-Ole Red?
IM, do you like Blake Shelton-Ole Red?
Posted by: forest hunter at February 19, 2006 12:20 AM (Fq6zR)
10
If I compare your intelligence and education to Alec's well, who do you think I would listen to? Not you that is for sure. Jealousy is running amuck here.
Posted by: Kathy at February 19, 2006 02:21 AM (1BvtU)
11
Kathy, you know nothing about my education, though it didn't include acting classes, so you got me there, I suppose. That means my options for becoming a parasitical pinhead who has a habit of making empty threats to leave the country if my candidate doesn't win are virtually nil. I will just have to live with that pain.
On the other hand, I'm not stupid enough to expect criminal actions to come out of a hypothetical civil suit, as Baldwin apparently is, and my command of the English language is such that I would never call an elected American official a "terrorist", regardless of which party he or she might represent. Baldwin's whining just has too much of the mincing nancy boy for my taste. And I have a really low tolerance for mincing nancy boys.
And finally, Kathy, no matter how much you pander to Alec, he is not going to suddenly notice you and whisk you away for a romantic interlude in the Caribbean.
On the other hand, I'm not stupid enough to expect criminal actions to come out of a hypothetical civil suit, as Baldwin apparently is, and my command of the English language is such that I would never call an elected American official a "terrorist", regardless of which party he or she might represent. Baldwin's whining just has too much of the mincing nancy boy for my taste. And I have a really low tolerance for mincing nancy boys.
And finally, Kathy, no matter how much you pander to Alec, he is not going to suddenly notice you and whisk you away for a romantic interlude in the Caribbean.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 19, 2006 02:38 AM (RHG+K)
12
Hahaha, Kathy thinks we are jealous of Alec. No, Kathy, not jealousy, but comtempt is my feeling for Alec Baldwin. And you need to return to your People Magazine, and leave the thinking and writing to those of us who have a brain. It's quite obvious you don't.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 19, 2006 01:41 PM (rUyw4)
13
Sorry Forest, I don't listen to much country music any more. In fact, I had to do a websearch to find out who Blake Shelton is.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 19, 2006 02:30 PM (0yYS2)
14
Alec Baldwin dropped out of college, Kathy. And the word is "amok". I won't bother with the rest of your punctuation and grammar. Pray tell, what level of education did you achieve?
Posted by: Oyster at February 20, 2006 10:04 AM (sMLtC)
Violating Dictator Rule #254
Like all good autocracies, Libya doesn't want its citizens slaughtered openly.
Moammar: Nasr, how many times have we told you, put them in prison, then we kill them.
Nasr: My apologies, sir, it won't happen again.
Moammar: You're damned right it won't, you're getting the firing squad....er, you're fired!
pssst, check out how many times the word "peaceful" is used in the news article linked above.
Posted by: Vinnie at
11:42 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This is Libya - nothing happens without the approval and authority of Mr K. Except this.
There is more going on here with this organized cartoon hysteria than simple pep rally rage against the west.
The islamists want a confrontation and power - and I have always suspected they have always been looking in their own countries for it.
To all the authoritarians and dictators in the islamic world - the islamists are a mean dog on a leash - but a mad dog knows no master.
There is more going on here with this organized cartoon hysteria than simple pep rally rage against the west.
The islamists want a confrontation and power - and I have always suspected they have always been looking in their own countries for it.
To all the authoritarians and dictators in the islamic world - the islamists are a mean dog on a leash - but a mad dog knows no master.
Posted by: hondo at February 18, 2006 02:05 PM (fyKFC)
2
If I understand it correctly, rioting splodidopes got dead. What's the problem?
Posted by: forest hunter at February 19, 2006 02:25 AM (Fq6zR)
February 11, 2006
ACLU Attacks Boy Scouts Again
Stop the ACLU reports that the ACLU is leading another assault on the Boy Scouts, sponsoring a lawsuit by a lesbian couple to have the Scouts thrown out of a San Diego park:
One can readily assume how this will be ruled; we are talking about the 9th Circuit here. The ACLU want to force the BSA to welcome professing homosexuals and even to recruit gay Scout leaders. They’d also like to erase the mention of “duty to Godâ€. The ACLU is waging more than just a battle; it is waging a campaign. Since 1981, it has participated in at least 14 cases against the Boy Scouts.Indeed, the Ninth Circus Court of Fools is notorious for softheaded rulings that bear little resemblance to mainstream jurisprudence. This is the court that wanted to strike the words, "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.
The ACLU's past championing of the child molestation advocacy group, the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), makes their continued fascination with the BSA, and inserting homosexuals into its leadership, appear all the more sinister.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
01:16 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.
1
HOT ABERCROMBIE CHICK IS A MAN!!
HERE'S PROOF!!!!
http:// foreigndispatches.typepad...bercrombie.html
WHO IS MUSTANG GIRL MARIE????
HERE'S PROOF!!!!
http:// foreigndispatches.typepad...bercrombie.html
WHO IS MUSTANG GIRL MARIE????
Posted by: George W Bush at February 11, 2006 02:22 PM (ZZXfq)
2
Isn't the partner of the current head of the ACLU a 9th circuit judge?
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at February 11, 2006 02:36 PM (aH6Zf)
Posted by: Dave at February 11, 2006 03:19 PM (3yvId)
4
They picked a good place. The judges in Sandiego tend to be very anti American values. BSA has for over a century been a paradigm of American values.
The court in San Daiego recently sided with the Trial Lawyers and ACLU in a case against the City selling a hill with a Cross on it to a NGO so the cross would not have to be destroyed (as the ACLU have got another court to order). The court also said the City had to pay the Trial Lawyers and the ACLU almost $1,000,000 in legal fees. They will very likely win this case and then use it as stare decisis in othe cases throught the West.
Disclaimer: 55 years ago I was a Scout and 25 years ago my kids were Scouts. I am very biased in favor of BSA and GSA. I also have hated the America hating ACLU for 50 uyears. Other than these 2 items I have no dog in this fight.
The court in San Daiego recently sided with the Trial Lawyers and ACLU in a case against the City selling a hill with a Cross on it to a NGO so the cross would not have to be destroyed (as the ACLU have got another court to order). The court also said the City had to pay the Trial Lawyers and the ACLU almost $1,000,000 in legal fees. They will very likely win this case and then use it as stare decisis in othe cases throught the West.
Disclaimer: 55 years ago I was a Scout and 25 years ago my kids were Scouts. I am very biased in favor of BSA and GSA. I also have hated the America hating ACLU for 50 uyears. Other than these 2 items I have no dog in this fight.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at February 11, 2006 06:28 PM (lwdxR)
5
ACLU the Atheists.Communists and Lawlers Underground its founder is a boneified communists
Posted by: sandpiper at February 12, 2006 01:58 PM (08Fdo)
6
It seems to me that "renting" out public parkland (for next to nothing) to a group that has religious requirements for membership is obviously unconstitutional.
Posted by: Brian Westley at February 14, 2006 08:27 PM (COPAg)
7
"Religious requirements"? You were obviously never a Boy Scout, Brian. And only a deranged deiphobe would consider acknowledgement of the existence of a higher power (which is all that the Scouting admonition to being "reverent" amounts to) to be in violation of the Establishment clause.
I advocate suing atheists for pushing their personal belief system as a state religion.
I advocate suing atheists for pushing their personal belief system as a state religion.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 14, 2006 09:11 PM (RHG+K)
8
Sorry Bluto, requiring a belief in a god IS quite clearly a "religious requirement", and the US government can't subsidise a group that has religious requirement for membership. The BSA actively kicks out atheists, and the government can't give them sweetheart deals any more than they can special deals to an organization that excludes Jews.
Posted by: Brian Westley at February 26, 2006 05:19 AM (COPAg)
February 10, 2006
ACLU Attacks Boy Scouts, Again
Having never forgiven the Boy Scouts of America for successfully resisting ACLU attempts to foist overtly homosexual Scout leaders on them (the Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the Scouts could select their own leaders), the ACLU is now threatening Boy Scout charters with local governments. The ACLU feels that there is excessive mention of "God" and "reverence" among the Scouts, and that this violates the doctrine of separation of church and state.
more...
Posted by: Bluto at
12:09 AM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 367 words, total size 3 kb.
1
That's the difference between Lefty vs conservative pressure groups. Conservatives apply grassroots pressure, while the Left, being fringe, has to resort to litigation and the courts. They are true totalitarians; a minority attempting to lead the majority by the nose- and using the court system to do so. They are vile and unamerican.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 10, 2006 12:32 AM (8e/V4)
2
Isn't their ultimate argument because the Boyscouts are a nonprofit organization, in other words contributions are tax-deductible? If so why should this be any different than a church? The ACLU is also a nonprofit organization; well its split into two entities. It lobbies and is funded through its membership, but its official foundation litigates and educates and what it derives as income is tax-deductible. They're just like the NAACP and AARP and all 3 'educate' and lobby for political ends. This is against the requirements for tax-exempt status. The NRA for example is not tax-exempt.
Posted by: Javapuke at February 10, 2006 12:52 AM (7D0Nk)
3
The BSA symbolically represents what they loathe the most - us. Its not about taxes - its about belief systems.
Posted by: hondo at February 10, 2006 03:13 AM (3aakz)
4
The ACLU gets far more, FAR more, funding from government for frivolous litigation. And when they leave, they leave ruination in their wake. At least the Boy Scouts leave a place better than it was when they arrived.
The ACLU represents some of the most hateful and bigoted people they can scrape off a rock. The Boy Scouts simply ask that someone not be "overtly" homosexual. Frankly, with the "don't ask - don't tell" policy that has been adopted and in today's atmosphere after the priest scandals and lack of control of sexual child-predation, I don't find it all that unreasonable.
The ACLU represents some of the most hateful and bigoted people they can scrape off a rock. The Boy Scouts simply ask that someone not be "overtly" homosexual. Frankly, with the "don't ask - don't tell" policy that has been adopted and in today's atmosphere after the priest scandals and lack of control of sexual child-predation, I don't find it all that unreasonable.
Posted by: Oyster at February 10, 2006 05:09 AM (YudAC)
5
You're right hondo. I think the ACLU hates the BSA the most is because it's the last place where the traditional values of American society can be instilled in heterosexual males, thus innoculating them against the virus of liberalism when they venture off to college.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 10, 2006 05:10 AM (0yYS2)
6
Sorry guys, but I was a boyscout in the original Boyscouts of the Netherlands during the 1960ies. At camp at one time we had a male performer in our tent who jerked off with cum! for one bottle of soda pop (brandname Exota). He upped his price as he got a to wide audience willing to pay for the spectable. We got groped all the time by other scouts. Some even mounted farm animals. That no boyscout lost his willy from a dog more interested in the sausage than the sause is still a wonder to me. I have never been licked off by a cow, but if so inclined I learnt it at the original Boyscouts of the Netherlands.
Our tents at camp were constantly patrolled with flashlights during the night. Bedhopping was frequent. Some Akela's had their favorites over for "sleepovers" in the seperate adult tents. Most of us were jealous of the perks these chosen enjoyed, from transport by car, while we walked, better food at the masters' table and what we thought was the luxury of unhindered sleep. Most of the scout masters were married or engaged: to women. I think a lot of inoculation went on inside those masters' tents. Like a lot of inoculation went on in all-male Catholic schools, orphanages, boarding schools run by Catholic priests. The British navy wouldn't be able to put all those ships out to sea if they didn't allow inoculators aboard.
Our tents at camp were constantly patrolled with flashlights during the night. Bedhopping was frequent. Some Akela's had their favorites over for "sleepovers" in the seperate adult tents. Most of us were jealous of the perks these chosen enjoyed, from transport by car, while we walked, better food at the masters' table and what we thought was the luxury of unhindered sleep. Most of the scout masters were married or engaged: to women. I think a lot of inoculation went on inside those masters' tents. Like a lot of inoculation went on in all-male Catholic schools, orphanages, boarding schools run by Catholic priests. The British navy wouldn't be able to put all those ships out to sea if they didn't allow inoculators aboard.
Posted by: tom at February 10, 2006 07:27 AM (97DNF)
7
>>>At camp at one time we had a male performer in our tent who jerked off with cum! for one bottle of soda pop (brandname Exota). He upped his price as he got a to wide audience willing to pay for the spectable.
tom,
if our Boy Scouts were like the netherlands Boyscouts, the ACLU wouldn't be suing them all the time, I guarantee it.
tom,
if our Boy Scouts were like the netherlands Boyscouts, the ACLU wouldn't be suing them all the time, I guarantee it.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 10, 2006 08:06 AM (8e/V4)
8
Oh great!
Now people look at me in the office 'cause I can't stop laughing!
No wonder I visit this blog everyday...
- Max
Now people look at me in the office 'cause I can't stop laughing!
No wonder I visit this blog everyday...
- Max
Posted by: Max at February 10, 2006 09:02 AM (Ol+Ma)
9
The ACLU the Atheists.Communists and Lawyers. Underground. americas most far left group of subversives ever along with the workers world party and the communists USA and they have the HQ right in the middle of HANOI ON THE BAY so why should we be surprised so instead of using the satue of liberty as the logo the should just use the communist symbol
Posted by: sandpiper at February 10, 2006 09:30 AM (U+eLg)
10
Fuck the ALCU!
Posted by: Andy at February 10, 2006 09:37 AM (tMU4W)
11
All anyone needs to know about the ACLU is their undying support (including legal and monetary support) for the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) who's website has articles on how to find young boys at an impressionable age that are ripe for the picking and make them fall in love with you.
Don't forget that the ACLU receives large donations from communist countries who are doing what they can to bring us down from within.
If people knew the real ACLU and not the one the MSM portrays, the money would start to dry up.
Don't forget that the ACLU receives large donations from communist countries who are doing what they can to bring us down from within.
If people knew the real ACLU and not the one the MSM portrays, the money would start to dry up.
Posted by: slug at February 10, 2006 10:01 AM (wcNc2)
12
Oyster is right. If we want to get serious about stopping the ACLU, we need to get Congress to change the laws that reward these litigators for filing and winning frivolous lawsuits. But we are up against the liberals in Congress, including the Trial Lawyers Association, and the RINO's who secretly support change in America forced by the Judicial Branch. And it's not change for the better that these RINO's support, but stealth leftism.
I talked to my Congressman last week about this very issue, and he was very noncommital, and he is a Democrat, just so you know. No help from him, just useless baggage for the Left, even though he claims to be conservative at election time.
I talked to my Congressman last week about this very issue, and he was very noncommital, and he is a Democrat, just so you know. No help from him, just useless baggage for the Left, even though he claims to be conservative at election time.
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 10, 2006 10:17 AM (rUyw4)
13
Euro Boyscouts ... now that image is funny ... and sooooo Dutch!
Posted by: hondo at February 10, 2006 11:48 AM (3aakz)
14
JJ, I think if anyone really wants to get serious about putting a stop to the ACLU, they're going to have to do it 1776 style.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 10, 2006 03:41 PM (0yYS2)
15
But when Goerge Bush had his gov't S.S. flunkies throw people with Kerry shirts out of his rallies, the same Conservatives who preen themselves on their new found tolerance were the first to deny, then justify Bush's petty fascism
Posted by: Jake at February 10, 2006 10:56 PM (5m1yM)
16
The ACLU is so horrible, but when the government busted Limbaugh for prescription drug fraud and abuse, the ACLU took his side on medical privacy and the fat hypocrite weaseled his way out. Conservatives hate the ACLu unless it serves their agenda
Posted by: Jake at February 10, 2006 10:58 PM (5m1yM)
February 04, 2006
The Moral Middle
All of the appeasers, and at least a few of the agitators, in the comment section of this post at Samizdata (h/t: Wretchard) are missing the point. When the author refers to the editors of UK periodicals who refuse to publish the cartoons as "craven" he doesn't have in mind a matter of whether they're worried about "offending religious believers," because things have gone far beyond that. What he means is that these editors are so far behind the curve that they believe it's still a matter of giving or taking offense. They're craven because they fail to recognize that there's no legitimate moral or ethical ground standing between "I am Spartacus" and the illegitimacy of "discretion is the better part of valor." With one possible exception, discretion is cowardice and foolishness.
That exception? There's something largely missing from this debate, because there would seem some ground upon which principled Muslims might have stood. They could have made the argument that the Danish cartoons could not have depicted The Prophet, regardless of the intent, but must have been of a False Prophet honored by Al Qaeda and the Salafists. What does it mean that most of the Ummah assumes Al Qaeda honors Muhammed? Are there any Muslims with the view that the controversy is over a False Prophet and a false Islam? Maybe the few who take this position need an amplifier to be heard over the "street din?" Come to think of it, giving those Muslims a larger voice might still be the better part of valor.
(Cross-posted to Demosophia and The Jawa Report)
Posted by: Demosophist at
09:18 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Very well said. However, a core doctrine of Islam is a rejection of sectarianism. Which, of course, is silly since Muslims are divided into several large sects and hundreds of large ones. But still, with such a direct prohibition they find it difficult to come up with a language suited to the task.
The interesting exception to the rule are the wahhabis (and many in the larger Salafa community) who have no problem declaring any one who does not agree with them kufr.
The interesting exception to the rule are the wahhabis (and many in the larger Salafa community) who have no problem declaring any one who does not agree with them kufr.
Posted by: Rusty at February 04, 2006 11:25 AM (JQjhA)
2
These moderates don't get heard because regardless of what they tell us, they really are a minority. There are far more Muslims who may not be the ones making the threats, partaking in terrorist acts or actively support those who do, but they sympathize and apologize for them regularly. And think it's better that we "submit" than fight.
Posted by: Oyster at February 04, 2006 11:38 AM (YudAC)
3
Ummah doesn't object to al'Qaeda's claims to be working in the name of Allah because they agree.
Posted by: Robert Crawford at February 04, 2006 01:56 PM (Gn9tM)
February 03, 2006
Riders Guard Soldier Funerals From Protesters
Stop the ACLU and Patriotic Mom post about protestors disrupting the funerals of Iraq War vets, and the extremes that their families have been driven to just to bury their loved ones with dignity.
Posted by: Bluto at
08:51 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 347 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Let's hope Congress pulls the ACLU's main source of money for lawsuits real soon.
Posted by: dave at February 03, 2006 09:35 PM (CcXvt)
2
A truly wacko fringe group that defies placement on the ideological scale.
Posted by: hondo at February 03, 2006 11:50 PM (3aakz)
3
These ACLU idiots couldn't spell respect, let alone define it.
Posted by: Oyster at February 04, 2006 06:10 AM (YudAC)
4
55 years ago I thought the ACLU was against America because they were all a bunch of Commies. The last 20 years they have been backing fascists; so the are no Commies. They just hate America and patriotic Americans. Nuts to the ACLU!
Posted by: Rodney A Stanton at February 04, 2006 07:13 AM (lwdxR)
5
Bikers--I don't know what it is about these guys. Their lifestyle has little resemblance to mine, but the ones I've met through a friend I've found to be the most decent, generous, loyal, and honest people around. They have a wild side, but so did the cowboys.
Posted by: youngbourbonprofessional at February 04, 2006 07:16 AM (tdhAh)
6
Let it be known that CODEPINK and the rest of the antiwar crowd of pests are not welcome here we dont want their vultures circling over this funeral
Posted by: sandpiper at February 04, 2006 07:56 AM (mY5+n)
7
I got a call from some riders over in Jersey who wanted to know if me and some of my guys would be willing to help them out in this kind of thing, because they heard murmurs of this crap planned going on over there.
Where and when.
Damn, I'm in a rage today. Gotta find me a hippie and do some earnest kicking.
Where and when.
Damn, I'm in a rage today. Gotta find me a hippie and do some earnest kicking.
Posted by: TC-LeatherPenguin at February 04, 2006 08:21 AM (ItXz2)
8
Ron Phelps Loves cock!
Posted by: God at February 06, 2006 07:05 PM (d+g2I)
9
Fred Phelps Loves cock!
Posted by: God at February 06, 2006 07:06 PM (d+g2I)
10
Over 100 Motorcycles from The American Freedom Veterans Awareness Organization came to help drown out the noise of the Phelps hate group protesting at Lc-Cpl Johnathan Kyle Price's funeral In Illinois recently.
While the community did what it could to make sure that the protestors or their signs could not be seen , the Bikes did what they could to see that they were not heard either.
Words can not describe the pain their " freedom of speech " must have caused to his family.
What ever happened to the civil right to be able to practice one's religion , by entering a church in peace, and being able to practice one's religion, in a solemn and respectful burial of their loved one.
ACLU only has respect for some peoples rights, when they choose sides , they choose who has the most rights. I wish this law had passed before Kyle's funeral.
One other thought , if such protests continue, it won't be long before communities will tire of it , and civil unrest will follow.
I understand that these protesters were taken for a long long ride for their own safety after the protest. I'm just waiting for them to sue my home town now. It's not like they haven't caused enough pain already.
It has been almost a month , and I'm still furious. Kyle didn't deserve this , none of our soldiers or their families do.
While the community did what it could to make sure that the protestors or their signs could not be seen , the Bikes did what they could to see that they were not heard either.
Words can not describe the pain their " freedom of speech " must have caused to his family.
What ever happened to the civil right to be able to practice one's religion , by entering a church in peace, and being able to practice one's religion, in a solemn and respectful burial of their loved one.
ACLU only has respect for some peoples rights, when they choose sides , they choose who has the most rights. I wish this law had passed before Kyle's funeral.
One other thought , if such protests continue, it won't be long before communities will tire of it , and civil unrest will follow.
I understand that these protesters were taken for a long long ride for their own safety after the protest. I'm just waiting for them to sue my home town now. It's not like they haven't caused enough pain already.
It has been almost a month , and I'm still furious. Kyle didn't deserve this , none of our soldiers or their families do.
Posted by: MorningSun at February 07, 2006 10:47 AM (b69MO)
11
The saddest part of this entire situation to me is the fact that these people claim to represent Jesus. To anyone who sees these people and hears their message I would say this: These people do NOT come from God and do NOT speak what God thinks of this nation. They are the most screwed up image of Christianity I have ever heard of.
Posted by: Jonny at February 10, 2006 01:49 PM (Ka9G0)
January 29, 2006
Obama and Biden See Alito Filibuster As Lost Cause
From the Associated Press:
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., predicted on Sunday that an effort to try to block a final vote on Alito would fail on Monday. That would clear the way for Senate approval Tuesday of the federal appeals court judge picked to succeed the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.These remarks beg the question: if you know you can't filibuster before you vote, why not just go to a straight up and down vote, and quit jerking everyone around?"We need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that, if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake," Obama said.
"There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers," he told ABC's "This Week."
"I think a filibuster makes sense when you have a prospect of actually succeeding," Biden said on CNN's "Late Edition." "I will vote one time to say to continue the debate. but the truth of the matter" is that Alito will be confirmed, he said.
Answer: the Democrats have veered so far to the Left that they have to pander to the tantrums of these nutcases.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
03:47 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 2 kb.
1
final vote 72-28 ... lets start a pool ...
Note: this type of vote will not indicate strength of Bush - but instead indicate weakness of Dem left.
Note: this type of vote will not indicate strength of Bush - but instead indicate weakness of Dem left.
Posted by: hondo at January 30, 2006 03:01 AM (3aakz)
2
agreed
Posted by: Dale at January 30, 2006 05:23 AM (6qCfg)
3
66-34
Posted by: Oyster at January 30, 2006 05:41 AM (YudAC)
4
The dhimmitards have finally reached the point where they're like a hostage-taker who has shot all his hostages, and is now holding the gun to his own head, threatening to pull the trigger. Considering who is calling the shots for them these days, I'd say they make asses of themselves in grand fashion.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 30, 2006 09:04 AM (0yYS2)
5
They just dropped a anvil of the demacratic donkey or more likly the donkeys own trap backfired
Posted by: sandpiper at January 30, 2006 09:40 AM (A2P9P)
6
Heh. I said "make asses of themselves" without even seeing the double entendre. I should never post before I have coffee.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 30, 2006 10:17 AM (0yYS2)
7
A bit on the wild side but - 10-1 says Hillary changes her mind and votes YES. I know - longshot - but shes a gamester!
Posted by: hondo at January 30, 2006 11:05 AM (3aakz)
8
You may be right hondo, she's not as smart as most people give her credit for.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 30, 2006 11:19 AM (0yYS2)
9
Of course she's smart - she just doesn't have much to work with politically - which is why she's all over the map on a dime - searching for that "magical middle".
Posted by: hondo at January 30, 2006 12:33 PM (3aakz)
10
If she were really smart, she'd go with what works, rather than trying to foist her crooked Marxist schemes upon us. She is scum and should be... well, you know the rest.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 30, 2006 06:30 PM (0yYS2)
January 27, 2006
This Is Just Wrong On So Many Levels
From the Associated Press:
An Italian judge heard arguments Friday on whether a small-town parish priest should stand trial for asserting that Jesus Christ existed.Okay, I know that Italy has become a cesspool of neo-communists, terrorist sympathizers and other assorted pinheads and kooks, but come on.The priest's atheist accuser, Luigi Cascioli, says the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people for 2,000 years with a fable that Christ existed, and that the Rev. Enrico Righi violated two Italian laws by reasserting the claim.
Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.
Posted by: Bluto at
10:37 AM
| Comments (26)
| Add Comment
Post contains 103 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Tell this Italian Cockbag (hey Filthy, nice word) to bring it on. We’ll send his ass to hell along with Tom Hanks.
Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 11:00 AM (Ffvoi)
2
Why is Tom going to hell?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 01:04 PM (0yYS2)
3
Counter sue the commie and make him prove Jesus didn't exist.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 27, 2006 01:27 PM (FBm0F)
4
He stars in the DaVinchi Code movie. It’s going to lead a lot of people in the wrong direction. I don’t know where Tom will end up, but I would have walked away from this one. I think it’s true that some people will sell their soul for fame.
I’ve enjoyed most of the movies by Ron Howard and Hanks. Apollo 13 is one of my all time favorites. I was disappointed to hear both were behind this load of crap.
I’ve enjoyed most of the movies by Ron Howard and Hanks. Apollo 13 is one of my all time favorites. I was disappointed to hear both were behind this load of crap.
Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 01:33 PM (3OPZt)
5
Brad, did you ever read the DaVinci Code? I'm a Christian myself and enjoyed the book very much. I can't wait for the movie...
On the topic at hand, however, this is kind of like life imitating art. I see a big courtroom drama a la "Miracle on 34th Street" happening. Heh. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't play well in Europeville.
On the topic at hand, however, this is kind of like life imitating art. I see a big courtroom drama a la "Miracle on 34th Street" happening. Heh. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't play well in Europeville.
Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 01:54 PM (Srmrz)
6
Vonski,
No I have not read the book. I have read and listened to a few knowledgeable Priests and Catholic apologists critique it.
I do not believe Jesus had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. I don’t think people who write books or make movies that portray this are going to fair well in the end.
No I have not read the book. I have read and listened to a few knowledgeable Priests and Catholic apologists critique it.
I do not believe Jesus had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. I don’t think people who write books or make movies that portray this are going to fair well in the end.
Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 02:11 PM (3OPZt)
7
Vonski I see a big courtroom drama a la "Miracle on 34th Street" happening. Heh. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't play well in Europeville.
OK, all you boys and girls, let's get out the pen and paper and start writing letters to Jesus, ICO: the Vatican
.
Then make them prove the Italian Post Office isn't an official agency of Italy
.
OK, all you boys and girls, let's get out the pen and paper and start writing letters to Jesus, ICO: the Vatican
.
Then make them prove the Italian Post Office isn't an official agency of Italy
.
Posted by: mamapajamas at January 27, 2006 02:16 PM (YmdvN)
8
Ironic (to me at least) that not only Christians, obviously, believe Jesus existed but so do many Jews and Muslims, generally speaking. I also am a Christian but speaking strictly from a historical point of view, I thought it was pretty much common knowledge even among historians who are atheists, that Jesus did exist. They may disagree on His importance in the grand scheme of things but I'm not aware of many who deny the He existed. I doubt this guy is going after the clerics at the mosque.
*** Spoiler Alert on the Da Vinci Code ***
Vonski, I read the Da Vinci code and many are offended because Dan Brown is passing this off as being a fairly accurate historical account of the children of Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the secret organization that 'protects the bloodline'. It is obvious to most that Brown had his plot already decided and then took a bunch of unsubstantiated material on Da Vinci and drew lines to connect the pieces of the story he wanted to tell. Everywhere the story needs to make a serious leap of faith, it is explained away as 'well Da Vinci didn't have the freedom to say what he knew to be factual from being leader of this secret organization so he left us clues in his paintings.' Then he expects the reader to make other leaps of faith on presumed hidden meanings behind Da Vinci's 'The Last Supper' by referring to a specific part of the painting and saying 'this means ...'. On one TV show, he made reference to the letter 'V' that Jesus and the person to his right form in the painting and then expects you to believe his conclusion based on a made-up premise. Sorry, I can't remember the conclusion based on the 'V' or I would so so.
I can't say I was offended by the book ascerting that Jesus had children but I was a bit offended as him passing it off as being historically accurate after making a series of leaps-of-faith that sound good when written in a fictional story. I am a Christian who understands the Bible was written by many different people over many years and has gone through many translations that could allow some detail to be lost but it seems to be a reach when no account (Matthew, Mark, Luke, ...) of Jesus' teachings and his adult life have mentioned a wife. Mary Magdalene is generally seen by scholars as another one of his closest disciples but probably not mentioned as such due to 'a woman's place' being subserviant. I have heard many priests who say they don't believe the story is true but that it's certainly not impossible. Sure, a lot of people are going to see it as 'the work of Satan' but most of us just have a problem with Brown because he's passing his story off as being based on truth when all of his 'proof' requires you to believe in the dots he has conveniently connected for us.
Yes, it is a work of fiction but Brown has been on many television shows explaining why the book is based on events that are historically accurate. If he were to admit that he made it all up, there wouldn't be as much controversy and, therefore, fewer sales.
It has definitely made him a very rich man.
*** Spoiler Alert on the Da Vinci Code ***
Vonski, I read the Da Vinci code and many are offended because Dan Brown is passing this off as being a fairly accurate historical account of the children of Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the secret organization that 'protects the bloodline'. It is obvious to most that Brown had his plot already decided and then took a bunch of unsubstantiated material on Da Vinci and drew lines to connect the pieces of the story he wanted to tell. Everywhere the story needs to make a serious leap of faith, it is explained away as 'well Da Vinci didn't have the freedom to say what he knew to be factual from being leader of this secret organization so he left us clues in his paintings.' Then he expects the reader to make other leaps of faith on presumed hidden meanings behind Da Vinci's 'The Last Supper' by referring to a specific part of the painting and saying 'this means ...'. On one TV show, he made reference to the letter 'V' that Jesus and the person to his right form in the painting and then expects you to believe his conclusion based on a made-up premise. Sorry, I can't remember the conclusion based on the 'V' or I would so so.
I can't say I was offended by the book ascerting that Jesus had children but I was a bit offended as him passing it off as being historically accurate after making a series of leaps-of-faith that sound good when written in a fictional story. I am a Christian who understands the Bible was written by many different people over many years and has gone through many translations that could allow some detail to be lost but it seems to be a reach when no account (Matthew, Mark, Luke, ...) of Jesus' teachings and his adult life have mentioned a wife. Mary Magdalene is generally seen by scholars as another one of his closest disciples but probably not mentioned as such due to 'a woman's place' being subserviant. I have heard many priests who say they don't believe the story is true but that it's certainly not impossible. Sure, a lot of people are going to see it as 'the work of Satan' but most of us just have a problem with Brown because he's passing his story off as being based on truth when all of his 'proof' requires you to believe in the dots he has conveniently connected for us.
Yes, it is a work of fiction but Brown has been on many television shows explaining why the book is based on events that are historically accurate. If he were to admit that he made it all up, there wouldn't be as much controversy and, therefore, fewer sales.
It has definitely made him a very rich man.
Posted by: slug at January 27, 2006 03:07 PM (wcNc2)
9
I would like to believe the "V" stood for Vonski, but I doubt it. 
Surely anyone with a firm foundation in Christianity would recognize the work as a fiction. And, there is no denying that people do believe that Christ and Mary Magdalene bore children, in spite of the fact that there is no evidence to support this claim. I agree that Brown stretches things to the point of breaking, but I was able to take it with a grain of salt and see it as entertainment versus letting it challenge my faith.
In regards to my initial response to Brad, I would hope that we would not wish to condemn someone to hell for reciting lines in front of a movie camera. That was a bit excessive. Rather, even in spite of the glaring discrepancies, I hope that some good comes of the picture. There might be some that come away convinced that they should research this Jesus fellow a bit more. I suggest starting with the Bible, New Testament, book of Matthew
Surely anyone with a firm foundation in Christianity would recognize the work as a fiction. And, there is no denying that people do believe that Christ and Mary Magdalene bore children, in spite of the fact that there is no evidence to support this claim. I agree that Brown stretches things to the point of breaking, but I was able to take it with a grain of salt and see it as entertainment versus letting it challenge my faith.
In regards to my initial response to Brad, I would hope that we would not wish to condemn someone to hell for reciting lines in front of a movie camera. That was a bit excessive. Rather, even in spite of the glaring discrepancies, I hope that some good comes of the picture. There might be some that come away convinced that they should research this Jesus fellow a bit more. I suggest starting with the Bible, New Testament, book of Matthew
Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 03:22 PM (Srmrz)
10
Of course none of this would matter if Christitanity were really based on the teaching of Christ the teacher rather than a cult based on the alleged divinity of Christ as the Son-O-God. Neither Christ nor Buddha, (both appelations, not names, by the way), wanted to have a cult of personality founded on them, but rather wanted only to spread enlightenment throughtout the world. Both failed and succeeded to varying extents, but no matter what, islam takes the prize as the greatest ideological blight to ever befall humanity.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 03:49 PM (0yYS2)
11
Another thing; modern Christianity is derived directly from the Council of Nicea, which was basically nothing more than an instument that allowed the emperor Constantine to unify all Christianity in one official church, under his control, of course, and thus consolidate power through his direct appointment and control of the various bishops. Any sects or teachings which did not contribute directly to such consolidation and control were deemed heretical, and the followers were marginalized and persecuted throughout the empire. In effect, the same people who murdered Jesus took control of the various religions established in his name, and put it to work for their own purposes.
As I've said before, Christinity inc. has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, but everything to do with power, control, and money. To find the true Jesus, one must first abandon Christianity.
As I've said before, Christinity inc. has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, but everything to do with power, control, and money. To find the true Jesus, one must first abandon Christianity.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 03:58 PM (0yYS2)
12
Ok Vonski, I can't condemn anyone to hell and really would not want to anyway. I was a little carried away.
Shit Maximus, every time I think I’m not being a good enough Christian I read one of your rants and damn if I don’t think I’m actually going to make it. You make me feel so holy.
Vonski, I guess we disagree about the seriousness of Hanks making this movie. I would not do it for all the money in the world. Even if you say you’re sorry; there it is for the entire world to see 20 years later. To me, it’s a lot.
Finally, I’m going back through the posts and trying to find the thing that set poor young George off and made him snap. Can someone direct me to the thread? It has to be pretty good.
Shit Maximus, every time I think I’m not being a good enough Christian I read one of your rants and damn if I don’t think I’m actually going to make it. You make me feel so holy.
Vonski, I guess we disagree about the seriousness of Hanks making this movie. I would not do it for all the money in the world. Even if you say you’re sorry; there it is for the entire world to see 20 years later. To me, it’s a lot.
Finally, I’m going back through the posts and trying to find the thing that set poor young George off and made him snap. Can someone direct me to the thread? It has to be pretty good.
Posted by: Brad at January 27, 2006 04:13 PM (3OPZt)
13
Does anyone else get the impression that IM was abused by a priest as an altar boy? Please do not confuse the 'pastors' on TBN and abortion clinic bombers as being ambassadors of the true Christian religion.
Constantine's attempt to catholicize all of the sects failed if you haven't noticed (we call this failure "denominations" hehe). And, Jesus did not deny His godhood (and therefore the "good news" that He died for our sins, so no further sacrifice was necessary) in any respect so I don't know where you got that idea.
But, that isn't really what this blog post is about. If we are merely talking about whether or not someone should have to go to court to prove that Jesus existed, there is ample historical evidence of this. I don't think the comments section is the appropriate place for a lengthy discussion as to veracity of the claims that Jesus is God and who is true followers are and what exactly they believe.
Constantine's attempt to catholicize all of the sects failed if you haven't noticed (we call this failure "denominations" hehe). And, Jesus did not deny His godhood (and therefore the "good news" that He died for our sins, so no further sacrifice was necessary) in any respect so I don't know where you got that idea.
But, that isn't really what this blog post is about. If we are merely talking about whether or not someone should have to go to court to prove that Jesus existed, there is ample historical evidence of this. I don't think the comments section is the appropriate place for a lengthy discussion as to veracity of the claims that Jesus is God and who is true followers are and what exactly they believe.
Posted by: Vonski at January 27, 2006 04:26 PM (Srmrz)
14
Frankly, I don't know of any passage in the bible that says thou shalt not say Jesus had a girlfriend. And if I were a Christian I would be more concerned about whether Hanks was "saved" than what role he might play in a ficticious story. Afterall, if he was a Christian wouldn't he already be forgiven for playing the role?
What's most interesting about it is that I haven't heard any Christians threaten to kill anyone over it or blow up a bus.
What's most interesting about it is that I haven't heard any Christians threaten to kill anyone over it or blow up a bus.
Posted by: Oyster at January 27, 2006 04:28 PM (YudAC)
15
IM,
Agreeing with your basic premise of church + absolute power = corruption, I definitely have to disagree with your assertion that Christ's message was separate from himself. There is no way you can read the book of John and not walk away with the doctrine that Jesus is God. Even acknowledging him as the "Christ" is attributing character beyond that of any human. Christianity (not the religion, mind you) is still first and foremost about the salvation accomplished by Christ (literally, the Saviour). The cults can usually be easily identified on this one point alone.
Agreeing with your basic premise of church + absolute power = corruption, I definitely have to disagree with your assertion that Christ's message was separate from himself. There is no way you can read the book of John and not walk away with the doctrine that Jesus is God. Even acknowledging him as the "Christ" is attributing character beyond that of any human. Christianity (not the religion, mind you) is still first and foremost about the salvation accomplished by Christ (literally, the Saviour). The cults can usually be easily identified on this one point alone.
Posted by: Henry at January 27, 2006 04:37 PM (CNngs)
16
True, Oyster, but I am going to give Tom Hanks a noogie next time I see him. I'll bet he will stop with the anti-Christian movies after he hears about this threat. Haha!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 27, 2006 04:39 PM (rUyw4)
17
Vonski, it sounds like we are in agreement. Like I said (or at least meant), the religious statement wasn't my issue with the book because I did recognize it as a work of fiction. My only issue is the continual sermonizing by the author on every liberal media outlet to try and make people believe this a story based on fact.
IM, I may not agree with the philosphical part of your argument but you're at least a man of strong conviction and it sounds like you know your history.
IM, I may not agree with the philosphical part of your argument but you're at least a man of strong conviction and it sounds like you know your history.
Posted by: slug at January 27, 2006 04:45 PM (wcNc2)
18
First to Brad: If you're feeling holy, then you're standing at the gates of hell, metaphorically speaking. There's no righteousness like self-righteousness.
Next, to Vonski: No, I wasn't an altar boy, nor was I even Catholic, for which I am grateful, considering the odds, but it is telling that you resort immediately to personal slurs rather than attempt to engage in enlightened discourse. Unfortunately, this is not atypical behavior of most Christians with whom I debate. If you're afraid I'm too smart for you to take head on, then don't try a sneak attack, because I'm too smart for that too, and you'll get busted, like you just did. My kung fu is stronger than your kung fu.
What happened to me was that I learned to think for myself, which put me forever in opposition to any and all dogma and doctrines that pretend to the truth, whether in the form of an ancient text or some televangelic fraud selling redemption and family vacations at Jesusland USA in one package for only twelve easy payments. Don't take this personally, but if you believe that any person can find the truth for you better than you can find it for yourself, then I've got a bridge I'm looking to sell...
As for Jesus not denying his godhood, (we call it divinity, hehe), the Council of Nicea, along with deciding whether Christ was human, divine, or both, was also tasked to assemble the various gospels and other texts into the Bible, and Eusebius was a fairly thorough editor, changing, deleting, and adding as he saw fit, and even saying that falsehoods, if they served the cause, were perfectly acceptable. Even Pope Leo X said "it has served us well, this myth of Christ". The Bible exists in the form it does because Eusebius wanted it that way, and all other conflicting gospels he ordered burned, as was also threatened to the newly-denounced heretics, but many survived, though most are even more preposterous than the ones that were kept.
And now, to Henry: Read the previous paragraph then continue. The word Christ doesn't mean savior, it means anointed, and may be etymologically related to the word for golden, chrysos.This is an academic argument and I have to take the dog for a walk, so it'll have to wait for another time, but I will be glad to continue at a later time.
As to the word Christ, I use it not because I wish to acknowledge his divinity, but because if I called him Ye-sh-ua bin Yu-suf, (damned filter),nobody would know who I was talking about. The salvation that Jesus offered did not then, nor does it now, require membership, twelve easy payments, nor the abandonment of reality, but it does require letting go of all sin, along with the willingness to forgive yourself and others for being human, though not to the point of absurdity. And absurdity is something in which Christianity inc. is well practiced.
Finally, to slug: Thanks, and you bet I know what I'm talking about, otherwise I'd keep my trap closed.
Next, to Vonski: No, I wasn't an altar boy, nor was I even Catholic, for which I am grateful, considering the odds, but it is telling that you resort immediately to personal slurs rather than attempt to engage in enlightened discourse. Unfortunately, this is not atypical behavior of most Christians with whom I debate. If you're afraid I'm too smart for you to take head on, then don't try a sneak attack, because I'm too smart for that too, and you'll get busted, like you just did. My kung fu is stronger than your kung fu.
What happened to me was that I learned to think for myself, which put me forever in opposition to any and all dogma and doctrines that pretend to the truth, whether in the form of an ancient text or some televangelic fraud selling redemption and family vacations at Jesusland USA in one package for only twelve easy payments. Don't take this personally, but if you believe that any person can find the truth for you better than you can find it for yourself, then I've got a bridge I'm looking to sell...
As for Jesus not denying his godhood, (we call it divinity, hehe), the Council of Nicea, along with deciding whether Christ was human, divine, or both, was also tasked to assemble the various gospels and other texts into the Bible, and Eusebius was a fairly thorough editor, changing, deleting, and adding as he saw fit, and even saying that falsehoods, if they served the cause, were perfectly acceptable. Even Pope Leo X said "it has served us well, this myth of Christ". The Bible exists in the form it does because Eusebius wanted it that way, and all other conflicting gospels he ordered burned, as was also threatened to the newly-denounced heretics, but many survived, though most are even more preposterous than the ones that were kept.
And now, to Henry: Read the previous paragraph then continue. The word Christ doesn't mean savior, it means anointed, and may be etymologically related to the word for golden, chrysos.This is an academic argument and I have to take the dog for a walk, so it'll have to wait for another time, but I will be glad to continue at a later time.
As to the word Christ, I use it not because I wish to acknowledge his divinity, but because if I called him Ye-sh-ua bin Yu-suf, (damned filter),nobody would know who I was talking about. The salvation that Jesus offered did not then, nor does it now, require membership, twelve easy payments, nor the abandonment of reality, but it does require letting go of all sin, along with the willingness to forgive yourself and others for being human, though not to the point of absurdity. And absurdity is something in which Christianity inc. is well practiced.
Finally, to slug: Thanks, and you bet I know what I'm talking about, otherwise I'd keep my trap closed.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 27, 2006 10:40 PM (0yYS2)
19
Pope Leo X never said that except in a satire by a British anti-Papist named John Bale. The work was titled, Pageant of the Popes. Show me where he said it in an encyclical and I will entertain the notion. Until then, the quote is non-existant as a historical matter.
Posted by: J Rob at January 28, 2006 04:03 AM (tYi+A)
20
Well Rob, it looks like you were right. I had never researched that quote on the internet, and now I know better. Thanks.
See? I'm honest in my dealings, because the truth is all that matters to me, and I will readily lay aside anything other. Can the same be said for my antagonists?
See? I'm honest in my dealings, because the truth is all that matters to me, and I will readily lay aside anything other. Can the same be said for my antagonists?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 28, 2006 09:50 AM (0yYS2)
21
That's the thing about IM. He's an atheist, but he's an honest atheist and he doesn't have an axe to grind. I can live with atheists like that. Our country is big enough for the both of us. Unlike the anti-christian Leftards who should all be packed into shipping crates and handed over to IM to dispose of as he sees fit.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 28, 2006 11:45 AM (XA7De)
22
JC, Maxie ain't got that much free time on his hands, even if he is semi-retired. Haha!
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 28, 2006 01:16 PM (rUyw4)
23
Oh I've got time on my hands if I want it, I just don't want to waste my time tilting at windmills. Besides, my differences with Christianity are generally philosophical and ethical in nature, i.e., purely academic, and what I want is not to see Christianity destroyed, but reformed once again and taken out of the gigantic, palatial temples of wealth where it's broadcast live on national television and sold in vacation packages for just twelve easy payments, and put back into the hearts of people. I'd rather the the Christianity the Jesus taught, not that which was given by the Pope's armies at the threat of fire and sword.
Christians have always contributed to the greatness of America, and it wouldn't be half a nice a place to live if not for Christianity. Anyone who thinks different should live in a muslim or communist country for a while, or one of the post-Christian secular European hellholes where morality is about as fashionable as steam driven locomotives and sailing ships. This, however, does not excuse the excesses committed and excused by many in the name of Christianity, and everyone knows what I'm talking about, so I won't go on about pedophile priests or televangelical frauds. Anyway, I'm not against Christians or Christianity, but I am against hypocrisy, and well never, ever, let hypocrites get by without notice.
Christians have always contributed to the greatness of America, and it wouldn't be half a nice a place to live if not for Christianity. Anyone who thinks different should live in a muslim or communist country for a while, or one of the post-Christian secular European hellholes where morality is about as fashionable as steam driven locomotives and sailing ships. This, however, does not excuse the excesses committed and excused by many in the name of Christianity, and everyone knows what I'm talking about, so I won't go on about pedophile priests or televangelical frauds. Anyway, I'm not against Christians or Christianity, but I am against hypocrisy, and well never, ever, let hypocrites get by without notice.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 29, 2006 10:08 AM (0yYS2)
24
Which goes to show that there is a vast difference between being athiest and being anti-religion or anti-Christian.
Posted by: Oyster at January 29, 2006 02:28 PM (YudAC)
25
>>>Which goes to show that there is a vast difference between being athiest and being anti-religion or anti-Christian.
True dat.
True dat.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 29, 2006 03:21 PM (8e/V4)
26
That italian atheiist jackass needs to get a bolt of lightning in his rear just like the atheist jackass MICHEAL NEWDOW who is trying to force the who nation to abide by his wishes they both nned a bolt of lightning in their rear ends
Posted by: sandpiper at January 30, 2006 09:49 AM (A2P9P)
January 13, 2006
Nose Drama Redux
Apparently Raymond Flowers, one of John Hawkins' readers, has noticed a pattern that might explain the "nose drama" phenomenon I posted about a few weeks ago. It hadn't occurred to me that it might be evidence of yet another dark Bush conspiracy, but the RWN reader doesn't seem to be aware of the use of the "nasals" in older Americans. Heh.
Has anyone noticed the use by George W. Bush and Jeb Bush and the republican party of nasal control implants in children as their family continues to re-entrench itself from World War II where it used the control technology on the German population running the yes sir Nathan Hales of the Hitler youth.They use stories to continuously bombard students creating day dreams producing what is commonly called attention deficit disorder in addition to hyper activity and they even produced dyslexia using the nasals to get the visual from the optic nerve and a Hewlett-Cray-Motorola computer did a dictionary look up for the current pattern which was regenerated weekly in some locations and is the reason that words written very poorly didn't jumble as the primitive software couldn't figure out what the word was and either left it alone or broke connections between letters to re-arrange what looked like components between humps or risers on the letters.
Well, that sure explains why Mary Baker Eddy is barking at me in Louis Farrakhan's voice. It's a software glitch!
(Cross-posted to Demosophia)
Posted by: Demosophist at
04:54 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Nasal control implants? Put there by the alien overlords, no doubt.
Just more proof that liberals are so stupid that they're too dangerous to society to be allowed to live.
Just more proof that liberals are so stupid that they're too dangerous to society to be allowed to live.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 13, 2006 09:13 AM (0yYS2)
2
But....but...the liberals are so intelligent and educated and smart and.......The truth is that they are just a bunch of dumb asses. Good lord, what will these idiots come up with next?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 13, 2006 10:03 AM (rUyw4)
3
If I only had a dollar for every time some idiot libtard told me they were the smart ones...
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 13, 2006 04:21 PM (0yYS2)
4
Ha, ha. Excellent.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 13, 2006 08:31 PM (AWtJU)
January 09, 2006
Party Poopers
Congress, in its infinite wisdom(cough choke gasp), has passed a law and the president has signed it making it against federal law to annoy people over the internet anonymously. Holy cow that means everything on the internet is now against the law! Also it has special consequences here at the Jawa. I guess Rusty must have the other Co-Bloggers post all that “annoy a terrorist†stuff? It also means that 99% of our comments are now “unlawfulâ€. Don’t forget to email your congressman and the President. Just be slightly more than bothersome, slightly less than annoying and yourself. Whatever the hell that means.
News.com :In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)
Does this mean posts like this or that or here or there or maybe this one are now unlawful?
The article tries to blame Republicans (Sen. Arlen Specter for one) but I also see Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), and Jerrold Nadler are sponsors as well. This garbage was attached to a “violence against women†bill. Just another reason why I support the idea that a bill should be about what the bill is about. Too often pork and crap like this is put with critical bills because they can’t stand alone. It’s time to put a stop to that and also if a judge doesn’t strike this down PDQ I’ll be surprised.
Hope I didn’t annoy anyone. Oh well WTF I’m me, so screw you hippie!
Posted by: Howie at
12:12 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.
January 05, 2006
Sigh
So a commenter sends this in from the trenches:
Pat Robertson thinks God struck Sharon for not keeping the territory intact.
Um...no. He thinks the Bible says that God will strike any Israeli PM that gives land for peace. A twisted interpretation to be sure, but not the same thing. Nice try at moral equivalence, though, given the post it was left on.
Palestinians are just as thankful about Sharon's condition as the Israelis were about Arafat's condition.
Once again, no. You see, the people who were thankful about Arafat's condition thought that maybe, just maybe, it might increase their chance of surviving a simple bus ride to the supermarket. The people thankful about Sharon's condition think that maybe, just maybe, it will increase a suicide bomber's chance at blowing up a bus on it's way to the supermarket.
Perhaps it's just human nature to hate your enemy so much that you rejoice when tragedy strikes.
Gee, thanks, now I have angst. I promise from now on to light a candle on the anniversary of their deaths in honor of the following:
Caligula
Mohammed
Vlad Tepes
Edward the Longshanks
King George III
Vladimir Lenin
Josef Stalin
Adolf Hitler
Chairman Mao
Pol Pot
Ho Chi Minh
Kim Il Sung*
And I promise to wear a black armband in honor of my sorrow when Osama is found with a .50 cal round in the skull, Saddam is swinging from the gallows, and Kim Jong Il's shadow is found on the irradiated remains of his presidential palace.
Because I see the light now. All men are not created equal. All men are created evil.
Pat Robertson's goofy Bible interpretation, well, that's no different than that PFLP joker's exhortations. The fact that Pat Robertson's followers aren't detonating themselves in a crowd of civilians is irrelevant.
As for the Israelis, how dare they show their hate by allowing their enemies, Arab Muslims, full citizenship, including voting rights, and seats in the Knesset. They're no different than the Palestinians, who allow no Jew to hold office, and routinely kill the members of rival factions.
Thank you, Dale the commenter, for showing me the shining light of the gray areas. more...
Posted by: Vinnie at
10:41 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 2 kb.
1
A refutation without condescension would have been preferred.
In reviewing my comments, I believe it is a viable summary to say Pat Robertson thinks this way. He cites the Bible and we know that his life is guided by the Bible. He cautions that future leaders should follow this biblical warning.
"Sharon "was dividing God's land and I would say woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the EU (European Union), the United Nations, or the United States of America," Robertson said.
The rest of my comments were meant to reflect that it is human behavior to rejoice when our opponents have trouble and that it is just as common on one side as another. There was no intent to support evildoers of any hue. I regret that my comments were not clear.
In reviewing my comments, I believe it is a viable summary to say Pat Robertson thinks this way. He cites the Bible and we know that his life is guided by the Bible. He cautions that future leaders should follow this biblical warning.
"Sharon "was dividing God's land and I would say woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the EU (European Union), the United Nations, or the United States of America," Robertson said.
The rest of my comments were meant to reflect that it is human behavior to rejoice when our opponents have trouble and that it is just as common on one side as another. There was no intent to support evildoers of any hue. I regret that my comments were not clear.
Posted by: Dale at January 06, 2006 06:52 AM (Dujiz)
2
I don't do condescension, just sarcasm. Or snark, if you will.
That's one problem with the internets, you can't hear the voices in my head.
That's one problem with the internets, you can't hear the voices in my head.
Posted by: Vinnie at January 06, 2006 07:14 AM (Kr6/f)
3
Anyone who takes one word from Pat Robertson's mouth seriously is about as big an idiot as Robertson himself. I used to watch the 700 Club when I was a Christian, and even back then in my brainwashed state I knew he was as full of shit as a Christmas goose.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 06, 2006 08:26 AM (0yYS2)
4
The rest of my comments were meant to reflect that it is human behavior to rejoice when our opponents have trouble and that it is just as common on one side as another.
Why we should not simply resign ourselves to such "human behavior":
Proverbs 24:17-18
17 Do not gloat when your enemy falls;
when he stumbles, do not let your heart rejoice,
18 or the LORD will see and disapprove and turn his wrath away from him.
Why we should not simply resign ourselves to such "human behavior":
Proverbs 24:17-18
17 Do not gloat when your enemy falls;
when he stumbles, do not let your heart rejoice,
18 or the LORD will see and disapprove and turn his wrath away from him.
Posted by: kyer at January 06, 2006 10:05 AM (4LLbh)
5
Pat Robertson is not representative of Christians, and does not speak for anyone but himself. That the media reports his stupidity is more a statement on the media than on Christianity.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 06, 2006 10:06 AM (rUyw4)
6
Just an aside from the Peanut Gallery:
Anyone who takes one word from Pat Robertson's mouth seriously is about as big an idiot as Robertson himself. I used to watch the 700 Club when I was a Christian, and even back then in my brainwashed state I knew he was as full of shit as a Christmas goose.
The difference between Left and Right. We denounce our looneys. Yet everyone wants a photo-op with theirs (e.g. Crazy Al Sharpton)
Anyone who takes one word from Pat Robertson's mouth seriously is about as big an idiot as Robertson himself. I used to watch the 700 Club when I was a Christian, and even back then in my brainwashed state I knew he was as full of shit as a Christmas goose.
The difference between Left and Right. We denounce our looneys. Yet everyone wants a photo-op with theirs (e.g. Crazy Al Sharpton)
Posted by: Gordon at January 06, 2006 10:24 AM (JwR1N)
7
A refutation without condescension would have been preferred.
Funny, I thought the comments being refuted were condescending.
Funny, I thought the comments being refuted were condescending.
Posted by: McGehee at January 06, 2006 10:46 AM (lAOTn)
8
So is everybody on this board saying it WASN'T the will of God?
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 06, 2006 11:58 AM (8e/V4)
9
Well this might be splitting hairs...
but do I think it was the will of god. Specifically Loki, the Norse god of mischief and the deity Libs call to when they pray for an American defeat.
but do I think it was the will of god. Specifically Loki, the Norse god of mischief and the deity Libs call to when they pray for an American defeat.
Posted by: Gordon at January 06, 2006 12:56 PM (JwR1N)
10
Right. And Pat Robertson wasn't chosen to head up the RNC either.
Posted by: Oyster at January 06, 2006 02:15 PM (YudAC)
11
Pat Robertson is the head of the Republican National Committee?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 06, 2006 03:21 PM (rUyw4)
12
I wonder what Robertson or Osama would have to say about the structural failure at Mecca which killed a bunch of hajjis?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 06, 2006 05:46 PM (0yYS2)
13
Ah! I'm with IM on this one.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 06, 2006 09:32 PM (ZsYgO)
14
JJ - You and I are having a communication breakdown, I think ;-)
I was implying that the dems gleefully chose Dean as their spokesman and embrace all the looney comments he spews, yet scream about republicans by quoting the likes of Robertson.
The difference is that we didn't choose Robertson to head up the RNC.
Sorry. I'm expecting people to read my mind.
I was implying that the dems gleefully chose Dean as their spokesman and embrace all the looney comments he spews, yet scream about republicans by quoting the likes of Robertson.
The difference is that we didn't choose Robertson to head up the RNC.
Sorry. I'm expecting people to read my mind.
Posted by: Oyster at January 07, 2006 07:52 AM (YudAC)
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 07, 2006 09:37 AM (8e/V4)
16
Damn, Oyster, I get no sarcasm these days. I'm uptight and out of sight about this damn dry weather. Christian or no, you need to pray for some rain in Texas. It is bone dry.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 07, 2006 01:25 PM (rUyw4)
17
Pat Robertson had better spend all his time praying that he dies peacefully in his bed from no apparent cause.
What's the saying? "Payback is Hell"
What's the saying? "Payback is Hell"
Posted by: Lokki at January 07, 2006 04:27 PM (qlgl+)
18
Yeah, I hope the weather gets damper, JJ. Maybe Filthy can sacrifice a goat or something for you. I'll say a prayer.
Posted by: Oyster at January 08, 2006 07:24 AM (YudAC)
January 04, 2006
Europeans Selling Iranians Parts For Nuke Missiles
Scheming with Saddam and skimming profits from the oil-for-food program was bad enough. According to the Guardian (admittedly not the most reliable source) the mad mullahs of Iran have been shopping in Europe for nuclear missile parts...and finding sellers.
From the Guardian:
The Iranian government has been successfully scouring Europe for the sophisticated equipment needed to develop a nuclear bomb, according to the latest western intelligence assessment of the country's weapons programmes.Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Scientists in Tehran are also shopping for parts for a ballistic missile capable of reaching Europe, with "import requests and acquisitions ... registered almost daily", the report seen by the Guardian concludes.
Posted by: Bluto at
01:56 AM
| Comments (28)
| Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Let me just remind you guys. That Saddam was bad, he had WMD. He could nuke the UK in 45 mins, just like that was a load of bollocks, so is this whole Iran and N. Korea rubbish.
Finally lets remember Iran. The FIRST DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRIME MINISTER OF THE COUNTRY WAS OVERTHROWN BY THE USA BECAUSE OF NATNIOLIZING THE OIL and replaced by the very western Shah of Iran, WHO WAS OBERTHROWN AND REPLACED BY THE WESTERN BACKED AYATOLLAH KHOMENEI.
Finally lets remember Iran. The FIRST DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRIME MINISTER OF THE COUNTRY WAS OVERTHROWN BY THE USA BECAUSE OF NATNIOLIZING THE OIL and replaced by the very western Shah of Iran, WHO WAS OBERTHROWN AND REPLACED BY THE WESTERN BACKED AYATOLLAH KHOMENEI.
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 02:26 AM (l8gSf)
2
Jaaaaaaack Abramoff is squealing,
Republicans get pwned,
coooooorrupted government,
gets blown up on the walls.
I bet he won't live till Friday,
surely he'll be dead,
shot down like John Kennedy,
or slave-freeing poor Abe.
Soon available on über-copyrighted, spywared CDs and DVDs from Sony BMG. Also tune in for "Abramoff is going to die"-music video, 10 pm every day on NBC.
Republicans get pwned,
coooooorrupted government,
gets blown up on the walls.
I bet he won't live till Friday,
surely he'll be dead,
shot down like John Kennedy,
or slave-freeing poor Abe.
Soon available on über-copyrighted, spywared CDs and DVDs from Sony BMG. Also tune in for "Abramoff is going to die"-music video, 10 pm every day on NBC.
Posted by: A Finn at January 04, 2006 03:19 AM (cWMi4)
3
In other news, 99%-certainly-Christian Greek anarchists blow up car of Finlands ambassador. Greek authorities try to assure that the Finnish embassy was not especially targeted.
A Finn still feeling hung over after holidays... 90% alcohol drinks are not meant to be drunk in mug sizes.
A Finn still feeling hung over after holidays... 90% alcohol drinks are not meant to be drunk in mug sizes.
Posted by: A Finn at January 04, 2006 03:48 AM (cWMi4)
4
Yes Amaad, the whole thing with Iran is a "load of bollocks" as you eloquently put it.
As Europe will be one of the first areas that Iran's nuclear warheads will be capable of reaching, you had best hope that indeed that is the case.
Iran is preparing to be a Nuclear armed nation, not only are they purchasing weapon systems capable of missile defense, they're also shopping for missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to greater increasing distances.
Nth. Korea is an example why Iran should not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, "you cannot put the genie back in the bottle" and once they have them, they'll use them as a bargaining chip in round after round of negotiations, they will of course never give them up. Then you have to look at Iran's promise to prolificate nuclear technologies to all Islamic nations, not an idea anyone should relish.
As Europe will be one of the first areas that Iran's nuclear warheads will be capable of reaching, you had best hope that indeed that is the case.
Iran is preparing to be a Nuclear armed nation, not only are they purchasing weapon systems capable of missile defense, they're also shopping for missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to greater increasing distances.
Nth. Korea is an example why Iran should not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, "you cannot put the genie back in the bottle" and once they have them, they'll use them as a bargaining chip in round after round of negotiations, they will of course never give them up. Then you have to look at Iran's promise to prolificate nuclear technologies to all Islamic nations, not an idea anyone should relish.
Posted by: dave at January 04, 2006 06:58 AM (CcXvt)
5
The article is way to obscure on details. What "western European nations"? What "leading industrialists"?
They're saying, "We have a leaked, sensitive document 55 pages long, but we're not telling you any of the 'detailed assessments' we have in the document. We'll just stick with generalities to freak you out."
All it tells me is that if Iran is still "seeking" parts and knowledge, they don't have anything concrete yet.
They're saying, "We have a leaked, sensitive document 55 pages long, but we're not telling you any of the 'detailed assessments' we have in the document. We'll just stick with generalities to freak you out."
All it tells me is that if Iran is still "seeking" parts and knowledge, they don't have anything concrete yet.
Posted by: Oyster at January 04, 2006 07:18 AM (YudAC)
6
Hey amaad, tell your mother that her last goat-blowing video sold well, but she needs to take a bath, as the goats are complaining about the smell.
Finn, you're just a fucking moron and not worth the effort of a good, biting comment. I hope being a dhimmi works out for you, which it should, as you seem to like fellating muslims.
Finn, you're just a fucking moron and not worth the effort of a good, biting comment. I hope being a dhimmi works out for you, which it should, as you seem to like fellating muslims.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 04, 2006 09:07 AM (0yYS2)
7
Amaad,
The Brits wanted Mossadegh out, not the U.S. Their money was at stake, not ours. We helped them get rid of him because that was the price of their continued help in the Korean War. That doesn't make it right, but the people who own the blame for the abuse Iran took up to 1953 are the Brits, not the Americans.
Where do you get this idea that the "West" backed Khomeini? Khomeini's only tie to the West prior the revolution was his short stay in France after the Shah forced him out of Iraq. France never "supported" him. They just gave him asylum.
The Brits wanted Mossadegh out, not the U.S. Their money was at stake, not ours. We helped them get rid of him because that was the price of their continued help in the Korean War. That doesn't make it right, but the people who own the blame for the abuse Iran took up to 1953 are the Brits, not the Americans.
Where do you get this idea that the "West" backed Khomeini? Khomeini's only tie to the West prior the revolution was his short stay in France after the Shah forced him out of Iraq. France never "supported" him. They just gave him asylum.
Posted by: ShannonKW at January 04, 2006 09:28 AM (dYdvr)
8
Nice writng Shannon.
improbulus go f**** yourself.
The Ayatollah was given the support of the USA after his touching speech on 'Islamic democracy'. This suprised the Shah because he thought the USA would respect a man in a suit more.
'taken from 'the days that shook the world' BBC3
improbulus go f**** yourself.
The Ayatollah was given the support of the USA after his touching speech on 'Islamic democracy'. This suprised the Shah because he thought the USA would respect a man in a suit more.
'taken from 'the days that shook the world' BBC3
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:31 AM (l8gSf)
9
As for terrorism: you fail to remember its global, not islamic. There are Christian, Jewish, Black, White, Nationalistic, Communist etc terrorist groups.
S0 THINK BEFORE YOU ARE PREJUDICED AGAINST MUSLIMS.
IF YOU ARE DRIVEN TO HATE BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW SO CALLED 'MUSLIMS' THEN YOU HAVE FELL INTO THE TERORISTS T
S0 THINK BEFORE YOU ARE PREJUDICED AGAINST MUSLIMS.
IF YOU ARE DRIVEN TO HATE BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW SO CALLED 'MUSLIMS' THEN YOU HAVE FELL INTO THE TERORISTS T
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:33 AM (l8gSf)
10
Afgahanistan is now a pothole in the ground beacuse of the USA not the Soviets.
Soviets invaded, mujahideen rebelled, USA gave financial and political backing, soviets left, USA left, Afghanistan turns into a pothole.
i think I know why the Afghani's would be pissed with America.
Soviets invaded, mujahideen rebelled, USA gave financial and political backing, soviets left, USA left, Afghanistan turns into a pothole.
i think I know why the Afghani's would be pissed with America.
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:40 AM (l8gSf)
11
Muslims going to America and Europe are faced with a flood of questions about Islam. People have many ways of asking these question and different motivations for doing so, but their questions are essentially as follows:
Why does Islam permit polygamy?
Why is a woman counted as half a man in matters of inheritance and when she gives testimony?
Why does Islam “belittle†women?
Is Islam a religion of terror since it prescribes jihad?
Who should we believe: Sunnis or Shiites?
Questions like these are what occupy their minds when they think about Islam, since the Western media has actively maligned Islam as a religion of lust and blood and nothing else. When our Muslim youth go to their countries, they often find such questions awkward and try to evade them.
They might say things like: Permission for polygamy is conditional upon justice between wives and justice between wives is impossible to achieve. Allah says: “You will not be able to be just between women even if you strive to do so.†[Sûrah al-Nisâ’: 129] Whatever is conditional upon something impossible is impossible itself. Therefore, polygamy is forbidden in Islam.
In many cases, Muslims will come across a strange opinion on a matter and promote it simply because it is more conciliatory.
When I visited America, I found that many Muslims who did not have correct or sufficient Islamic knowledge suffered from such difficulties. They really did not know what to do.
I used to tell them the following: Why should we be on the defensive? Why don’t we adopt a more assertive attitude? If they confront us one question, we should respond with ten of our own. If they ask us about jihad, we should ask them about America’s openly aggressive policies in many parts of the world, not to mention all of their covert operations.
If they ask you about polygamy, ask them about the sexual promiscuity that is rife in their societies that has brought humiliation to so many women and allowed men to absolve themselves of their responsibilities towards them and towards their children?
If they ask you about inequalities in inheritance, ask them about the reality in their own country where a woman earns only 60% of what a man earns for doing the exact same job.
I do not mean that we should be evasive. However, it is not good for you to respond when you are in a state of weakness and difficulty where there is a danger that you might answer falsely and misrepresent Allah’s religion in order to appease someone else.
You can move on to a more advanced level of discourse and demonstrate that Islamic teachings are the solution to the problems that they are suffering from. For instance, according to some assessments, there are 119 women to every 100 men in the United States. In some states, the number is more like 160 women to every 100 men. Polygamy is the solution to the problems that ensue under such circumstances, since it requires some men to assume responsibility for more than one woman and to be as just as humanly possible in doing so.
We can stress how Islam teaches equality between all people. There is no preference for anyone over anyone else except by a person’s piety and virtue. This is the way to do away with the problem of racism that people in the West suffer from.
The Islamic teachings about jihad are what uproots oppression and guarantees people the freedom to think and to choose their religion for themselves without being under any compulsion. Islam seeks to have people freely submit themselves to their Creator and not be placed under the subjugation of any worldly dictator, race, tribe, or nationality.
There are a few points that I would like to emphasize:
1. Matters of Islamic law are established by the unambiguous texts of the Qur’ân and Sunnah. No one, regardless of who he is, has the right to change, add, or subtract anything to placate anyone’s desires or fears. When someone who calls others to Islam opts to misinform people about Allah’s rulings, he is doing a disservice to Islam. He is also deceiving people. He has no right to meddle in matters of Islamic Law that are the jurisdiction of Allah alone.
2. Matters that fall within the scope of juristic discretion and allow for differences of opinion should be presented in a balanced and objective manner by the person who is calling others to Islam. He should take circumstances into consideration when doing so. He should not select the most severe and restrictive opinion on a matter and present it to the people as if it is Islam itself, especially when he is trying to endear Islam to the people’s hearts.
3. Our objective should be to convince others of the correctness of the Islamic ruling so that they will accept it. We must employ all of our knowledge and reasoning abilities in achieving this objective. We must provide all the relevant facts. We can employ to our advantage other areas of knowledge that we find to be of benefit in convincing people of Islam. This may inlude discussions of the Qur’ân's scientific miracles, statistical information, circumstances and experiences, and rational arguments. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, this is an integral part of conveying the truth to the people.
4. We must instill in the hearts of our young people complete and total confidence in every aspect of Islam, from the most general teachings of their faith to the most specific. We must dispel any sense of weakness or deficiency that they might possibly feel at the hands of some of those who dispute with them.
We do a disservice to Islam if we lead the people to believe that Islam is close to the life that they already living and that the Islamic approach to life is not much different than their own. This only makes the people feel that Islam is unnecessary for them and encourages them to turn away from it. They are, in fact, trying to escape from the hellish aspects of the lives that they are already leading. They need to be presented with an alternative.
When they ask about Islam or even about something else, they are looking for a way out. They are looking for something to rescue them. Therefore, we must present Islam to them with all of its uniqueness and show them clearly how it differs from their own life experiences. In this way, we encourage them to think about Islam.
We must present Islam to them in a logical manner with clear and insightful arguments. Our responsibility ends here. Indeed, this was the extent of the responsibility of Allah’s Messengers (peace be upon them). Allah says to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):
“It is naught your duty but to convey the message.†[Sûrah al-Shûrâ: 48]
“It is your duty only to convey the message. It is upon Us to take account.†[Sûrah al-Ra`d: 40]
“So admonish them. You are but one who admonishes. You do not control their affairs.†[Sûrah al-Ghâshiyah: 21-22]
It is not necessary for us to fancy that the whole world will convert to Islam at our hands. However, we must be eager to guide them and we must seek to do so in every possible and permissible way. We should perfect our way of presenting Islam to them, taking into account the age, circumstances, and level of knowledge of those whom we are addressing. We must present to them the noble Islamic values of freedom, justice, and human dignity and prove to them that Islam is superior to everything that they already know.
Above and beyond all of this, we must conduct ourselves in the best, most ethical manner and present our own lives as a practical example of moral virtue.
Unfortunately, many Muslims call people to Islam with their tongues while pushing them away from it with their ignoble, contradictory conduct and with their narrow-mindedness.
Why does Islam permit polygamy?
Why is a woman counted as half a man in matters of inheritance and when she gives testimony?
Why does Islam “belittle†women?
Is Islam a religion of terror since it prescribes jihad?
Who should we believe: Sunnis or Shiites?
Questions like these are what occupy their minds when they think about Islam, since the Western media has actively maligned Islam as a religion of lust and blood and nothing else. When our Muslim youth go to their countries, they often find such questions awkward and try to evade them.
They might say things like: Permission for polygamy is conditional upon justice between wives and justice between wives is impossible to achieve. Allah says: “You will not be able to be just between women even if you strive to do so.†[Sûrah al-Nisâ’: 129] Whatever is conditional upon something impossible is impossible itself. Therefore, polygamy is forbidden in Islam.
In many cases, Muslims will come across a strange opinion on a matter and promote it simply because it is more conciliatory.
When I visited America, I found that many Muslims who did not have correct or sufficient Islamic knowledge suffered from such difficulties. They really did not know what to do.
I used to tell them the following: Why should we be on the defensive? Why don’t we adopt a more assertive attitude? If they confront us one question, we should respond with ten of our own. If they ask us about jihad, we should ask them about America’s openly aggressive policies in many parts of the world, not to mention all of their covert operations.
If they ask you about polygamy, ask them about the sexual promiscuity that is rife in their societies that has brought humiliation to so many women and allowed men to absolve themselves of their responsibilities towards them and towards their children?
If they ask you about inequalities in inheritance, ask them about the reality in their own country where a woman earns only 60% of what a man earns for doing the exact same job.
I do not mean that we should be evasive. However, it is not good for you to respond when you are in a state of weakness and difficulty where there is a danger that you might answer falsely and misrepresent Allah’s religion in order to appease someone else.
You can move on to a more advanced level of discourse and demonstrate that Islamic teachings are the solution to the problems that they are suffering from. For instance, according to some assessments, there are 119 women to every 100 men in the United States. In some states, the number is more like 160 women to every 100 men. Polygamy is the solution to the problems that ensue under such circumstances, since it requires some men to assume responsibility for more than one woman and to be as just as humanly possible in doing so.
We can stress how Islam teaches equality between all people. There is no preference for anyone over anyone else except by a person’s piety and virtue. This is the way to do away with the problem of racism that people in the West suffer from.
The Islamic teachings about jihad are what uproots oppression and guarantees people the freedom to think and to choose their religion for themselves without being under any compulsion. Islam seeks to have people freely submit themselves to their Creator and not be placed under the subjugation of any worldly dictator, race, tribe, or nationality.
There are a few points that I would like to emphasize:
1. Matters of Islamic law are established by the unambiguous texts of the Qur’ân and Sunnah. No one, regardless of who he is, has the right to change, add, or subtract anything to placate anyone’s desires or fears. When someone who calls others to Islam opts to misinform people about Allah’s rulings, he is doing a disservice to Islam. He is also deceiving people. He has no right to meddle in matters of Islamic Law that are the jurisdiction of Allah alone.
2. Matters that fall within the scope of juristic discretion and allow for differences of opinion should be presented in a balanced and objective manner by the person who is calling others to Islam. He should take circumstances into consideration when doing so. He should not select the most severe and restrictive opinion on a matter and present it to the people as if it is Islam itself, especially when he is trying to endear Islam to the people’s hearts.
3. Our objective should be to convince others of the correctness of the Islamic ruling so that they will accept it. We must employ all of our knowledge and reasoning abilities in achieving this objective. We must provide all the relevant facts. We can employ to our advantage other areas of knowledge that we find to be of benefit in convincing people of Islam. This may inlude discussions of the Qur’ân's scientific miracles, statistical information, circumstances and experiences, and rational arguments. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, this is an integral part of conveying the truth to the people.
4. We must instill in the hearts of our young people complete and total confidence in every aspect of Islam, from the most general teachings of their faith to the most specific. We must dispel any sense of weakness or deficiency that they might possibly feel at the hands of some of those who dispute with them.
We do a disservice to Islam if we lead the people to believe that Islam is close to the life that they already living and that the Islamic approach to life is not much different than their own. This only makes the people feel that Islam is unnecessary for them and encourages them to turn away from it. They are, in fact, trying to escape from the hellish aspects of the lives that they are already leading. They need to be presented with an alternative.
When they ask about Islam or even about something else, they are looking for a way out. They are looking for something to rescue them. Therefore, we must present Islam to them with all of its uniqueness and show them clearly how it differs from their own life experiences. In this way, we encourage them to think about Islam.
We must present Islam to them in a logical manner with clear and insightful arguments. Our responsibility ends here. Indeed, this was the extent of the responsibility of Allah’s Messengers (peace be upon them). Allah says to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):
“It is naught your duty but to convey the message.†[Sûrah al-Shûrâ: 48]
“It is your duty only to convey the message. It is upon Us to take account.†[Sûrah al-Ra`d: 40]
“So admonish them. You are but one who admonishes. You do not control their affairs.†[Sûrah al-Ghâshiyah: 21-22]
It is not necessary for us to fancy that the whole world will convert to Islam at our hands. However, we must be eager to guide them and we must seek to do so in every possible and permissible way. We should perfect our way of presenting Islam to them, taking into account the age, circumstances, and level of knowledge of those whom we are addressing. We must present to them the noble Islamic values of freedom, justice, and human dignity and prove to them that Islam is superior to everything that they already know.
Above and beyond all of this, we must conduct ourselves in the best, most ethical manner and present our own lives as a practical example of moral virtue.
Unfortunately, many Muslims call people to Islam with their tongues while pushing them away from it with their ignoble, contradictory conduct and with their narrow-mindedness.
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:44 AM (l8gSf)
12
First of all don't talk crap up about Islam.
Read between the lines of the quraan.
Don't make up phony hadith.
ISlam isn't bad.
Read between the lines of the quraan.
Don't make up phony hadith.
ISlam isn't bad.
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:47 AM (l8gSf)
13
Back to the topic point - I have serious problems with a report in the Guardian - long on claims and totally absent on details.
The Guardian will eagerly play both sides of the street to stir the pot.
The Guardian will eagerly play both sides of the street to stir the pot.
Posted by: hondo at January 04, 2006 10:48 AM (3aakz)
14
WHY SHOULD I BELIVE BUSH THIS TIME.
HE HAD 'CLEAR' and 'CONCSIVE' PROOF THAT SADDAM HAD NUKES, WHERE THE F*** ARE THEY?
HE HAD 'CLEAR' and 'CONCSIVE' PROOF THAT SADDAM HAD NUKES, WHERE THE F*** ARE THEY?
Posted by: Amaad at January 04, 2006 10:50 AM (l8gSf)
15
Stay on topic - don't let Amaad divert you into an idiotic argument about caparative islam.
Posted by: hondo at January 04, 2006 10:52 AM (3aakz)
16
Yes, the lack of specifics in the Guardian report is curious. Perhaps they're planning a series.
Amaad: the source of Islam's bad press is 9/11 and 7/7, not the western media. The American MSM have bent over backwards to accommodate Islam. That's why there's a media embargo on 9/11 images.
I have tried to find something redeeming in Islam, but failed. It appears to be a corrosive, third-world cult that thrives on ignorance.
Amaad: the source of Islam's bad press is 9/11 and 7/7, not the western media. The American MSM have bent over backwards to accommodate Islam. That's why there's a media embargo on 9/11 images.
I have tried to find something redeeming in Islam, but failed. It appears to be a corrosive, third-world cult that thrives on ignorance.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at January 04, 2006 10:59 AM (RHG+K)
17
There are good people that are Muslims, nonetheless Islam is not peaceful. Eventhough Islamofascists are a minority of Muslim they still represent Muslims in the millions. Unlike communist, neo-nazi, white supremacist etc, etc groups; Islamofascists are extremely well financed by millionaire and billionaire fellow cadres. As for the religion of peace claim by Muslims go to this website - http://www.thereligionofpeace.org - to see the true ethics of Islam. Islamofascist are not nice people and their intent is world domination with an overseeing Caliphate. Not good for unbelieving Muslims who will to choose between conversion or death or dhimmitude.
Posted by: Theway2k at January 04, 2006 11:15 AM (V6rdo)
18
Oops that website is http://www.thereligionofpeace.com, not dot org.
Posted by: Theway2k at January 04, 2006 11:16 AM (V6rdo)
19
Afgahanistan is now a pothole in the ground beacuse of the USA not the Soviets.
How is that again? The Arabs flocked to Afghanistan like it was some third-world, donkey meat, kebab cart and hung around like a bad cumin smell.
You can also look at their neighboring country Pakistan for pretty much all of Afghanistan problems, seeing as they occupied, and created their own Government in Afghanistan, and created a third-world, medieval, knuckle-dragging society where women were treated worse than goats, and "evils" such as music and art were banned.
You have some huge nuts, sunshine.
How is that again? The Arabs flocked to Afghanistan like it was some third-world, donkey meat, kebab cart and hung around like a bad cumin smell.
You can also look at their neighboring country Pakistan for pretty much all of Afghanistan problems, seeing as they occupied, and created their own Government in Afghanistan, and created a third-world, medieval, knuckle-dragging society where women were treated worse than goats, and "evils" such as music and art were banned.
You have some huge nuts, sunshine.
Posted by: dave at January 04, 2006 11:48 AM (CcXvt)
20
Amaad,
It seems unlikely that the U.S. supported Khomeini prior to the revolution for several reasons:
We were already invested in the Shah, and Khomeini started denouncing the U.S. shortly after he started denouncing the Shah (about 1963). Khomeini kept claiming the shah was our puppet. He was wrong, but he had no way of knowing that. The U.S. historically *hates* the notion of political disruption in the Gulf to the extent of propping up some pretty oppressive monarchies. We weren't willing to topple the shah for democracy any more than we are willing to support democracy in Saudi or Bahrain. Serious questions of revolution in Iran didn't rise in the U.S. until the latter half of 1979, and our state department was encouraging the shah to put down the massive autumn protests
right up until his army fell apart and he fled the county weeks later.
What you are interpreting as support for Khomeini is really just State Department double-talk. Khomeini was talking democracy, and the U.S. has to approve of democracy, even when we are working with a dictator. Compare the situation with that of Ferdinand Marcos (though the shah was a good deal more benign than Marcos.)
It seems unlikely that the U.S. supported Khomeini prior to the revolution for several reasons:
We were already invested in the Shah, and Khomeini started denouncing the U.S. shortly after he started denouncing the Shah (about 1963). Khomeini kept claiming the shah was our puppet. He was wrong, but he had no way of knowing that. The U.S. historically *hates* the notion of political disruption in the Gulf to the extent of propping up some pretty oppressive monarchies. We weren't willing to topple the shah for democracy any more than we are willing to support democracy in Saudi or Bahrain. Serious questions of revolution in Iran didn't rise in the U.S. until the latter half of 1979, and our state department was encouraging the shah to put down the massive autumn protests
right up until his army fell apart and he fled the county weeks later.
What you are interpreting as support for Khomeini is really just State Department double-talk. Khomeini was talking democracy, and the U.S. has to approve of democracy, even when we are working with a dictator. Compare the situation with that of Ferdinand Marcos (though the shah was a good deal more benign than Marcos.)
Posted by: ShannonKW at January 04, 2006 12:22 PM (dYdvr)
21
So Amaad
Since the topic story (AS PER THE GUARDIAN) is about Iran aquiring missile and nuclear weapons technology from Europe and other sources - what is your opinion?
Or is that too fuckin' much to ask?
Thank God muslims don't play baseball - otherwise you would be giving use box scores too.
Since the topic story (AS PER THE GUARDIAN) is about Iran aquiring missile and nuclear weapons technology from Europe and other sources - what is your opinion?
Or is that too fuckin' much to ask?
Thank God muslims don't play baseball - otherwise you would be giving use box scores too.
Posted by: hondo at January 04, 2006 12:32 PM (3aakz)
22
Hey amaad, I heard the reason that so many muslim guys are such psychopathic retards is because you all get used like girls when you're young, like your pedophile prophet mohammed (bacon grease upon him) did to poor little Aisha. I guess being used like a girl would mess a guy up, so it figures that you're all such pathetic losers who abuse women and pretty much hate everyone. Maybe you should just kill yourself to end the pain?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 04, 2006 01:23 PM (0yYS2)
23
Amaad: Don't forget to give some credit to the Afghans themselves. We stay we are asked to leave. We leave it's our fault for leaving them hanging. Blaming the US for everything is counter productive. Is it not reasonable to suggest that these countries are due some blame as well.
Posted by: Howie at January 04, 2006 01:35 PM (D3+20)
24
Oh, poor 'as unlikely as possible', disappointment, terrible disappointment. Crummy insults, since it's always that same stuff when you people get stumped and angry. Dhimmi dhimmi dhimmi and some sex stuff, possibly because it's extremely taboo for certain fanatics and those who desperately want more of it. Me? Nah, enough nudity on various screens to not value sex stuff too much, despite lack of manual labour related to the subject.
Posted by: A Finn at January 04, 2006 03:32 PM (lGolT)
25
You all hear amaad guys, islam isn't bad, so it must be Mennonites cutting peoples' heads off and blowing up kids and stuff.
Hey amaad, is your sister still prostituting in Africa?
Hey amaad, is your sister still prostituting in Africa?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 04, 2006 07:35 PM (0yYS2)
26
I also wanted to address the "man assumes responsibility for more then one woman" stuff.
Ok men should be responsible and that's all honorable and good. However the attitude that women are helpless without men or a burden is the core problem. If your mindset is that women are incapable and a burden what do you expect? that they will be treated well. Women can and do just about anything and surely in some families the man could be called the "burden".
Ok men should be responsible and that's all honorable and good. However the attitude that women are helpless without men or a burden is the core problem. If your mindset is that women are incapable and a burden what do you expect? that they will be treated well. Women can and do just about anything and surely in some families the man could be called the "burden".
Posted by: Howie at January 05, 2006 08:58 AM (D3+20)
Posted by: Amaad at January 05, 2006 01:51 PM (l8gSf)
28
dave your comments are absurd.
Pakistan have caught many more Al-qaeda leaders than the USA.
Pakistan accept Afghani refugees.
Oh and by the way most of the natural gas going to America goes through Afghanistan, turkeminestan and PAKISTAN.
Finally Pakistan did not make the government.
“A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company's headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.†“Taleban in Texas for talks on Gas Pipeline,†BBC News, December 4, 1997 (Sugarland is 22 miles outside Houston.)
THE PRESIDENT OF AFGHANISTAN IS A SHARE HOLDER IN THE CARLYLE GROUP. A SHARE HOLDER IN THE MANY OF BUSH'S GROUPS AND FORMER GROUPS.
YOU GUYS SHOULD SERIOUSLY WATCH FARENHEIT 9/11. IT'LL GET RID OF THE CRAP IN YOUR BRAIN.
Pakistan have caught many more Al-qaeda leaders than the USA.
Pakistan accept Afghani refugees.
Oh and by the way most of the natural gas going to America goes through Afghanistan, turkeminestan and PAKISTAN.
Finally Pakistan did not make the government.
“A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company's headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.†“Taleban in Texas for talks on Gas Pipeline,†BBC News, December 4, 1997 (Sugarland is 22 miles outside Houston.)
THE PRESIDENT OF AFGHANISTAN IS A SHARE HOLDER IN THE CARLYLE GROUP. A SHARE HOLDER IN THE MANY OF BUSH'S GROUPS AND FORMER GROUPS.
YOU GUYS SHOULD SERIOUSLY WATCH FARENHEIT 9/11. IT'LL GET RID OF THE CRAP IN YOUR BRAIN.
Posted by: Amaad at January 09, 2006 08:44 AM (l8gSf)
December 30, 2005
Nose Drama: Part of God's Plan?
I snore pretty loudly, or so others tell me. I've never heard it, myself. However sometimes, just as I'm falling asleep my nasal passages emit sounds like a poorly tuned reed instrument leaving me the impression, in my half-dream stupor, that there's a crowd cheering close by, or that some poor soul next door is screaming his bloody head off in agony. I usually awake with a start. I think the muscles that generally hold those passages open, relax just enough to turn the whole nasal chamber into a sound synthesizer that hits my half-conscious mind with windy reverberations it interprets as shrieks, howls and shouts. Once I even heard elephants charging and several times Mary Baker Eddy yelled at me to turn off the damn TV, which I often leave on because the sound is off anyway.
How do I know it's Mrs. Eddy? Well, she has a voice like Louis Farrakhan's. It's the result of being dead for nearly a century coupled with the self imposed moral burden of having stolen many of her spiritual notions from the Freemasons, without attribution. So, she thinks it's her job to keep me on the narrow regarding my exploitation of major electrical appliances. Or it could just be my deep-seated religious guilt, a legacy of childhood.
Come to think of it I don't recall ever hearing this nasal racket before I turned 50, so it could be something God designed into us for its entertainment value, just to break up the monotony as things get really tedious in the autumn of life. Well, that's my theory. It could also be adenoids, I guess.
Update: Or Bush-family-supported nasal implants.
(Cross-posted to Demosophia)
Posted by: Demosophist at
03:07 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Agent Smith advises the snorer to see an ear, nose and throat specialist.
Agent Brown says that podlings who have nasal problems require a lot of maintenance from the gi tract bots.
Agent Brown says that podlings who have nasal problems require a lot of maintenance from the gi tract bots.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 30, 2005 06:30 PM (HuVhz)
2
Somehow I thought you were much younger, Demosophist. No reason. I just assumed.
Posted by: Oyster at December 31, 2005 06:05 AM (YudAC)
3
I recommend you Google on "sleep apnea". Snoring sounds like a joke, but is actually life threatening in the long run.
Posted by: Ernie Oporto at December 31, 2005 08:52 AM (WvUov)
4
Ernie:
Thanks for the concern, although I don't think the nose drama is the sort of snoring they're talking about. It isn't the zzzzzz... type of thing. It's just "whistlely." I do actually snore though, so I try to adapt by sleeping on my side. Seems to help quite a bit. Plus the epidemic of "apnea" looks a lot like the '80s epidemic of hypoglycemia. There's a core of genuine concern, but most of it is hysteria.
Oyster:
I'm young at heart, and in thought. And I look pretty young too, probably because I haven't produced offspring. That seems to help the longevity and retard the aging of rats, and I have a few ex-girlfriend who put me in that category.
Thanks for the concern, although I don't think the nose drama is the sort of snoring they're talking about. It isn't the zzzzzz... type of thing. It's just "whistlely." I do actually snore though, so I try to adapt by sleeping on my side. Seems to help quite a bit. Plus the epidemic of "apnea" looks a lot like the '80s epidemic of hypoglycemia. There's a core of genuine concern, but most of it is hysteria.
Oyster:
I'm young at heart, and in thought. And I look pretty young too, probably because I haven't produced offspring. That seems to help the longevity and retard the aging of rats, and I have a few ex-girlfriend who put me in that category.
Posted by: Demosophist at December 31, 2005 11:54 AM (2HYQ1)
5
Snoring is a sign that God is trying to smother you in your sleep, but that he isn't quite serious about it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 31, 2005 11:56 AM (0yYS2)
6
Another former Christian Scientist, eh? I don't know why, probably, but I always take something like pleasure in running across the other walking wounded.
Take care. Have a prosperous 2006.
Take care. Have a prosperous 2006.
Posted by: Toby Petzold at December 31, 2005 11:55 PM (QUWO/)
November 30, 2005
On the Fall of the West
Indication #1: 50 Cent plays a bat mitzvah
Indication #2: Celebration of absolutely dreadful writing
Indication #3: Sen. Kerry still sees himself as an important voice for policy matters (ha, the joke's on him though... he was never important)
Indication #4: Rusty gives me the key to this place. Certainly some will recognize me, as I have been around here since the beginning. My comments usually make no sense and involve the International Jewish Banking Conspiracy in some way, or are latent with extreme hostility.
In order to prevent the fall of the west, I will do the one thing I know how. I will rant with furious anger, babble with furious anger, and bring this blog back to it's core and true foundation -- ethnic slurs and Star Wars. Expect lots of both. You have been warned.
Wine-aholic
UPDATE: Rusty reminds me that I should always make room for "religious slurs" as well as ethnic ones. Tally-ho, sir. I couldn't agree more.
Posted by: wineaholic at
03:43 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.
1
More fun than a bag of wild tomcats. Welcome.
Posted by: Howie at November 30, 2005 03:57 PM (D3+20)
Posted by: Vinnie at November 30, 2005 04:39 PM (Kr6/f)
Posted by: dcb at November 30, 2005 04:56 PM (6ffkR)
4
I am standing, dcb! Like a wall, a stone wall. Rally to the Virginians!
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 30, 2005 05:13 PM (rUyw4)
5
The "bad sex" awards (in link 2) was pretty funny. Did you read some of those passages? Egad.
Posted by: Oyster at November 30, 2005 05:24 PM (YudAC)
6
Maybe I'm old fashioned but "4 bits" is better name for the gangsta rapper.
Posted by: jwookie at November 30, 2005 07:47 PM (llDzn)
7
Actually it's "Fiddy Cen'", if ya wanna get tizz-echnical bi-yotch.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 30, 2005 07:58 PM (0yYS2)
8
Dayum, IM, you da shizznit.
Posted by: Vinnie at November 30, 2005 08:08 PM (Kr6/f)
9
Fo shizzle, brothas. Thanks for tha greetings, we be keepin it real. My friend actually grew up in Fiddy's "hood" in Queens, NY. She said he was a "punk bee-yatch." Word is bond.
Posted by: Wine-aholic at November 30, 2005 08:23 PM (sH4J5)
10
Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttt man, I'm all about tha thug life!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 30, 2005 08:36 PM (0yYS2)
11
Agent Jones says his research at the Mises Institute revealed that the Federal Reserve Bank is a conspiracy based on lies and false money.
Agent Brown says all your fake money are belong to him.
Agent Brown says all your fake money are belong to him.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 01, 2005 06:43 AM (Ww5es)
Posted by: Oyster at December 01, 2005 07:07 AM (YudAC)
13
#1 Republicans Rock #2 Hott !!! #3 still on #2
Posted by: john ryan at December 01, 2005 10:02 AM (ads7K)
14
LoL! Ø¥§†3® !§ PWN3D!!!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 01, 2005 11:53 AM (0yYS2)
266kb generated in CPU 0.0557, elapsed 0.1016 seconds.
51 queries taking 0.0581 seconds, 541 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
51 queries taking 0.0581 seconds, 541 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
