mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) "<i>Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to ev

May 08, 2006

Sac Bee Intentionally Undermining Federal Case?

Hmmm, I wonder why all the news coming out of the Hayat terror cases was so negative? more...

Posted by: Rusty at 05:31 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 1 kb.

Atwar Bahjat Beheading Video a Hoax (Images / Video)

****Jawa Report Exclusive****

A gruesome beheading video delivered to the Sunday Times purporting to be of slain journalist Atwar Bahjat is a hoax. On Sunday, May 7th, the Times reported that they had received a low-quality video of Atwar Bahjat being slowly beheaded. That video is now being circulated on the internet as the "Atwar Bahjat" beheading video.

The Jawa Report can reveal that the Times and Halal Jabar, the author of the article, are victims of a hoax. The video actually shows the gruesome murder of a Nepalese man by the Army of Ansar al-Sunna in Iraq from August of 2004. The man was one of 12 victims executed by the terrorist organization--the other 11 were shot (original story, video, and images of 12 Nepalese murdered in Iraq here).

The Times describes the Nepalese murder video precisely. However, the video delivered to the Times was actually a low-quality version of a much higher quality film originally made by Ansar al-Sunnah. The Times video also is edited to exclude the murder of the other 11 hostages.

The Army of Ansar al-Sunna has murdered dozens of civilians in Iraq. The organization is an offshoot of the Army of Ansar al-Islam--a Kurdish Islamist organization. The group routinely murders those suspected of collaborating with the U.S. and Iraqi governments. Before the group murders their hostages they accuse them of 'apostasy', a crime punishable by death under Islamic law. They therefore justify their murders as 'executions' for 'crimes' committed against Islam.

Halal Jabar describes the video in the Sunday Times, but leaves out that you can hear the victim gasping for breath through the hole in his severed neck:

By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage.
It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear. ...
A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8in blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.
Her cries Â— Â“Ah, ah, ahÂ” Â— can be heard above the Â“Allahu akbarÂ” (God is greatest) intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.
Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.
Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker in a grotesque parody of one of her pieces to camera.

Greyhawk tipped us to the possibility that the video delivered to the Times was not authentic. This image from Getty shows the corpse of Bahjat, apparently shot by terrorists, in February.

Soon afterward, jihadi forums began to circulate the phony video. Thanks to Baf Baf for much of the legwork in helping figure out which video the hoax had been made from.

The Times reported that the film was delivered to them by Sunni insurgents and said that it had been found on the mobile phone of a dead Shia militant. The article erroneously tries to blame Bahjat's murder on Shia militias, and uses the false video as evidence of growing civil strife in Iraq.

The video, in fact, actually shows an "infidel" being murdered by a Sunni Salaafist terrorist organization with ties to al Qaeda. Related from Jeff Goldstein on why this matters. Neo-neocon as well.

Earlier report: The Bloody Murder of Muslim Jouralist Atwar Bahjat

Here is a link to the original video being circulated on jihadi discussion boards as the Atwar Bahjat beheading video (WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC). Disgusting, cruel, and graphic images from it are posted below.

----
UPDATE: Just for the sake of clarity, Bahjat was murdered in a cruel way. The fact that this video is a hoax should not distract us from that fact. Whoever murdered her deserves the severist punishment available. [And by 'hoax' I do not mean to imply the video is fake, only its attribution. For some reason some Islamist scumbag thought it would be funny/scary/useful to send out an old video and label it 'Bahjat'.]
----
UPDATE 2: Al Arabiya (Arabic) is now confirming the tape was a hoax (via Abu Aardvark).
----
UPDATE 3: Ogrish now reporting same.
----
UPDATE 4: Here is a translated version of the al Arabiya article. Bahjat was a reporter for al Arabiya. It claims that the Atwar Bahjat hoax video is for sale on CD-ROM on the Baghdad streets:

It was published this tape in Arabic forums on the Internet, as well as news of the British newspaper quoted several Arab newspapers. The sources also stated that the tape recording sold on CD-ROM in the streets of Baghdad.

----
UPDATE 5: I don't know how I overlooked this, but apparantly The Jawa Report's Mike Pechar had been on this from the beginning. From our February post on Atwar Bahjat's murder:

Their bullet-riddled bodies were found by their vehicle near the town of Dawr. Notably, by all indications, these journalists were specifically targeted.

----
Why do we show these images? So you can see the cruel and barbaric deeds of the enemies we fight in Iraq and around the globe.

The Western press has no problem with showing you the misdeeds of U.S. soldiers in Iraq--misdeeds that are punished--but will not show you what our enemies are like. The hypocrisy of a media which has no problem characterizing prisoner abuse as 'torture'--- and endlessly publishes photos of a woman laughing at nude prisoners---but refuses to show you what our enemies routinely do to prisoners. Torture them, murder them, and behead them.

WARNING: DO NOT PROCEED. GRAPHIC IMAGES. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 12:35 PM | Comments (49) | Add Comment
Post contains 1107 words, total size 9 kb.

1 I am not optimistic about the future of Iraq. I do see the situation improving.

Posted by: john Ryan at May 08, 2006 01:33 PM (TcoRJ)

2 ...so who did they butcher in this clip then? It's not like they haven't done it before?

Posted by: tj at May 08, 2006 01:38 PM (iXWYc)

3 Where did all of the reports of torture using an electric drill come from? I know the article said that was a hallmark of Shia 'death squads' but the beheading was Sunni. They were specific about the drill being used on her body, and eye. Was that all fake information to implicate Shia's in her murder? or fact?

Posted by: davec at May 08, 2006 01:45 PM (CcXvt)

4 TJ The victim is a Nepalese truck driver.

Posted by: Rusty at May 08, 2006 01:52 PM (J2Kyq)

5 the gruesome murder of a Nepalese man. MAN?

Posted by: AL at May 08, 2006 02:21 PM (FEXFJ)

6 "Why do we post these images?" To get an immediate and visceral reaction from idiots. Hope it inspires y'all to join the corp. It's too bad there weren't any video cameras during the Spanish Inquisition... you guys would really LOVE that stuff...

Posted by: JT at May 08, 2006 02:47 PM (HJ32c)

7 "Why do we post these images?" To get an immediate and visceral reaction from idiots. Hope it inspires y'all to join the corp. Case in point, idiot.

Posted by: davec at May 08, 2006 02:50 PM (CcXvt)

8 Yeah, JT. Because only idiots would think there's something wrong with these people. I mean afterall, only a smart person like you would just yawn, right?

Posted by: Oyster at May 08, 2006 02:57 PM (EigeA)

9 Oyster, the Leftists don't want to see what their allies are doing in Iraq. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. But the Left is complicit in supporting these murderous thugs, whether by tacit approval through silence, or attacking what is good rather than opposing what is evil. They will soon be in power here in the US, and we will get a taste of their hypocrisy as well. I don't think they will last very long, however.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 03:15 PM (rUyw4)

10 I don't think they will last very long, however. Those are my plans, anyway.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 08, 2006 03:28 PM (0yYS2)

11 Oh, by the way, nice job, Rusty! I do believe you missed your profession, as you should be the editor of the NYT, and the idiot in that position should be unemployed. There is little justice in this world we live in, but congrats on a job well done.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 03:45 PM (rUyw4)

12 Joe, Thanks. I don't think I'd exactly fit in at the Times. I'm more of a Weekly World News fan myself ;-)

Posted by: Rusty at May 08, 2006 03:59 PM (JQjhA)

13 Haha, me too, Rusty. But I think you could point the Grey Lady on the Right path, so to speak.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 04:16 PM (rUyw4)

14 ...she was just shot to death. It was just some guy that was beheaded... Well that absolves the Islamofascists then doesn't it?

Posted by: DANEgerus at May 08, 2006 04:38 PM (J8yxJ)

15 I dont know how they passed this off as a woman? it is gross beyond what i am able to look at. i stopped it. just ish.

Posted by: john kerry at May 08, 2006 05:54 PM (BpHeA)

16 Sorry to rain on your parade Rusty, but I had this figured as being the Nepalese vid way before you wrote your exclusive.

Posted by: Arosent at May 08, 2006 05:55 PM (Oe7Bs)

17 Arosent, By "exclusive" I don't mean I'm the only one to figure it out (note the hat tip to Baf Baf, for instance, and to Greyhawk) only that I'm the only one that reported this in the "media" (as of the earliest writing).

Posted by: Rusty at May 08, 2006 06:01 PM (JQjhA)

18 Â“To get an immediate and visceral reaction from idiots. Â“ As opposed to the more intellectual reaction, which would beÂ…? What? Whine? Sorry, but most human beings have a visceral reaction to seeing a person bound and semi-beheaded and then teased while spewing blood. A non-visceral reaction would indicate mental disability. And I doubt many people would be inspired to join a pacifist organization after seeing how evil human beings can be.

Posted by: Mus Zibii at May 08, 2006 06:49 PM (MWcae)

19 Dad, are there monsters in the world? Yes sweetie there are, and most of them worship a false moon god named allah. But, do not worry little one, your father is well armed, and has a great amount of ammo. ROPMA

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 07:41 PM (D2g/j)

20 Rusty is /b>the Master.

Posted by: Howie at May 08, 2006 08:15 PM (D3+20)

21 They must have learned from DAN RATHER or TOM BROKAW

Posted by: sandpiper at May 08, 2006 09:58 PM (xt8mX)

22 Maybe they did it out of terror ... fear for their lives. How would you like to meet her in a dark alley?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 12:48 AM (FCC6c)

23 What a barbaric and evil act. These beings are not human. They are not even animals. They are a low life form and will be destroyed. One word - KARMA

Posted by: wisp at May 09, 2006 12:54 AM (pgVjQ)

24 sdsdsds

Posted by: john at May 09, 2006 01:20 AM (ObQcD)

25 The colonial occupation forces are responsible of of the beheading of (IRAQ) and not this journalist!!...they invade that country to ensure democracy!!!!who believes them??where is the mass weapons you came for??? Abu Ghraib and guantanamo are black spots in the forhead of the violent aggressive terrorists who invaded that country and destroyed it completely. that is the type of democarcy they want to establish! you can not fool people, these are more intelligent than the chief commander i.e. (Adolph) Bush!! a simple question: what is the difference betwen the Nazi actions and what we see now in Iraq? they invaded that country for stealing the oil and getting revenge for Sept. 11, and for the sake of Israel... They will lose, in deed they lost the war: morally (Abu Ghraib and Pucca), and militarilly (these losses frm the iraqi resistance.. the will of people can not be defeated!!??

Posted by: john at May 09, 2006 01:33 AM (ObQcD)

26 The colonial occupation forces are responsible of of the beheading of (IRAQ) and not this journalist!!...they invade that country to ensure democracy!!!!who believes them??where is the mass weapons you came for??? Abu Ghraib is a black spot in the forhead of the violent aggressive terrorists who invaded that country and destroyed it completely. that is the type of democarcy they want to establish! you can not fool people, these are more intelligent than the chief commander i.e. (Adolph) Bush!! a simple question: what is the difference betwen the Nazi actions and what we see now in Iraq? they invaded that country for stealing the oil and getting revenge for Sept. 11, and for the sake of Israel... They will lose, in deed they lost the war: morally (Abu Ghraib and Pucca), and militarilly (great losses of the occupation forces every day... the will of people can not be defeated!!??

Posted by: john at May 09, 2006 01:37 AM (CKBe6)

27 Why do we post these images? If more media [legacy and new] organizations would publicize images and video of this nature, more people would have a clearer sense of what and who we are dealing with. This information is necessary and good to disseminate.

Posted by: Jason McClain at May 09, 2006 03:48 AM (5wcIa)

28 John, you moron. Don't make me invoke Godwin's Law.

Posted by: Oyster at May 09, 2006 04:01 AM (YudAC)

29 John, you need mental help. And you are off topic. Why don't you comment on the beheading video, or perhaps you are one of the animals we speak of.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 09, 2006 05:56 AM (rUyw4)

30 I agree with Jason. I don't like it that we show Abu Ghraib photos of panties on the head and gasp with terror and self ritcheousness, but we refuse to show the towers falling anymore except on 9/11 anniversary shows, and we don't show what the barbarians we are fighting do to their "POW's" most of whom are civilians. A war is partly won in the spirt. The spirits of our country need to be educated and reminded.

Posted by: KJ at May 09, 2006 06:05 AM (Rb147)

31 We would have been much better off with a " no American foot touch the ground policy ". Wherever there is a threat building up, just nuke it. No muss, no UN, no fuss. In Saddam's case just send him a " care " package about once every few weeks. That is all that needed doing, but cowboys are not all that smart ....

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 02:13 PM (H9rjL)

32 Can't grasp reality Larry: ah, yes a scorched earth policy with Nuclear weapons is a smart idea, especially if you have to crawl out from under a rock to post on the Internet. What a moron.

Posted by: davec at May 09, 2006 02:33 PM (CcXvt)

33 "Arosent, By "exclusive" I don't mean I'm the only one to figure it out (note the hat tip to Baf Baf, for instance, and to Greyhawk) only that I'm the only one that reported this in the "media" (as of the earliest writing)." Apart from the fact it was posted on Ogrish an hour before? Normally I view and really enjoy your stuff man, but claiming the 'exclusive' is a bit cheeky

Terminus

Posted by: Terminus at May 09, 2006 06:39 PM (8Qkxe)

34 The colonial occupation forces are responsible of of the beheading of (IRAQ) and not this journalist!!...they invade that country to ensure democracy!!!!who believes them??where is the mass weapons you came for??? Abu Ghraib is a black spot in the forhead of the violent aggressive terrorists who invaded that country and destroyed it completely. that is the type of democarcy they want to establish! you can not fool people, these are more intelligent than the chief commander i.e. (Adolph) Bush!! a simple question: what is the difference betwen the Nazi actions and what we see now in Iraq? they invaded that country for stealing the oil and getting revenge for Sept. 11, and for the sake of Israel... They will lose, in deed they lost the war: morally (Abu Ghraib and Pucca), and militarilly (great losses of the occupation forces every day... the will of people can not be defeated!!?? Posted by: john at May 9, 2006 01:37 AM How can you possibly declare yourself against "torture" after what you've just done to logic and the English language, John? Or is that really you, Baghdad Bob...?

Posted by: ipw533 at May 09, 2006 07:53 PM (Q5K6a)

35 It's funny how leftards are quick to jump on our reaction to such heinous acts of brutality, but pointedly refuse to condemn said acts, which in itself tell us all we need to know about them; they support terrorists now as they always have, regardless of the cause. Whatever mental disorder is at the root of leftism, it must be a real doozy; why would anyone cheer for the destruction of civilization? No sane person would, but as we have all known for a long time, leftards are not even close to sane. If we're not going to hang them all, we should at least deport them to any third-world dictatorship that would have them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 10, 2006 08:11 AM (0yYS2)

36 Indeed, I don't think that Atwar Bahjat was beheaded because I saw her on TV when they found her body ... She was shot only . In conclusion , this video makes sure of creating death teams which are led by certain persons who came after the invasion whether from Iran or another country .

Posted by: Iraqi at May 10, 2006 01:00 PM (a8ZQa)

37 What I can't figure out is how Hala Jaber, an award winning journalist, could write this article when back in February she wrote of seeing details of her friend Atwar's body in a green coat, and that the body had "taken two bullets to the head." And as a journalist and friend of Atwar's she must have seen the photographs of Atwar's body. Doesn't make any sense that she could have been so easily duped. The Sunday Times needs to clarify this.

Posted by: The Unknown Blogger at May 10, 2006 01:11 PM (1rr7m)

38 Hello? Those are man tits. That's not a woman being beheaded. Awful just the same and those responsible are sub-human. Awful. But let's not forget that whomever this was, they died a horrible death. If Allah exists, he's puking in the gutter that is Iraq right now.

Posted by: Brod at May 10, 2006 07:47 PM (IiOAJ)

39 but the beheading was Sunni. They were specific about the drill being used on her body, and eye. Was that all fake information to implicate Shia's in her murder? or fact? Now the new information indicates that where was no beheading. Therefore not sunni. The only remaining evidence (of the dril) points towards Shite.

Posted by: Someone at May 11, 2006 03:14 PM (33djT)

40 There are a few comments about 'leftists'. I'm not sure what you guys regards as 'leftists'. I beleive in a national health service, high taxes for good public services, basic rights for all. I wouldn't want to live in a country where the rich flourish at the expense of the poor. That said, I'd cheerfully see the kind of people that would perpetrate these inhuman acts boil in a vat of their own shit. Slow boil, mind... wouldn't want them to get off lightly... You reap what you sow.

Posted by: Mr Nobody at May 11, 2006 06:57 PM (jmflC)

41 watch your mouth please. the beleivers of Allah generally doesn't hunt for any other's property and doesn't kill except their lifes are in danger. This inhuman act does not seem to be a normal insurgent's work. You can only know this when you will be able to know muslim people, and that's not zionist warlords doesn't want you to. Do you think tese thrilling videos were in corcondance with current Muslim world? How come while all Muslim people were living soberly, some people can make all the western world beleive that they are bloodthirsty animals? Do you know the history? Was there any terrorist act in Islamic world (Hashasins are not islamic)before western occupation? Have you examined the teachings of Islam? or are you eager to beleive your dark princes of war and use your beloved ammunition on people just for they beleive in Allah? That environment of vengeance and terror makes them very rich or important persons, but the appliers will burn in hell without any benefit in this world.

Posted by: tugrul at May 15, 2006 03:51 AM (YrMKA)

42 Only a Muslim is worse than Hitler or Stalin. The latter two killed millions - but killed them cold-bloodedly. Muslims, and only Muslims can do this - kill their targets (including other Muslims - of course) hot-bloodedly. They'll cry Allah and slaughter people with glee in the wicked hearts. Only a Muslim could not notice how this segment of lower humanity has contributed nothing worthwhile to the world. 22 Muslim countries and every single one is backward. Say Allah; say Muslim, and everyone else gets nauceous. These "Allah" invokers are the pigs of this world.

Posted by: Jack at May 16, 2006 07:42 PM (zdT8j)

43 Great work! http://fezvmcfa.com/qzhk/bkem.html | http://sdubmwxl.com/ufbe/blni.html

Posted by: Holly at May 17, 2006 12:20 AM (qlRDC)

44 Tugrul - I do hope your writing was not directed at me. I fully understand that the vast majority of muslims are decent people - but I stand by the point that those who commit the barbaric acts portryed on the video in question deserve a fate worse than death. Not because they're muslim, but because they're animals. Jack - really, man, what the fuck are you on? Do you even read? Know any history? Have you ever actually *met* a muslim? For the record - most tend to be clean to the point of fastidiousness, respectful, and pleasant. As to your woefully inaccurate comment that they have contributed nothing to the world - whilst Europeans went back to hitting each other with sticks, it was the Arabs who preserved the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans. Without their efforts, Europeans, and thus Americans, would not be where they are today. We'd have had to rediscover these things all over again. They've given nothing to the world? Pfft. You're just too ignorant to know. Yes, the people that make these disgusting, horrible, awful videos are worthy of nothing but contempt and hatred. Do they represent Muslims in general? No. No more than that lunatic Fred Phelps represents Christians. Every religion has its nutters.

Posted by: Mr Nobody at May 17, 2006 07:35 PM (szIZi)

45 Tugrul - I do hope your writing was not directed at me. I fully understand that the vast majority of muslims are decent people - but I stand by the point that those who commit the barbaric acts portryed on the video in question deserve a fate worse than death. Not because they're muslim, but because they're animals. Jack - really, man, what the fuck are you on? Do you even read? Know any history? Have you ever actually *met* a muslim? For the record - most tend to be clean to the point of fastidiousness, respectful, and pleasant. As to your woefully inaccurate comment that they have contributed nothing to the world - whilst Europeans went back to hitting each other with sticks, it was the Arabs who preserved the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans. Without their efforts, Europeans, and thus Americans, would not be where they are today. We'd have had to rediscover these things all over again. They've given nothing to the world? Pfft. You're just too ignorant to know. Yes, the people that make these disgusting, horrible, awful videos are worthy of nothing but contempt and hatred. Do they represent Muslims in general? No. No more than that lunatic Fred Phelps represents Christians. Every religion has its nutters.

Posted by: Mr Nobody at May 17, 2006 07:37 PM (szIZi)

46 These people are not wanting to or willing to conform to western ideals. They are savage, barbaric individuals who know nothing more than war and hatred towards others who do not confom to their ideals. Why don't we rid the world of this disease, the way bleach kills germs. Afterall, they are the germs of the world. A nicely placed nuke would do wonders!

Posted by: kill'em all! at May 22, 2006 11:56 AM (maXzk)

47 This goes to show the mechanations of propaganda in the east. We in the west use more subtle and less violently graphic images, but it is still propaganda. The main thing we can see from this is the absolute difference in cultures; these tortures and murders are abhorrant and barbaric much where we were 200 yrs ago.The question then is how do we deal with a culture based on outmoded thinking and beliefs? I think we all know how this has to happen.Either the change happens within its own culture or it must be forced

Posted by: tony at May 24, 2006 09:06 PM (lXTwL)

48 I can tell that many of you would probably kill your selves if presented face to face. Have you learned nothing of this terrible war? This is exactly what religion does to you. Why donÂ’t you people just start to use your brain and THINK!

Posted by: Frank at May 30, 2006 11:06 AM (NVRTq)

49 Could anyone tell me why was it when Hala Jaber got this what we now know was a hoax video the authorities were not informed ,there is an investigation wouldnt someone have simply spoken to the coroner?

Posted by: sarah chadwick at June 03, 2006 10:57 AM (TnArq)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Malaysian Police Search for Sheep Rapist

No word from PETA yet on whether or not the sheep is claiming the relationship was consensual.

Interested Participant:

.... heard the frantic bleating of her ewe. The sound came from beneath the lower portion of her house, which is built on stilts, where she kept her livestock.
On checking, the woman found the youngster naked with one of her ewes.
"When she screamed, the youth jumped up and fled. She lodged a police report," Nazley said.

Ewe!

UPDATE: The wisdon of Khomeini:

"The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold."
"If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it."

Because the Ayatollahs ask the important questions.....

Posted by: Rusty at 10:35 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Now, Rusty, isn't this what the great prophet told these dimwits to do? Oh, yeah, that was goats, but it's the same thing. They can always say, "The Prophet(PBUH) made me do it."

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 12:13 PM (rUyw4)

2 Some is raping sheep and PETA has not responed what is happening its weird

Posted by: sandpiper at May 08, 2006 12:34 PM (gJhPg)

3 Next minute they'll be stoning the sheep to death for leading the men astray.

Posted by: Jester at May 08, 2006 01:59 PM (TuAMG)

4 I can see it now, Jester. Burn the manger and barn of this filthy sheepish whore and prostitute. Malaysian sheep are warring against the ummah, probably inspired by jinni, and must be destroyed. Let Dukhtaran-e-Milat have at this slutty sheep.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 02:35 PM (rUyw4)

5 B-a-a-a.

Posted by: Oyster at May 08, 2006 02:42 PM (EigeA)

6 JJ, the frightening thing is this could all be possible in the parallel universe that is Islam.

Posted by: Jester at May 08, 2006 03:07 PM (TuAMG)

7 Does "frantic bleating" mean he was doing it right or wrong?

Posted by: Graeme at May 08, 2006 04:02 PM (xT207)

8 I can't BELIEVE it. Don't you guys realize that Islam treated sheep better during the Middle Ages than Christianity ever did? That the Koran teaches LOVE the sheep, and only be consensual with them? That in fact, Jewish sheep were veritable kings of Damascus? Islam just needs a reformation in its lovemaking of sheep...

Actually, given the religious diversity of Malaysia, we don't even know if this guy was Muslim.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 04:08 PM (aqTJB)

9 How can they call this rape? In my my experience, Malaysian sheep, usually, are just asking for it.

Posted by: lumberjack at May 08, 2006 04:56 PM (wMUe9)

10 On the bright side, at least the family will get a nice hearty meal out of the inevitable honor killing. Mmmm... Stuffed mutton!

Posted by: ShannonKW at May 08, 2006 05:04 PM (dT1MB)

11 "given the religious diversity of Malaysia....." jd, you need to update your records. The ROP has forced a goodly number of Christians and Buddists to leave Malaysia. My latest count has Muslims in the 60-65% range.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 05:37 PM (rUyw4)

12 What's the most popular Cole Porter song in Malaysia? "My Sweet Embraceable . . . Ewe"

Posted by: ScurvyOaks at May 08, 2006 05:52 PM (a6SFl)

13 Sheep stories? Oh God! Where is this blog going!

Posted by: hondo at May 08, 2006 09:48 PM (SeBrl)

14 The East coast sheep are hip I really dig the fleece we share, and the southern rams with the way they balk ... they knock me out when I'm down there ....

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 08, 2006 11:57 PM (FCC6c)

15 That would be my point, JJ--that we don't know his religion. At 65%, that's lower than the % of Americans who are Christian. Yet if some American were going to town on a sheep, would you be okay with the world assuming he was a Christian? (altho I'd bet good money he was, given that this is primarily a rural game, and rural America is much more Christian. Not so many Jewish/Buddhist/Muslim/atheist farmers in the heartland!). All this reminds me of a good joke, though. A prim and proper British major was sent to a desert outpost in Egypt during WWII. A gruff corporal was giving him a tour of the camp. Tour ends, major says "Just one question: what is that camel for?" The corporal looks ashamed, but says "Major, we are 100 men, and it gets lonely out here in the desert. We are 50 miles from the nearest town, so when the powerful urges strike, well, the men use the camel." The major nods "I see. Well, you can assure the men that given the circumstances, I will allow the camel to remain, although I deeply disapprove." A month later, those powerful urges come over the major, and he figures, why not try it? He asks the corporal to bring the camel to his tent, mounts up on a little stool, and has loud, violent sex with the camel. When he finishes, he asks the corporal "Is that pretty much how the men do it?" "Not exactly, sir. They usually ride the camel into town where the girls are."

Posted by: jd at May 09, 2006 10:29 AM (aqTJB)

16 erm: "The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold." "Sodomized while alive"? Necrophilic bestiality is okay?

Posted by: Phillep at May 09, 2006 02:00 PM (OpGpa)

17 Also--this seems kind of bogus, actually, now that I think about it. If it is ritually unclean after sodomizing, why is it okay to sell it to someone from the next village? Presumably, Khomeini was writing for the whole nation, anticipating everyone is Muslim. Put me down as skeptical as to its authenticity.

Posted by: jd at May 09, 2006 02:06 PM (aqTJB)

18 Yeah, the same source says Khomeini endorsed sex with infants, so long as there was no penetration. This sounds like a bogus translation. There are MANY weird things endorsed by religious leaders of all stripes, and I've read some imams who have very peculiar views about masturbation, menstruation, etc. But infantophilia seems an unlikely thing for Khomeini to endorse. You can find websites that say that Jews are instructed to eat infants and drink Christian blood. It doesn't make it true, just because it is up on the web.

Posted by: jd at May 09, 2006 02:34 PM (aqTJB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Challenging the Misogyny of Islam: Ayaan Hirsi Ali Interview

Ayaan Hirsi Ali confronts Islam....because when people say they are oppressing you because Allah demands it, you might just want to take them seriously. Watch the video here.

Posted by: Rusty at 10:32 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

Good Sexual Harassment

Exploring the possibilities of good sexual harassment. Because we ask the important questions.

Posted by: Rusty at 10:28 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

Muslim Women Demand Death for Prostitute

Above: Members the women's group Dukhtaran-e-Milat ( Daughters of the Muslim Faith) hurl rocks in protest of a prostitution sex scandal in Kashmir, India.

All religions are basically the same alert: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

AP:

Carrying placards and shouting slogans demanding "severest punishment to the guilty," protesters broke through police barricades, pelting stones and bricks.

New Kerala:

"We appeal to government that those who are guilty should be brought before us and we will punish them,"

Reuters:

Last week, an angry mob ransacked the house of a woman suspected of running the prostitution ring, before razing it to the ground and setting fire to her belongings.

Also: Gateway Pundit who has more.

Posted by: Rusty at 10:06 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Is this a pr0n site? Her soaked burka reveals the curve of her leg, I can see the bridge of her nose and she is exposed up to the wrist. These are not permissive.

Posted by: fluffy the spammer! at May 08, 2006 10:28 AM (UxguT)

2 Good, Prostitution should be illegal. Its spreads Aids and destroys families. It tells men that Sex is something to be bought and sold, so when men run out of money they rape.

Posted by: John McParlin at May 08, 2006 10:46 AM (TwcDR)

3 I always here how Muslims also have Jesus but I guess they skpped the whole "ye without sin" thing.

Posted by: pka at May 08, 2006 12:00 PM (UA1kS)

4 Are you sure that wasn't just a wet burka contest?

Posted by: Oyster at May 08, 2006 12:53 PM (xYgw4)

5 Your weight is on the wrong foot, and you need to extend her arm more in order to achieve greater velosity of the stone. Also, use the other hand to point with as you let the stone fly BITCH!

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 01:58 PM (D2g/j)

6 This old hag is probably pissed as her man's been using the housekeeping for a bit on the side.

Posted by: Jester at May 08, 2006 03:11 PM (TuAMG)

7 Let us have a secular code of law only

Posted by: Guruji Kanda at May 08, 2006 04:08 PM (9d7Bb)

8 Leatherneck, Kashmir is a Cricket-playing country, so the techniques that are obvious to players of Baseball are apt to be lost on them. I sort of wonder what Muslims think when they hear the "let him without sin cast the first stone" idea. I guess they just look around among themselves and figure that the guy without sin must be detained elsewhere, so they get started without him.

Posted by: ShannonKW at May 08, 2006 04:45 PM (dT1MB)

9 Prostitution should remain illegal, IMO, but stoning prostitutes isn't the way to enlightenment. Obviously, those women have a bloodlust.

Posted by: RepJ at May 08, 2006 05:45 PM (wZLWV)

10 Yea, they have a blood lust. It is called Islam. Good one ShannonKW.

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 07:47 PM (D2g/j)

11 Please remember, everyone: There is no God called Allah, and Mohammed is a child molester. ~Voice

Posted by: A voice in the wilderness at May 08, 2006 10:53 PM (KoMkb)

12 The only thing these tormented muslim women like more than inflicting pain is feeling little suckling mouths of future suicide bombers pressing firmly on their breasts.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 12:07 AM (FCC6c)

13 I think it is high time that the Koran is exposed to the rest of the world as a terrorist manual. So more people should be made curious to see what is actuall y in the Koran. So please sign this petition to ban the Koran. This is just a tactic -- no actual censorship is supported -- to get those who have not read the Koran to pay attention and read it. Here is the link http://www.petitiononline.com/banquran/petition.html

Posted by: Soma Rus at May 09, 2006 12:37 AM (JFFgw)

14 hey ! is it possible to go in the street and asking for the death of people becoz they dont have your belief ? if not, just kill all that muslims right down in the street, prostitutes r 100000000000000000000 times more vertuous that mo the fake guru of muslims.

Posted by: James at May 09, 2006 12:48 AM (mQmjK)

15 once again they are crying and mobing and roiting... check the facts out... Islamic sprital leaders screw uncounted childs every year... New kerla forget to tell, how Arabs usually comes to hyderabad.. marry a girl and then sell her in Middle east, making India top tourist destination for getting virgin girls and for human trafiking Islam says, dont do Prostitution, as in this way u have to pay the women.i think perhaps islam is against looking women selfdependent. women, who want to opt the oldest form of buz to survive .... instead Islam says screw anyone.. rape them, tear them, bring fear in them... but dont pay money.. I dont think prostitution is bad, instead as a Hindu i see those act's more bad, which forced these womens to opt this biz. killing these womens is not the solution, solution is to find out, where what gone wrong.. becuz of which, a person has to sold herself to earn money

Posted by: perfektm at May 09, 2006 04:34 PM (E6/Ja)

16 You're all Damned to Hell .. ha ha ha ha! God will Smite you !!

Posted by: Angelo at May 10, 2006 06:13 PM (lRmdE)

17 This reminds me of Atefeh Rajabi's brave speech in court in Iran right before the judge dragged her out and put the noose on her himself. She had ripped off her headscarf and demanded that the system that forced these things on women be punished, not the women forced into "relations" as she was. Rest in Peace, poor child. On another note, I still don't get it. What is it with Muslims and rocks? Huh? Worship, throwing, murder with, etc.?

Posted by: Pim's Ghost at May 11, 2006 09:47 PM (TK5Ak)

18 It isn't rocks they're throwing. It's busted concrete, from all the shelled out buildings they got from blowing everything up on a regular basis.. ha ha Paul

Posted by: Paul Wampum at May 23, 2006 04:34 PM (7/8/U)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Jawa Gets Death Threats, Fatwa, Targetted for Online Terrorism

Over the past few days a number of death threats have been e-mailed to various writers for The Jawa Report. The specific threat is that "God permitting, I will cut your neck."

Why would normally rational and tolerant people threaten to cut off our necks? Because some of our authors have dared to insult the Holy Quran. I'm sure those issuing the threats are simple misunderstanderers of the Quran's injuction to, you know, strike at the necks of the infidels.

And, just to keep things straight, we are all infidels. And proud of it.

It looks like the threats come on the heels of a posting at Islamonline. I can't make out the entire post, but it seems to be something about some "cowards" at an Islamic conference who didn't speak out violently enough against those who ridiculed Mohammed in those now infamouse cartoons, or who had blasphemed the Koran, in the discredited stories about "Koran flushing" at Guantanamo.

I did, though, understand the part about certain "vile sons of monkeys, pigs, and cross worshippers" followed by some links to various bloggers associated with The Jawa Report. Also, the poster notes that the call to arms against The Jawa Report comes on the heels of several attempts of online terrorism by "Saudi Hacker 020" --- a reference to the online terrorist who has been attacking Aaron's Rantblog (site currently under attack and down).

There's also some allusion to how when we do finally get attacked not to blame those killing us, but rather that it is the just punishment of Allah.

So, I insult the Quran and you threaten my life? I'm not sure if I should be scared or if I should strut around the office today gloating that I finally got my fatwa? I'll go with the latter.

Damn it feels good to be a gangsta!

UPDATE: Death threat tracked to ......drumroll.....wait for it....I bet you're going to guess Switzerland, right? ......

Cairo, Egypt. Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?

Vinnie's death threat.
Howie's death threat.
Bluto's death threat.

Posted by: Rusty at 09:09 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 3 kb.

1 I see no value whatsoever in gratuitously insulting the Koran. Don't get me wrong, you're more than free to do so. But it has no value. On the contrary, it lends credence to islamist charges that we are waging a war on islam. You actually help the jihadi cause by gratuitously insulting the Koran.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 09:45 AM (8e/V4)

2 Possibly. Or we expose the lie that Islam is a peaceful tolerant religion.

Posted by: Rusty at May 08, 2006 10:10 AM (JQjhA)

3 Rusty, criticizing islam focuses on people's actual BEHAVIOUR, which I believe is fair game. Attacking the Koran, on the other hand, is an inanimate object and serves no purpose. A fine distinction, but a real one. There are plenty of muslims that aren't driven to violence by the Koran, so why alienate them.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 11:04 AM (8e/V4)

4 Jesusland Carlos- There may be muslims not driven to violence, but their silence emboldens and empowers the jihadists. Their silence is tacit approval so they are just as guilty. If "moderate" muslims won't clean out their 7th century house, we'll do it for them.

Posted by: odrady at May 08, 2006 12:48 PM (FPlB1)

5 Seems to me these radicals insult the koran daily with hate and threats, following a very old book to the letter is a bad thing just move out of the 8th century will ya.

Posted by: deke at May 08, 2006 12:56 PM (sR1yi)

6 Does this make us commenters guilty by association? I sure hope so.

Posted by: Oyster at May 08, 2006 01:01 PM (xYgw4)

7 Ron Howard insults the New Testament, with a fiction novel. We do not call for the death of Ron Howard. What seems to be the problem with writing about an insane man, and the Koran? Because the ROP might get mad? Who cares what the moon god worshipping POS think? We are not going to win them to our side, and they only say peace, peace as long as they can not win. Then they break their truce, and make war.

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 01:52 PM (D2g/j)

8 I don't believe in the teachings of the Koran. I'll burn that book if I feel like it, and quite frankly, as a freedom loving Christian, I'd burn a Bible, too. THEY ARE ONLY BOOKS AND THERE ARE MILLIONS OF COPIES!!!! The superstitions of Islamo-fascists need to be pointed out and the "moderates" need to brought into the 21st century kicking and screaming.

Posted by: RepJ at May 08, 2006 05:53 PM (wZLWV)

9 Shock the monkey 'till it comes out of it's cage and then skewer the pathetic little SOB!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 12:10 AM (FCC6c)

10 Has anybody else emailed that dirty haji back?

Posted by: Fernando Rivera at May 13, 2006 01:47 PM (rfru1)

11 I did but got nothing back.

Posted by: Howie at May 13, 2006 07:23 PM (D3+20)

12 Thats too bad. I was hoping for a good laugh. I guess my Exorcist quote made his head explode with anger.

Posted by: Fernando Rivera at May 13, 2006 11:16 PM (rfru1)

13 I sent another email, if this one doesnt get a response, it is safe to assume that it was a troll and not a dirty muj bastard.

Posted by: Fernando Rivera at May 14, 2006 12:27 AM (rfru1)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Get Your Free Hymen Report from all Three Credit Bureaus!

They don't have "credit reports" in Arab countries, laments Jordanian born Eurabe:

Then I realised we do. It's called "your reputation"..and it something that comes along with being a girl. it's just as important as your credit report in the US. One slip and everybody in the country finds out about it. Your reputation report is reviewed anytime you need to make important social and even career transactions just like in the US when you make financial contracts. The girls in my dorm were all intent on having hymen operations before marriage. Because loosing that is equivilant of bankruptcy. Anyone living in the US knows what that will do to your credit report.

So, how does one go about getting an Equifax hymen report?

Posted by: Rusty at 08:34 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

Next on ACLU's Agenda: Rip the Distinguished Service Cross from my Grandfather's Corpse

So, the ACLU has succeeded in getting a court to order a cross be removed from a San Diego monument honoring our fallen soldiers? I guess the logic is that putting a cross up to commemorate our fallen dead is just the first step toward a Rightwing theocracy. You know, the American Taliban and all that.

I suppose that had it been a giant phalis honoring Mother Gaia, the ACLU would have had no problem. You can sign a petition against the court's action here.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:23 AM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 111 words, total size 1 kb.

1 By the Left's definition of "theocracy", America has always been one. So it's not the "American Taliban" who are trying to turn us into a "theocracy", it's the Leftards who are trying to change how this country has always been. They are a secular taliban.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 09:49 AM (8e/V4)

2 You know, it pisses me off when people call Ashcroft, Robertson, or Falwell "Taliban". it is the modern equivalent of "nazi". It isn't accurate. None of these gentlemen want to construct a state in which homosexuals are actually executed. None of them want to impose complete religous orthodoxy. By the same token, to call the ACLU "secular Taliban" seems more than a little offensive, more than a little extreme, and just a whole lot wrong. The ACLU would be the secular Taliban if they executed Christians for not converting to secularism, or forced women to NOT wear modest clothing on pain of death. Relax--there is no war on Christmas, and what little war there is on Christians is a skirmish at best. Christians are and will remain the majority. Polls show that atheists are far less popular, and have real trouble getting elected to anything. They also have their children taken from them, just because they are not Christian (it has happened in more than 70 documented divorces, and these are just the cases where the judge actually SAYS it). If there's a war going on here, it is against atheists. But neither side in this "war" is anything like the Taliban.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 10:08 AM (aqTJB)

3 Well Carlos the country is changing. It has always been in the process of change, most of it for the good. Social and political conservatives are usually against change. Things that we now take for granted like the right of women to vote were considered frighteningly radiacal 100 years ago. Discrimination against catholics was prevalent even in the 1960 presidential election. That was the way things used to be. Our country has survived and thrived on its ability to change.

Posted by: john Ryan at May 08, 2006 10:59 AM (TcoRJ)

4 jd, the difference is Falwell tolerates different viewpoints in the marketplace of ideas-- the secular taliban doesn't. That's why they're always in court.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 11:06 AM (8e/V4)

5 >>>Well Carlos the country is changing. That's fine. But it's the "American taliban" that is constantly accused by the Left of wanting to change this country into a theocracy. Obviously that's just another lie from the "reality based community". The worst the christian fundies can be accused of is not going along with the Leftwing program. And there are plenty of non-fundies who aren't going along with it either.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 11:09 AM (8e/V4)

6 The ACLU (secular taliban to you--thanks for neither responding to my pointing out how nobody in our cultural wars deserves to be called Taliban nor from refraining from it--feel better, now that you have libeled your enemies? something in that Bible you love so much about bearing false witness? Or you have the expurgated version?) doesn't object to ANY groups expressing themselves, whether it is Jerry Falwell or NAMBLA or Nazis, so long as they are doing it with their own money, on their own land, or in a public place that is open to all other expressions (ie, free speech zone). What they DO object to is government sponsorship of religious speech or government discrimination against certain speech. You can think they draw the net too widely, but you certainly can't say that they are "taliban" or that they don't want Mr. Falwell to have his speech. They just don't want our tax dollars to pay for Mr. Falwell's speech. Back when Baptists were Baptists (as John Ryan wisely points out, these things change), they ardently opposed any government sponsorship of religion. That's why Jefferson's letter on wall of separation was the Danbury BAPTISTS. In truth, the founders were very divided on the precise line between church and state, and Jefferson, along with Paine and some others, were on the left of that debate. But most of the major founders were Deists of one kind or another, and that is a very different thing from what we think of today as "Christian fundamentalist". It is intellectually dishonest for people like Falwell to point to "endowed by their creator" in the DOI and say that proves we are a Christian nation. Jefferson didn't even believe in the divinity of Christ, and even a cursory glance at a bio of him proves this.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 12:25 PM (aqTJB)

7 The ACLU is one of the most vile groups in this country and the usial rotten seculay judges i mean we need to revoke the ACLUs tax exempt status this group is as bad as AL QUEDA and as nasty as any communists group and lets remember its got its HQ in HANOI ON THE BAY or SAN FRANCISCO

Posted by: sandpiper at May 08, 2006 12:40 PM (gJhPg)

8 ACLU is for what ever feeeeellllsss good. It is a New Age religion. A few examples are, abortion as a form of birth control, gay marriage, and NAMBLA. The ACLU is trying very hard to shape America to appear like Europe. Where there are no limits, and forget about morality, because it is hate speech. This is New Age thought, and New Age religion where children grow up not understanding limits, or what is right, and wrong. P.S. For those who are wondering what NAMBLA is, it is child sex between a man, and boy. SICKOS. One of the biggest LIES of the ACLU, and their like is the founding fathers were Deists. They were not. Most prayed to Christ for the forgiveness of their sins.

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 02:17 PM (D2g/j)

9 Actually, Leatherneck, I didn't say that the Founding Fathers were all deists. I said "most of the major founders" but that's a little vague. How about Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe? That's the Father of the DOI, the Father of our Country, the Father of our Constitution, the author of Common Sense "the pen of the Revolution", the greatest intellect at the time of the Founding, and, in total, four of the first five presidents of the United States? That good enough for ya, Leatherneck? Deism was very popular in intellectual circles at the time of the founding, and is best characterized by this quote from Voltaire: "the existence of a watch presupposes the existence of a watchmaker". This is what Jefferson meant by "nature and nature's God"

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 04:15 PM (aqTJB)

10 jd, you are wrong. You want to be right, but you are not, and never will be. Perhaps, your lot will change all of history to suit your New Age agenda. That being said jd, I will not cut your stupid head off for believing as you do.

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 04:38 PM (D2g/j)

11 Thanks for letting me keep my head on my non-leathery neck. But if I'm wrong, do me the favor of showing me where. Are you saying these men were not Deists? Are you saying that other, more important founders were not Deists (Adams?)? Are you saying that my interpretation of Deism is wrong? (certainly, there were differences in the Deist beliefs of Washington and Jefferson. Washington clearly had no problem with a national proclamation about prayer, and Jefferson did). It is easy to say "you're wrong". But it really isn't the glimmer of a refutation.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 04:43 PM (aqTJB)

12 Incidentally, Adams was a Unitarian, which makes five of the first five presidents either Deists or unitarians. If this was a "Christian" nation, it wasn't in any sense a Christian nation the way most Christians today would understand it. Moreover, Washington approved a treaty with the Barbary States which stated EXPLICITLY that the US was not a Christian nation.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 05:35 PM (aqTJB)

13 //home.aol.com/TestOath/deism.htl www.creationists.org Keep those lies to yourself.

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 06:29 PM (D2g/j)

14 >>>What they DO object to is government sponsorship of religious speech or government discrimination against certain speech. jd, thanks for reciting the talking points to me (like I hadn't already heard them a thousand times). I can tell the difference between government sponsorship of religion vs what the Left claims is government sponsorship of religion, thank you.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 07:51 PM (paKD6)

15 Leatherneck--great site on religious history of US. I was wrong about Adams, I think, upon reading that. I didn't realize how significant the Emerson influence on Unitarianism was. I should have known, though, given Adams' status as the first president to exploit religion falsely (he called Jefferson an atheist and/or satanist, although they later patched things up when both were in retirement). But the website is in error on deism, particularly in its treatment of Paine and Jefferson. It uses Deism's critics to define it, which is hardly balanced. Also, it ignores the fact that deism was an incredibly diverse philosophical school, without a unifying document. It was founded on the belief in reason, and for that reason, Jefferson wrote a bible that removed all miracles. He didn't believe in the divinity of Christ, he believed in Christ's teachings. He had a real problem with the trinity, as did many deists. But an interesting site, nonetheless. I'm intrigued by the quote from Hamilton. As one of my favorite Founders, Hamilton is one whose view on this I actually don't know and should.

Posted by: jd at May 09, 2006 11:32 AM (aqTJB)

16 Hey JD...yeah there is a war going on against the athiests...when they want to tear crosses down that commemorate my ancestors that have fought for our freedom and theirs, you darn tootin there is going to be war. Just as we do not tolerate terrorists attcking our country, we will not stand for our own people attacking us. If they do not like how this country is ran or what it was found on..they can leave with my blessing. Let them start their own country with their own rules They can have no crosses, no christians, the ACLU and all the baby killing abortionist and homosexuals they want. They can call it Rainbow City.But when it comes to my freedoms they better back off because I will fight to the death for what I believe.

Posted by: CJ at May 23, 2006 11:04 PM (GRjOw)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Muslims Attack Woman in Germany for Speaking Hebrew

Islam: religion of tolerance and peace alert. A woman was assaulted by a mob of Muslim women in Germany for speaking Hebrew in a predominately Muslim immigrant neighborhood.

The woman, who holds dual German-Israeli citizenship, was walking home after a party because she missed the last bus. As she walked home, she was speaking Hebrew to a friend in Israel on her cell phone. The Steglitz neighborhood of Berlin is home to a largely Muslim immigrant community.

At about 2 a.m. she passed by a group of women who immediately confronted her after they recognized she was speaking Hebrew, when:

one of the girls suddenly walked up to the Israeli woman and slapped her in the face. The other women then joined in, pulled her hair, beat her up and kicked her. The abuse eventually stopped when the attackers thought they heard a police car approaching, and they fled the scene.

The student, who sustained injuries in the attack, received medical treatment and filed a complaint with the police.

The women's identity has not been established thus far, but they were apparently Muslim.

Apparently the dream of a Jew-free Germany lives on. Hat tip: Joel

Posted by: Rusty at 08:01 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.

1 No 2nd Amendment, no firearms, no concealed carry, no protection from assault, no freedom in Germany or any other place in Europe for that matter. What a travesty! It may be Jews today, but soon Germans will be assaulted for daring to speak German in these Islamic slums. Enjoy your multi-culturalistic relativism, Euros, because the Muslims are about to have their way with you, and apparently you think playing nicey-nicey with them will help you. You better think again, and for God's sake, read and study your own history. The last time the Muslims invaded Europe(in 711 starting with Spain) they stayed for 1100 years, killed millions, enslaved millions more, and caused misery beyond belief. I guess you want some more of that.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 08:37 AM (rUyw4)

2 Perhaps playing nice is not exactly what they have done in Germany. Most Muslims in Germany are Turks (or Turkish Kurds). They were invited in as arbeiters, guest workers. They were denied any ability to become German, and were expected to work and return home. However, as the years turned into decades, solitary men brought over families, and soon you had second and third generation arbeiters. Yet still denied assimilation. Entire neighborhoods in Berlin and Frankfurt are Turkish speaking. The second and third generation are caught--neither Turkish nor German, they are in limbo. As in France, they are much more likely to turn to Islamo-fascism than are immigrants to the US, simply because here, they are assimilated and welcomed. It is no accident that some of the worst islamo-terrorists are part of this European diaspora. It is not "nicey nice" to deny people citizenship who have lived and worked their entire lives in your country. And it leads to extremism. Our way is much better. That's what the Europeans should learn--not some bizarre lesson from the Crusader era!

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 09:28 AM (aqTJB)

3 And even on the history, I'm not sure you are right, Joe. The Ottoman turks, for example, made life significantly better for many of the areas they captured in Europe. The Moors in Spain were also an improvement in terms of humanity over the Goths they beat. In many parts of Europe during Feudalism, the common folk didn't much care who ruled them. Jews were significantly BETTER off if they happened to be conquered by Muslims than by Christians (remember where the Sephardim went when the Christians took total control over Spain and starting slaughtering Jews).

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 09:38 AM (aqTJB)

4 I thought "Bush" was the real threat to our freedoms.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 09:51 AM (8e/V4)

5 Saint Nunilo: Memorial 22 October Profile Sister of Saint Alodia. Muslim father and a Christian mother, she was raised Christian. When her father died, her mother married another Muslim man who persecuted the girls, imprisoned them, and turned them over to die during the persecution of Abdur Rahman II. Martyr. Born Huesca, Spain Died beheaded 851 at Huesca, Spain Patronage child abuse victims, martyrs, people ridiculed for their piety, single laywomen

Posted by: Brad at May 08, 2006 10:38 AM (3OPZt)

6 "The Ottoman turks, for example, made life significantly better for many of the areas they captured in Europe. " That is not the impression I get from reading De Busbecq's "Turkish Letters". And if things were so nice under the Turks, how come the Greeks, the Armenians and the Kurds were or are so anxious to be free of them?

Posted by: Don Cox at May 08, 2006 11:48 AM (Z3fFl)

7 If this had happened in i say KENNESHAW GEORGIA there would have been a few mulim thugs laying on the coranors table with a few bullet holes in their foreheads

Posted by: sandpiper at May 08, 2006 12:43 PM (gJhPg)

8 jd, where in the World did you get your information on the Turks being benovolent imperialists? I was a history major in college, and I learned that the Turks were among the most brutal of all the conquerers with perhaps the exception of the Huns and Monguls, but as they were related peoples, perhaps the brutality was shared. You might broaden your reading list to include some of the eyewitness accounts of the Turkish slaughter of the Armenians, the depopulation of Hungary, the successive invasions of India that slaughtered tens of millions, the enslavement, murder and rape of the Balkans, the wars of conquest waged against Russia, Austria, Greece, most of the islands in the Mediterranean, and need I go on? I doubt whether most of these people considered the Turks a fair master, as the people of the book were forced to pay the tax, beaten if they wore green, not allowed to own a horse, not allowed to even protect themselves if attacked by a Muslim, and need I go on? My point, jd, is that you have only a surface knowledge of Islam. Open your mind, seek the truth, and learn the true legacy of Islam. It is not a religion of peace.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 01:23 PM (rUyw4)

9 jd, what is your problem? Do you hate yourself so much you want to be a moon god worshipper? You keep telling some lies about history. We all know there were some very nasty men who used religion to harm people. That does not give the Muslims a right now to be insane. STFU

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 02:32 PM (D2g/j)

10 The massacre of Armenians was long after the period I was referring to. The Ottomans eventually became the "sick man of Europe" in that their backwards system could not compete with the rest of Europe, and with emerging nationalism. My point was not that living under Islamic rule was a picnic for non-Muslims. My point was that, compared to contemporaneous Christian practices, Islam was often better for minority religions. The comparative advantage under Islam vanished as the West underwent renaissance and reformation. But for centuries, it was much better to be a Jew in Damascus than a Jew in London, or Paris, or Madrid. I don't see what hating myself has to do with debating historic treatment of religious minorities in Europe and the Middle East, but then, Leatherneck, I often don't understand your posts. In that, I think we establish some mutuality.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 03:27 PM (aqTJB)

11 This is from wikipedia, a source I approach with some trepidation, but it agrees with what I've read elsewhere that is not electronic. I think you'll concede that this sounds a hell of a lot better than the fate of even CHRISTIAN minorities under most Christian rulers at the time. In conquest (and in particular in its treatment of rebellious Serbs), the Ottomans were capable of exceptional brutality. In that, they were no different from Christians at the time. Please also note that the Ottomans establish separate courts, endorsed by the Sultan, upholding different religious laws made by Jews and Christians, carried out by them, interpreted by them. *** Under Ottoman rule the major religious groups were allowed to establish their own communities, called millets, each retaining its own religious laws, traditions, and language under the general protection of the sultan... From an early date, Greek citizens of Constantinople were able to achieve high positions in the fields of commerce, politics, religion, and the military. The Patriarch of Constantinople, for example, developed a great degree of power, both religious and political, but was still very tightly controlled by the state. The Phanariot Greeks worked as the sultan's statesmen in Western Europe and as local rulers in the Balkans; and Aegean Greeks were granted wide commercial rights and also developed a fleet that quickly became the empire's maritime weapon. In fact, some Greek citizens prospered to such a degree that they eventually opposed the Greek War of Independence of 1821Â–1831, afraid to lose their privileged position in the imperial capital. On the other hand, the Christian population in the Balkans was practically devoid of any rights preventng it for centuries to develop above the level of peasantry. Any signs of dissent were harshly suppressed (e.g. see April Uprising). The Ottoman Jews enjoyed similar privileges to those of the Phanariot Greeks, and indeed came to enjoy some of the most extensive freedoms in Jewish history. The city of Thessaloniki, for instance, received a great influx of Jews in the 15th century and soon flourished economically to such an extent that, during the 18th century, it was the largest and possibly the most prosperous Jewish city in the world. By the early 20th century, Ottoman JewsÂ—together with Armenian and GreeksÂ—dominated commerce within the Empire. ***

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 03:51 PM (aqTJB)

12 Yes, the Turks were such kind masters that even other muslims hated them, and generally still do. Muslims hate, it's what they do, and the only way to stop them is to kill them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 08, 2006 03:54 PM (0yYS2)

13 I think the Arab antipathy for Turks that you reference has less to do with Turk brutality (which did exist--I'm just saying it was no worse and in some ways better than the rule of many contemporaneous Christians--a nuanced point that seems to be eluding many here) than it does with the emergence of Arab national identity, under delayed influence from European romanticism. Pan arabism grew up first in opposition to Turkish rule, and then in opposition to western colonialism. You're right, though, that even today, the Arab world looks with suspicion at Turkish hegemony, particularly given the historically close relations between Turkey and Israel. The Islamic world, which can appear monolithic, is truly a mosiac of sects, races, ethnicities, and regions. For what it is worth, Iraq is at the intersection of Arab, Persian, Kurdish, and Turkish spheres of influence, as well as a key intersection between Shia and Sunni Islam. Add oil to that mix...and you've got the recipe for a major conflagration. Too bad we had such simpletons running our national government when they invaded..."greeted as liberators"...uh, right.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 04:33 PM (aqTJB)

14 jd, you write like everyone is below you. The leaders of our country are not simple. Nor do they think all Muslims are Arab. I doubt if anyone on the blog has anything to do with going to war in Iraq. However, it appears almost everyone supports the troops there. I wish we were not in Iraq. I do think the people of Iraq do not want Suddam, and sons back. Now, Hamas does because their little moon god worshipping bomber's families got $20,000.00 for blowing up those nasty Jeeeeewwwwwwsssss. ROPMA

Posted by: Leatherneck at May 08, 2006 04:51 PM (D2g/j)

15 I don't think people here are below me. Far from it. The point of engaging in dialogue is to learn. I might know more about some things, but others know more about others. And I don't think our leaders were ignorant, just insufficiently sensitive to the volatile nature of Iraq and the explosive history of the region. Wolfowitz and Rummy are not stupid. Neither was Bob McNamara. On this website, the phrase "leftard" is often thrown about, as if all liberals/leftists were stupid. Some people on the hard left and hard right are damn brilliant. I just disagree with both, but that doesn't make them "retarded". I'd say the same about Wolfowitz. He's brilliant. And almost 100% wrong on Iraq, since 1996. Being smart is no guarantee of being right. As William F. Buckley put it: I'd rather be governed by the first 100 names in the phone book than the faculty of Harvard. When he said that, he was aware that the faculty of harvard were "smarter" than the first 100 names in the phone book.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 05:08 PM (aqTJB)

16 You make some valid points JD, but if you're going to tell us that everyone in power is wrong and you're right, you might want to tell us why, otherwise you'll be taken as just another effite liberal crackpot who confuses indonctrination with intelligence.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 10, 2006 05:54 AM (0yYS2)

17 Why, IM, that's the most moderate posting I've ever seen you do. Did you wake up on the right side of the bed today? I'm not telling you that everyone in power is wrong, and I'm right--far from it. I was right on Iraq's occupation, but I was one of those idiots who thought it would be tougher to take Baghdad. Military expertise is not one of my strong suits. Effete...oh, occasionally. Liberal, ditto. Crackpot? Possible. Indoctrinated? Doubtful.

Posted by: jd at May 10, 2006 03:55 PM (aqTJB)

18 IM's " A Beautiful Mind " facet ...

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 11, 2006 08:51 PM (FCC6c)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Excuses Excuses

Howie is home feeling crappy this morning. Rusty, I expect will be along eventually with smashing news. Co-Bloggers have at it. Open trackbacks on this post if you can post them. They have been a bit flaky for some users lately.

Posted by: Howie at 07:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.

May 07, 2006

Egyptian blogger Arrested

Via Rantings of a Sandmonkey:

Alaa, blogger, co-founder of the egyptian blog aggregator Manalaa and democracy activist, got arrested today during a protest to support the Judiciary's branch fight for independence. He, and about 10 others, were rounded up in the street, beaten up and thrown in a police car. Amongst those who got arrested were at least 3 girls, and the police beat up at least another 2 girls as wellÂ…
Â…I will be damned if we let the regime get away with this. So, readers, if things come to that, we will need your help. The Committe to protect bloggers is no more, we are on our own and the regime is getting more desperate, paranoid and brutal by the minute. We will most certainly need your support to get him out, but let's just hope it doesn't come to that.

Hat Tip: Tiger Hawk who has the contact information for the Egyptian Embassy

The Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt
3521 International Ct. NW
Washington DC 20008
Phone (202) 895 5400
Fax (202) 244 5131
(202) 244 4319
Email: embassy@egyptembdc.org

Posted by: Howie at 12:17 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 189 words, total size 1 kb.

It's Not As Good As "devil will do meetballs from your bodies."

You're just going to have to share with everyone, I guess, Howie.

From: hisham faiad Signed-By: yahoo.com | Mailed-By: yahoo.com
To: freewheeling@verizon.net, vinceautmorire@gmail.com, mjpechar@yahoo.com, lists@chrisshort.net, trader66@wabash.net, tim@opinionbug.com, pajamahadeen@hotmail.com, dreadpundit@hotmail.com, richard.hyscience@gmail.com
Date: May 7, 2006 7:10 AM
Subject: why u insult the holly qouran ? why why
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/084371.php
why u insult the holy qouran ? why why
did u know any thing about the holy qouran ?
he is the speaking of allah ( the good )allah give u
ur head , hand , leg , face , eye ... etc and he can
take this things all of this things so why u insult
his speaking why why ? where ur mind go ?
ur without mnid . allah Venge of u .
i ask u somthing .
give me ur country & address and give somtimes
to ............ cut ur neck
yes i willl cut ur neck beazn allah i will do that
if ur brave give ur address and somtimes to
killing u cut ur hand whiche Sacrilege the holy qouran
in shaa allah i will cut ur neck

Well, it looks like someone found the contact page. Still, the poor guy wasn't nearly as creative as this commenter from long ago:

when muslim's are in heaven,you all christs burn in hell.devil will do meetballs from your bodies.

But hey, we'll take 'em when we can get 'em.

Thanks Hisham Faiad, you're my Islamotard of the week!

Posted by: Vinnie at 10:21 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.

The Bloody Murder of Muslim Jouralist Atwar Bahjat

Sickening

Via The London Times Online :
Update: See Rusty here who says, "Ah young Paducan learn to trust your feelings". (Note extended entry was posted yesterday.)
Nobody but her killers knew just how much she had suffered until a film showing her death on February 22 at the hands of two musclebound men in military uniforms emerged last week. Her familyÂ’s worst fears of what might have happened have been far exceeded by the realityÂ….
...We now know that it was not that swift for Bahjat. First she was stripped to the waist, a humiliation for any woman but particularly so for a pious Muslim who concealed her hair, arms and legs from men other than her father and brother.
Then her arms were bound behind her back. A golden locket in the shape of Iraq that became her glittering trademark in front of the television cameras must have been removed at some point Â— it is nowhere to be seen in the grainy film, which was made by someone who pointed a mobile phone at her as she lay on a patch of earth in mortal terror.
By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage.
It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear...
...A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8in blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.
Her cries Â— Â“Ah, ah, ahÂ” Â— can be heard above the Â“Allahu akbarÂ” (God is greatest) intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.
Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.
Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker in a grotesque parody of one of her pieces to camera.
The voice of one of the Arab worldÂ’s most highly regarded and outspoken journalists has been silenced. She was 30....
...I found it hard enough to bear the news of her murder. When I saw it replayed, it was as if part of me had died with her. How much more gruelling it must have been for a close family friend who watched the film this weekend and cried when he heard her voice.
The friend, who cannot be identified, knew nothing of her beheading but had been guarding other horrifying details of BahjatÂ’s ordeal. She had nine drill holes in her right arm and 10 in her left, he said. The drill had also been applied to her legs, her navel and her right eye. One can only hope that these mutilations were made after her death.

Also see the Mudville Gazette who adds:

Regardless of which side in the conflict killed her (and I have my own thoughts on that - in the eyes of her killers her greatest crime was most likely being a woman outside of a kitchen) the London Times reporter can't resist a mild apology for their act:
Just as Bahjat bore witness to countless atrocities that she covered for her television station, Al-Arabiya, during IraqÂ’s descent into sectarian conflict, so the recording of her execution embodies the depths of the countryÂ’s depravity after three years of war.
In truth, it represents a depth of depravity achieved over centuries. From the description, her killers hadn't just conceived or improvised their method execution on the spot - they seem to have been well practiced. But such is the nature of the enemy in this war, and perhaps this is their most sacred and well honed knowledge: if a brutality can be inflicted that exceeds all human ability to comprehend, the humans will find a way to deny it

Blue Crab Boulevard says :

This is the face of evil itself. That the monsters choose to hide behind masks shows how deeply depraved and cowardly they really are. We must remember we are at war. Or that face will show itself again and again.

Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch chimes in with the following:

Anyone who thinks that God's greatness is established by such acts of barbaric cruelty must be resisted at all costs.

I want to add one thought. I know this is a horrid thing. IÂ’ve seen several of these things and they turn my stomach. I dread having the even think of it. But this video should be released as respectfully and responsibly as possible. Hard to do I know, but the public must be shown this evil. Otherwise how are they to know the truth. Also I have an all too realistic awareness of what the threat below really means. We don't want to release it but we feel we have to release it. The Jawa Report will bring you updates if and when it becomes available. Our prayers go out to Atwar Bahjat and her family.

Others : Malkin and Captains Quarters.

See our beheading archive; Warning Graphic Images. more...

Posted by: Howie at 10:00 AM | Comments (31) | Add Comment
Post contains 997 words, total size 7 kb.

1 >>> This is the face of evil itself There's just no other way to describe it.

Posted by: Graeme at May 07, 2006 11:59 AM (XF1Ly)

2 True Graeme, although liberals will fall all over themselves to make excuses for the animals who do such things.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 07, 2006 12:01 PM (0yYS2)

3 The people that did this were not social or political liberals I have yet to see any liberals making any excuses for this. IM could you provide us some links ?

Posted by: john Ryan at May 07, 2006 12:37 PM (TcoRJ)

4 DING DING DING. I thunk he's talking about the reporter. It does boggle the mind you can see the struggle of the liberal in that one quote. It's admirable that she wants to understand shows she is a caring person in my book But she can't it's beyond evil. Satanic I'd call it in a chilling way. I think it underscores the stuggle on the left how to be left and still fight these people who have no respect for life. It's beyond a moderate liberal democracys imagination Left Right Middle whatever. It's freaking evil doubleclutch!

Posted by: Howie at May 07, 2006 12:56 PM (D3+20)

5 I don't know why this surprises anyone. The animals learned this behavior and received plenty of practice under the regime of Saddam. The hate they display is a learned behavior, not something that comes natural to anyone. Saddam was a great teacher.

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 07, 2006 01:44 PM (rUyw4)

6 John Ryan: Excuses include, but are not limited to A) blaming America and the West for being the cause for these actions and/or B) not saying anything at all - as if it isn't.even.happening. WE have those who constantly harp on how bad the West is, how they're the "oppressors" yet, when this is the reaction, they're strangely silent. They know damn good and well there is no excuse for what happened to this woman and to bring it up detracts from their argument. When cornered, they often say, "Well, er, uh, of course that's wrong ...... but," Why must they equivocate? Sometimes, something is just so evil - there IS nothing else. There IS no excuse. There IS nothing else to say.

Posted by: Oyster at May 07, 2006 02:42 PM (YudAC)

7 Anyone have a link to the video? Not to put the cruelty and stupidity of this act into the shade, but the depiction brings to mind something that I've noticed in all the Angry Arab beheading videos. Why can't Arabs sharpen a knife? Historically they've always used slashing weapons, and a dull scimitar is pretty useless, so when did they forget how to use a whetstone? One of the videos I've seen featured a beheading so botched it could have passed for a Saturday Night Live skit if the knife had been fake. Maybe you've seen it--the victim is in a chair, bound hand and foot, and some lumpy goombah in a homemade ninja suit comes up behind him to do the deed. Problem is, not only is the knife dull but the idiot (obviously not a Boy Scout) is cutting toward himself. Naturally, as he tries to saw the dull blade through the skin, the victim squirms out of the chair and tucks his chin, so the executioner and his buddies end up sliding around in a puddle of blood trying to wrestle the guy while avoiding getting cut by their own knife. After some minutes of this there is a break in the video after which the killer displays the freshly detached head and holds forth on God's greatness, utterly oblivious to the irony of the scene. (My thought was, if this clusterfark is an example of God's greatness, what does it look like when He isn't really trying?) I suspect the dull-knife phenomenon is Arab rather than Muslim, because I've seen the infamous Chechen beheading video and it's worlds apart. If there can be such a thing as a good beheading video, this is it. In fact, the whole thing is handled so businesslike it resembles an instructional video for people who want to take up beheading as a hobby (and knowing the Chechens it may well be.) They've got all the cardinal points covered. The victim on the ground, so he can't flop over. The killing is done outdoors, so everyone keeps their traction and nobody has to mop up. The victim's head is firmly clamped to a large flat rock by the executioner's boot, so there will be no writhing about. The knife is big and razor-sharp. There is no posturing nor ecstatic ululating nor reading from the Scripture, though all celebrants apart from their guest are zealous Muslims. The executioner carefully places the point just below the victim's ear, edge away from himself, and strokes easily through the neck in less than 5 seconds. Presumably the head was removed for taxidermy after the twitching was over, but this was rightly judged a separate task.

Posted by: ShannonKW at May 07, 2006 02:59 PM (dT1MB)

8 Hey! Dont knock the Religion of Peace! My liberal President says you narrow minded xenophobes are just making trouble. We need to give the Jihadists a chance! The Jihadist is just like you and me. If you cant believe my liberal President who can you believe?

Posted by: Rod Stanton at May 07, 2006 03:04 PM (EgoYF)

9 No! Its ot the left winger in the White House that likes Jihadists. Its his less than capable PC AG Alberto that like Jihadists.Your liberal President does not car either way.

Posted by: Jo macDougal at May 07, 2006 03:43 PM (EgoYF)

10 The knife is dull to insure maximum pain & suffering.It is like trying to behead someone with a huge butter knife.The people doing these things are "Satanists" & they KNOW that they are "Satanists."Everybody has their own opinion of Islam.To me,whats the difference between yelling "Allahu Akbar" & "Hallelujah,Praise the Lord" while doing this vile crime.My point is that these people are trying their best to villify the religion of Islam,just like they would Christianity &/or Judaism.These very same people could be beheading people here in the U.S. or say,Northern Ireland in the "name" of the Christian's God.This is not about belief,this is about attacking a belief & misrepresenting the belief in order to damage it.This killing was not done in the name of religion but to attack religion & to cast the certain targeted religion in a bad light & we are more than happy to take the bait.

Posted by: Roy Smith at May 07, 2006 03:50 PM (AoEIx)

11 Roy, I'm not sure I understand your post, but if you are saying this killing was not done in the name of religion, of course it was. Islam needs to undergo the same reformation and reexamination that Christianity did coming out of the Middle Ages. Jews annihilated non-Jews (read the old testament, they took over entire towns, killed all the men (down to infants), raped all the women, all at God's orders). Christians for centuries behaved with extreme brutality, towards heretics and non-believers, beheading, burning, etc. Islam has come into confrontation with modernity all at once, over a 100 year period, as an external, foreign, dominating power, whereas for us it was internal, gradual, and positive for our relative power in the world. This is NOT making excuses for the animals who beheaded this women--they should be treated as military enemies--but it is to say that this IS a problem of religion, within a major religion. The president is right: what is needed is not a war against Islam but a war within Islam. We must take sides with people like this woman, against people like these beheaders. Samuel Huntington, who predicted in the late 80s that "the borders of Islam will be bloody" was prescient on just this point.

Posted by: jd at May 07, 2006 04:25 PM (aqTJB)

12 Roy do you really believe that crap.

Posted by: Howie at May 07, 2006 04:28 PM (D3+20)

13 Good points JD, but the difference is that when muslims commit atrocities, their behavior is sanctioned by the koran, so there can be no reformation.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 07, 2006 04:30 PM (0yYS2)

14 Shannon : I've not come across the video yet. As I inderstand I was sent to the family and they shared it with the Times. Obviously it would be very difficult for the family to release that. I've requested it and or selected images and will keep looking as well.

Posted by: Howie at May 07, 2006 04:31 PM (D3+20)

15 If I said who I really believe was doing these killings,Then my house would be filled with aluminum foil for making those hats to protect my brain.Somebody is doing all of the killing in Iraq.I would not be surprised if all of a sudden a "Christian" version of Bin Ladin &/or Zarqawi will come on the scene & in the name of "Jesus" proclaim himself a "Crusader" & commit acts of terror which will of course be a misrepresentation of all who would consider themselves Christians.If you can understand what I am saying from this angle then you can understand how people who call themselves Muslims would say that the persons doing this crime must be Israelis & or the Mossad.This is NOT to blame Israel at all,they are just saying that they cannot believe a muslim could commit such a crime.I could just as easily blame the illuminati,freemasons,...Opus Dei,you get the picture.It is hard to believe that what we Christian Americans would call "true Christians" or what Iraq would call "true Muslims" would commit such a crime.I believe these people who killed this women are "Satanists."They may not call themselves that,but they knowingly embrace evil.They have an agenda to cause unrest in Iraq.They could be Iraqi or foreign fighters from surrounding countries,they could be Israel,they could be Iranian,They could be American(which I know is a very cynical thought).NOBODY REALLY KNOWS who is doing all of these killings.We just know who we want to believe is doing it.

Posted by: Roy Smith at May 07, 2006 04:57 PM (AoEIx)

16 Seeing as how the Old Testament calls for stoning homosexuals, killing people who refuse to honor their parents, or blaspheme against God, along with many other extraordinarily violent responses, including wars of extermination, all supported by God, I'm encouraged by modern Judaism's disavowal of those things. Even the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox do not practice those. There are passages in the Koran that are equally or more disturbing. I'm confident that moderate interpretations and reinterpretations can prevail, although I'm not convinced they will, or will do rapidly. As for Christianity: yes, it does preach, in the New Testament, a much more loving attitude than the Old Testament (altho not without its brutality). It is clear to me that Christianity is, as doctrine, a better fit for modernity than Islam. It did, however, take us hundreds of years to stop violently waging war in the name of God, massacring those who took a different view of God, etc. Ironically enough, it is the one aspect of Islam that is most "modern" compared to historic Christianity that has prevented its authoritative evolution: its diffuse lines of authority. Christians, for whatever reason, have tended to organize around established lines of ecclesiastical hierarchy (Baptists excepted). Thus, when Christianity reformed, each denomination could do so in a relatively organized fashion. Islam lacks any such organized leadership, a tragedy as they try and reform. Of course, I know, IM that you don't consider any of these faiths worthy of your support, so it is to some extent an academic debate for you, isn't it? And if you don't have any religion, upon what morality do you base your wars of extermination against liberals and Muslims? Randian objectivism? Nietzschean ubermenschery? Nihilistic libertarianism? Secular humanism? Neofascism?

Posted by: jd at May 07, 2006 05:02 PM (aqTJB)

17 It is about ideology, with religion as the driving force, I posted this @ jihad watch but it's worth repeating here: I was reading this the other night, and it jumped out at me, while it discusses Communism, and Nazism et al, it really applies to Islam too: Ideology -- that is what gives evildoing it's long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination. That is social theory which helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and other's eyes, so that he won't hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise and honors. That is how the agents of the Inquisition fortified their wills: by invoking Christianity; the conquerors of foreign lands, by extolling the grandeur of their Motherland; the colonizers, by equality, brotherhood of future generations. Thanks to ideology, the twentieth century was fated to experiment evildoing on a scale calculated in the millions. -- Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago.

Posted by: davec at May 07, 2006 05:06 PM (CcXvt)

18 YOu guys seem so amazed- The muslim is an animal. They walk like an animal, talk like an animal and you seem su-prised when they act like animals. It is high time we treated them like the animals they are. Butcher them. Put them to sleep. Put them in cages. Jebus, I won't let one of the buggers step on my lawn. Bad for the grass.

Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 07, 2006 05:42 PM (/RE21)

19 Evil is a force in this world and yes, there are evil people. Don't let Liberals tell you otherwise. They live in a fantasy world were closing your eyes to the obvious is considred a virtue.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 07, 2006 05:45 PM (8e/V4)

20 What a sick ass world we live in. There are people who probably deserve to die like that, but this victim wouldn't seem to be one of them. The fact that one human being can do this to another is incomprehensible. Which leads me to the unavoidable conclusion that the killers are SUB human.

Posted by: Richard at May 07, 2006 05:51 PM (7KF8r)

21 jd, "Islam needs to undergo the same reformation and reexamination that Christianity did coming out of the Middle Ages." Are you sure Islam "needs" this, or that we in the West would approve of them more if the Koran stopped being an obstacle to adopting our moral beliefs? The West has greatly benefited by rubbishing some of the more inconvenient of the Bible's teachings. But you should be careful to distinguish between teachings that are truly impractical and those that are merely incompatible with modern moral vogue. For example, the requirement to forgive wrongdoers would make justice and civilization impossible, so we gain a real demonstrable benefit by ignoring it; but rules about modest dress and sexual conduct don't restrict anything but your right to party, so we could impose these on our people and be just as civilized as we are now (though grumpier.) I mention this because when Westerners look at Islamic countries with an eye toward junking the rules that are supposedly holding them back, they always pick the wrong ones. The plight of Muslim women, for example, wets no end of hankies in the West, but there is no point in emancipating the women in some countries. The U.S. could afford to do this after we industrialized and babymaking became a burden rather than blessing. Sure, we take a self-congratulatory attitude toward it now as though we suddenly awoke to how evil it was to keep 'em barefoot and pregnant, but it's no coincidence that we had this epiphany when the economy had found better things for them to do. Personally, I think the biggest things holding back Muslim countries are their penchant for nationalized industry combined with a lack of rule of law, but it's unclear how this can be pinned on the religion (not that I'd be surprised if it could...)

Posted by: ShannonKW at May 07, 2006 06:41 PM (dT1MB)

22 JD, I'm not really into "isms", so I don't need any ideological support for my opinions, just simple logic: Kill my enemies before they kill me. Survival is the prime imperative in life, and anything that threatens survival must be destroyed without mercy or remorse. It is no secret that global liberalism and terrorism go hand in hand, and that liberals have always supported whatever psychopaths came along as long as they were preaching some ideology that promised to destroy civilization, and nothing has changed, except now the liberals support islamic terrorism rather than communist terrorism, but only because muslims look like they stand a good chance of destroying civilization.

Posted by: Imoprobulus Maximus at May 07, 2006 07:20 PM (0yYS2)

23 Top 10 most Dangerous jobs in the ME,/a> When it gets this evil ... I don't know it's just hard to phantom how evil these shits can be.

Posted by: jack at May 07, 2006 11:30 PM (aitZQ)

24 Top 10 most Dangerous jobs in the ME When it gets this evil ... I don't know it's just hard to phantom how evil these shits can be.

Posted by: jack at May 07, 2006 11:30 PM (aitZQ)

25 well I did not really expect that anyone would provide any links showing "liberals" justifying the especially brutal murder of this brave woman. The demonization of all who are not in 100% agreement has polarized and weaken our nation.

Posted by: john Ryan at May 08, 2006 07:57 AM (TcoRJ)

26 John Ryan, read Oyster's comments above. Sometimes a lack of condemnation of an action is a justification, or at least tacit support, even though the method itself may not be to someone's liking. Does the term "insurgent" ring a bell?

Posted by: jesusland joe at May 08, 2006 08:45 AM (rUyw4)

27 >>>Does the term "insurgent" ring a bell? john ryan, does the term "minuteman" ring a bell?

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 08, 2006 09:53 AM (8e/V4)

28 I see Islam degenerating in that part of the world..organized murder and mayhem led by thugs who parade as Mullahs. There is a power vacuum...which we created. And, God is crying....

Posted by: sharon spry at May 08, 2006 01:04 PM (BdT9X)

29 Ah me a suck you a sucker he a sucker she a sucker wouldn't ya like to be a sucker too.

Posted by: Howie at May 08, 2006 02:59 PM (D3+20)

30 Re the news media's seeking to tone down the barbarity of these acts: "Every villain is followed by a sophist with a sponge." -- EM Forster, misquoting a Lord Acton lecture

Posted by: The Sanity Inspector at May 08, 2006 03:47 PM (uw+0A)

31 John--you don't think the majority of people feel the need to back up what they say, do you? That's betraying your bias for "reality". And as Stephen Colbert so insouciantly put it: reality has a well known liberal bias.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 05:10 PM (aqTJB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Howie Gets Very First Death Threat

I was blabbing on the blog this week about how I had never received a direct death threat yet. Well the dry spell is over boys and girls.

From: hisham faiad h_faiad@yahoo.com Signed-By: yahoo.com | Mailed-By: yahoo.com
To: rustyshacklefordatympetjawa@gmail.com, mchlhwrd@gmail.com
Date: May 7, 2006 7:09 AM
Subject: why u insult the holly qouran ? why why
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/084371.php
why u insult the holy qouran ? why why
did u know any thing about the holy qouran ? he is the speaking of allah ( the good )allah give u ur head , hand , leg , face , eye ... etc and he can take this things all of this things so why u insult his speaking why why ? where ur mind go ? ur without mnid . allah Venge of u . i ask u somthing .
give me ur country & address and give somtimes to ............ cut ur neck
yes i willl cut ur neck beazn allah i will do that if ur brave give ur address and somtimes to killing u cut ur hand whiche Sacrilege the holy qouran
in shaa allah i will cut ur neck

Well, to be honest, he also includes Rusty so I have to share this one. Rusty wrote the post too so thatÂ’s even more credit to Rusty, thanks man, couldnÂ’t have done it without you. Oh and if itÂ’s from a troll just pulling my leg, thanks man for thinking of me. And if I'm just one of those misundrstanders of Islam and in translation "cut your neck" means "buy you a beer", thanks man and sorry for splashing your email all over the internet. And if itÂ’s really from a Muslim online terrorist who wants to, you know, chop off my head. YouÂ’ll have it to do then won't you. more...

Posted by: Howie at 08:35 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

Most-Wanted Fugitive Warren Jeffs

Warren Jeffs (Salt Lake City, Utah) The 50-year-old leader of the polygamous Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Warren Steed Jeffs, has been placed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives List.

Jeffs is wanted for allegedly arranging marriages between underage girls and adult men, for criminal charges of sexual conduct with a minor, and for being an accomplice to rape. Convictions of the charges may put Jeffs in prison for life.

Inclusion on the FBI's list, which is disseminated world wide, increases to $100,000 the reward for information leading to Jeffs' arrest.

Jeffs is considered a prophet by about followers in Utah, Arizona, Texas, Colorado, South Dakota, British Columbia, and Quintana Roo (on the Yucatan Peninsula), Mexico. Likely protected by armed bodyguards, Jeffs is considered armed and dangerous.

There is reason to believe that Jeffs may be holed up in a FLDS church compound in Eldorado, Texas. Authorities, however, haven't acquired probable cause to enter and search. Maybe the bumped up reward will loosen a tongue.

Jeffs was profiled on last night's America's Most Wanted television program and, by all indications, is a demented, authoritarian pervert. In my opinion, Jeffs is scum. Many lives have been forever altered by his actions. He needs to be found and apprehended.

Pass the word. Call the FBI if you have information. Collect $100,000.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 04:34 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

The Blog Sabbath Caption Contest: Don't Tread On Me Edition

Caption this photo of our national symbol defending his home.

I'm adding a new wrinkle to the BSCC. Captions will be allowed until 10:00 p.m. Central Time on Sunday night, and then comments are cut off.

Fatwas will be issued by those who email me at vinceautmorire@gmail.com voting for the best captions.

Since the comments/captions also are emailed, when you vote, please put [VOTE] in the subject line.

The top three most popular will be fatwa'd.

Winners announced Monday.

In other words, this is the American Idol of Fatwa Issuing.

Anyone juxtaposing Rusty's upcoming trip to Europe with the glare of the eagle will get super secret double extra consideration, as long as it's hilarious.

Posted by: Vinnie at 12:54 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 134 words, total size 1 kb.

May 06, 2006

Five Â“SuspiciousÂ” Men Detained on AA Flight

The flight was originated in Dallas. An air martial noticed the men and the plane landed in Newark. No word yet on who they are or what made them suspicious. Five men, American Airlines, you get the idea.

AP Via Yahoo News: NEWARK, N.J. - Authorities on Saturday boarded an American Airlines plane and detained five men after it landed at Newark Liberty International Airport, according to a spokesman for the airport's operator.
The plane was bound from Dallas Fort Worth International Airport when an air marshal notified authorities of five men he considered suspicious, according to Marc LaVorgna, a spokesman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
Port Authority police took the five men into custody immediately after the plane landed at 3:20 p.m., LaVorgna said.

WeÂ’ll update when more details become available.

Update : via Brignt and Early:

The men _ identified only as four Angolan military personnel and an Israeli _ were traveling back to their respective home countries after attending helicopter training school in Texas, said Steven Siegel, a spokesman for the FBI's Newark office.
Fellow passengers on Flight 1874, which had departed from Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, became suspicious of the men because they were speaking in foreign languages and had "aircraft flight materials" with them, Siegel said.

Hey at least we know people are aware and watching. False alarm.

Posted by: Howie at 03:25 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

British Copter Downed, Iraqis Cheer (video / images)

A British military helicopter crashed in the predominately Shia city of Basra today. Reports from the crash indicate Iraqi cheered the helicopter crash and threw stones at British troops who arrived at the scene.

Image: AP. Video of the aftermath here.

The Iraqis involved were followers of Muqtada al-Sadr. It boggles the mind that al-Sadr and his militias weren't wiped out long ago. In recent weeks, members of al-Sadr's Mehdi Army have begun to mimick the tactics of other insurgent groups and have begun posting propaganda films on the internet. Up to this point, the Mehdi Army has simply claimed to be a militia fighting to protect Shia from Sunni abuses. Recently, a group claiming to be the Mehdi Army posted video of an attack against a Coalition tank. This is not a good sign.

All four of the British troops are reported dead. Tragic.

So much for the alleged success of the British whose 'hands off' occupation policy is so often seen as succesful in 'winning the hearts and minds' of the Iraqi people. Is it better to be feared or loved? Feared.

In related news, a U.S. CH-47 Chinook helicopter has been downed in Afghanistan. Ten U.S. soldiers were killed. (hat tip: Traderrob). A bad day for our brave soldiers.

Fox:

A British military helicopter crashed in Basra on Saturday, and Iraqis hurled stones at British troops and set fire to at least one armored vehicle that rushed to the scene. Clashes broke out between British troops and Shiite militias, police and witnesses said....
British forces backed by armored vehicles rushed to the area but were met by a hail of stones from the crowd of at least 250 people, who jumped for joy and raised their fists as a plume of thick smoke rose into the air from the crash site.
The crowd also set at least one British armored vehicle on fire, apparently with a rocket-propelled grenade, but the British soldiers inside escaped unhurt, witnesses said. British fired weapons into the air in an effort to disperse the crowd.
Shooting broke out between the British and armed militiamen, and at least two people, including a child, were killed, Khazim said.
Crowds chanted "we are all soldiers of al-Sayed," a reference to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, an ardent foe of the presence of foreign troops in Iraq.

The Left Coaster predicts this will drive the Brits out of Iraq sooner.

This guy says: IÂ’d like to think that the people who are throwing rocks at the burning wreckage of the helicopter are terrorists. I'd suggest watching the video.

Clarity and Resolve call it: Mogadishu, Somalia Redux

Robert Spencer: Tiny Minority of Extremists and They'll Welcome Us As Liberators Updates

Posted by: Rusty at 11:36 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 4 kb.

1 As I reminded my British family, who also talk about the success of the British forces in Basra and mark it as a success of how the British forces handle the local population, vs 'Cowboy' American tactics of storming their houses, and dragging the occupants out at gunpoint. Basra isn't the Sunni Triangle. The Mardi army needs to be dismantled in Iraq, and I don't believe that the U.S isn't going to revisit their conflict with them; The Mardi Army is the main source of Iranian influence via their puppet 'mookie'

Posted by: davec at May 06, 2006 12:13 PM (CcXvt)

2 "Is it better to be feared or loved" Always better to be loved. Maybe your question was meant to be "Is it better to be hated or feared?"

Posted by: john Ryan at May 06, 2006 12:17 PM (TcoRJ)

3 No, I meant loved or feared. It's a classic question about power.

Posted by: Rusty at May 06, 2006 12:22 PM (JQjhA)

4 Just wait till the bombs start falling on Iran... The Brits will be in deep poopoo in Southern Iraq.

Posted by: Ariya at May 06, 2006 12:38 PM (yHb0A)

5 I have great respect for those soldiers for not firing their machinepistols until they run out of ammo! It's a never ending story with these Monkeys... Yes, Monkeys!!!

Posted by: Dan at May 06, 2006 12:52 PM (Z2OsI)

6 But guys, democracy is democracy, and the human soul yearns to be free. Didn't Bush tell you that?

Posted by: MiB at May 06, 2006 01:01 PM (5kwsD)

7 I don't think being feared or loved is in the cards for us. We can't do the things that would make us feared without losing the support necessary to continue the occupation. And as Machiavelli pointed out, their loving us depends on them. There's nothing we can do to make that happen. I'd love to hear of an exception if any of you can think of one, but I think as a rule occupied peoples tend to adore conquering soldiers and despise the MPs/gendarmes that follow in their wake. Even the Nazis were welcomed by Russian civilians--until the SS showed up to police them. Then they had a big partisan problem on their hands and frankly, if the SS couldn't inspire enough fear to cow their subjects into submission, we can't do it either. The bottom line is you can't police armed and hostile people without catching a bullet now and then, and we need to accept that. So far this year 20 officers have been murdered trying to police the U.S. We don't like it, but it's the price we've got to pay. It's stupid to assume as many seem to that we shouldn't have to pay it in Iraq.

Posted by: ShannonKW at May 06, 2006 01:40 PM (dT1MB)

8 MiB, Perhaps your right, thousands of your fellow jumping beans flock to the United States, and complain about the lack of Democracy being extended to them too -- Thanks for reminding us.

Posted by: davec at May 06, 2006 01:47 PM (CcXvt)

9 Firing into the air? Thaq's too high, you mow the sons of bitches down and that will put a stop to that shit.

Posted by: Howie at May 06, 2006 02:18 PM (D3+20)

10 This is a lesson to the brits and to us as well. Arabs are little more than subhuman filth and are incapable of functioning in any democratic society. The quicker the coalition realizes this and liquidates the arab populations the quicker we will have peace and no terrorism.

Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at May 06, 2006 02:49 PM (y+196)

11 If you watch the video you will see that this "demonstration" is actaully only a handful of folks in the center of a crowd of gawkers. They appear to be led by the dude in a white robe whose carrying around the debris. It would be very easy for mookie's cronies to drum up 50-100 folks to show up in the crowd and start chanting (Palestinian terrorists are masterful at this). It doesn't necessarily mean the guy on the street is praising allah for the copter being downed and it really doesn't mean that mookie is the most popular guy in town.

Posted by: TexAg03 at May 06, 2006 03:03 PM (I0vqQ)

12 Yes MiB, the human soul yearns to be free, but arabs aren't human, they're somewhere between rats and dung beetles on the evolutionary scale.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 06, 2006 03:36 PM (0yYS2)

13 Amen, Improbulus.

Posted by: Unashamed Patriot at May 06, 2006 03:54 PM (y+196)

14 I am still somewhat optimistic about Ieaq. But at 58 years I am not sure if I will live long enough to see that happen.

Posted by: john Ryan at May 06, 2006 10:00 PM (TcoRJ)

15 Hmmm ... seems reminiscient of Black Hawk down, Somalia. How many times does it take to learn everytime we try to help around the globe we get slapped in the face and our corpses dragged through the streets? If these people could handle democracy, then democracy they would already have.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 06, 2006 10:52 PM (FCC6c)

16 Arabs are either at your feet or at your neck; they cannot behave as civilized people.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 07, 2006 06:09 AM (0yYS2)

17 I don't know why anyone is concerned. The insurgency is in its last throes. No news here, move along, sheep.

Posted by: jd at May 07, 2006 01:50 PM (aqTJB)

18 " Insurgency in its last throes " ? Is that why there were another 4 bombs today and another 30 dead?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 07, 2006 02:49 PM (FCC6c)

19 Insurgencies typically last anywhere from ten to twenty years, but this isn't a true insurgency; it is a war of conquest, only this time it's on the enemy's turf. Islam's war against civilization has lasted about 1400 years so far, and shows no signs of letting up, so we must keep taking the fight to them, although the gutless liberals would rather bend over for the muslims than fight them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 07, 2006 04:36 PM (0yYS2)

20 Larry--you have GOT to stop reading the liberal MSM. They are in a conspiracy to make you think that Iraq is going badly. They refuse to report all the GOOD NEWS that is going on. They are doing this because they HATE America, and they love Islam. All of them, even the Jewish liberals. Iraq is actually going fabulous because the insurgency has been defeated! (obviously, if it was in its last throes when Cheney said, it's over by now.) Wake up and smell the victory.

Posted by: jd at May 08, 2006 03:57 PM (aqTJB)

21 What the hell good news are you talking about jd? That another muslim has been saved or kept alive so they can keep festering, reproducing suicide bombers? Or that another $billion has gone to prop up some medical facility that will probably get blown to rubble? Get a hint from IM!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 02:38 PM (H9rjL)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Real Life Cripple Fight

Do not laugh at this. I repeat: Do. Not. Laugh. At. This.

Man Without Legs Fights Deaf Guy:

Kent Hisey, 52, became frustrated by the difficulty of James Mills, who is deaf, in communicating directions....Hisey, who has two prosthetic legs, stopped his car at the Porter County Airport, got out and used his walker to go around to the passenger side, where he grabbed Mills to pull him from the car, police said.
Mills allegedly pushed Hisey to the ground, causing him to hit his head.

If you laughed, you are a bad person. A very very bad person.

Posted by: Rusty at 11:09 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

199kb generated in CPU 0.3398, elapsed 0.3997 seconds.
136 queries taking 0.3573 seconds, 529 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 72246
Files: 18
Bytes: 420.9M
CPU Time: 39:35
Queries: 6117475

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76631

Feeds

May 08, 2006

May 07, 2006

May 06, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds