Nullius in Verba

I firmly believe that both the mainstream media (MSM) especially CBC, as well as most socialists would rather see Iraq (and Afghanistan) a destroyed smoking heap than for the Americans to have any success there. That’s how selfish they are.

(The twisted irony is that Socialists more than any other group of people seem to have all the traits of the Seven Deadly Sins)

Whether the invasion was right or wrong, at this moment in life it is what it is.

The real question is now what? Leave when people are most vulnerable and your job is half done?

More news from yet another independent journalist Michael Totten, that you will never hear from the biased MSM. Ramadi in Anbar province was one of the worst places in Iraq and possibly on the planet. Literally the people of the entire city were terrorised and blown to bits by Al Quaeda simply for the benefit of the cameras of the Mainstream Media. Now that the surge is working and the city has been intelligently turned and the people are on the side of sanity things have cleaned up. No attacks in 81 days. The city is boring and the MSM is nowhere to be found.

Violence has declined so sharply in Ramadi that few journalists bother to visit these days. It’s “boring,” most say, and it’s hard to get a story out there – especially for daily news reporters who need fresh scoops every day. Unlike most journalists, I am not a slave to the daily news grind and took the time to embed with the Army and Marines in late summer.

…

“We have one Iraqi lieutenant here who speaks pretty good English,” Marine Lieutenant Jonathan Welch told me. “You should talk to him. He has a sarcastic sense of humor and a really interesting point of view.”

“That would be terrific,” I said. “Can you introduce me to him?”

He went to find the lieutenant, but came back with bad news.

“He won’t talk to you,” he said. “Apparently some reporters recently spent a few days with him and his men. They wrote an agenda-driven story with a few quotes yanked out of context. He said the story was a total lie and that he refuses to have anything to do with the media.”

I heard complaints of that sort about the media every day from American Soldiers and Marines, but this was the first time I had heard it, albeit indirectly, from an Arab Iraqi.

Totten’s report is worth reading. Unbiased reporting is hard to find and thanks to the internet, the power of blogs, and the power of individual private donation we have real reporting.

I was greeted by friendly Iraqis in the streets of Baghdad every day, but the atmosphere in Ramadi was different. I am not exaggerating in the least when I describe their attitude toward Americans as euphoric.

Grown Iraqi men hugged American Soldiers and Marines.

…

Ramadi has changed so drastically from the terrorist-infested pit that it was as recently as April 2007 that I could hardly believe what I saw was real. The sheer joy on the faces of these Iraqis was unmistakable. They weren’t sullen in the least, and it was pretty obvious that they were not just pretending to be friendly or going through the hospitality motions.

…

The Iraqis of Anbar Province turned against Al Qaeda and sided with the Americans in large part because Al Qaeda proved to be far more vicious than advertised. But it’s also because sustained contact with the American military – even in an explosively violent combat zone –convinced these Iraqis that Americans are very different people from what they had been led to believe. They finally figured out that the Americans truly want to help and are not there to oppress them or steal from them. And the Americans slowly learned how Iraqi culture works and how to blend in rather than barge in.

Finally this exerpt I found especially profound:

“We’re learning to use local conflict resolution strategies,” said Colonel John Charlton. “Living with Iraqis every day helps us understand local culture. We’ve actually become attached to these people on a personal level. We feel responsible for their safety. We’re concerned about what will happen to our Iraqi friends if we don’t succeed in this country.”

I heard quite a number of Soldiers and Marines express the same sentiment. Whether it’s true or it isn’t, and whether it’s supposed to be this way or not, sometimes I sensed they feel like they’re fighting for Iraqis more than they feel they are fighting for Americans.  

When one considers exactly how little most of the socialists on campus at either of my universities actually contributed to the lives of others, it is a tiny list indeed. In fact out of all the folks on this planet I meet, socialist are the most selfish people of all. I’ll say it out loud but many people feel the same way.

(This is how socialists truly feel. Greed Jealousy…)

I have been a union shop steward in more than one union. I have been involved in unions, hung around enough unionists, and moreover now that I am occasionally forced to practice medicine, I have handed out more than my share of “get out of work for spurious medical reason” forms than I ever should.

(In truth, it was the free flow of capital, investment, property rights, capitalism and mercantilism that has done more for the common peasant then Karl Marx, Unions, government or any other pretender.)

In my honest opinion about 1 out of 50 grievances are valid. Maybe less. Quite honestly some people deserve a frigging boot to their lazy hides.

I’ll put it this way. I have no problem with people forming a monopoly in order to bargain for higher wages or changes in their workplace. BUT employers should be able to fire them all if they want to and hire new people. If your skills are worth something, employers won’t be so eager to fire you off. And honestly for the most part I have found employers reasonable people.

In fact unions are such a waste of time these days that they actively seek obscure issues to mobilize around because in reality they have nothing better to do. The great majority of people in a union are apathetic and therefore the union leadership gets taken over by busy-bodies who love raising stink and trying to be more important than they really are.

So in the end union leaders tend to be either one of two types. A busy-body of self importance or a thief who is trying to steal as much as he can from other member’s paychecks. Or both. The lackies who attend union meetings are the kind of people who fit into the above categories but aren’t quite able to clamber to the top of the dung heap yet. 

At a union meeting I once said that one way we could increase our employee’s wages is by lowering our union dues. I’ll tell you the blank stares of disbelief I received were worth it. Or the other time when our teacher’s union was trying to “make a bold statement in defence of Palestine and in condemnation of Israel” I said that there were quite a few members who were Jewish in our union and that perhaps we should consider only relavent issues pertaining to employer and workplace in order not to uneccesarily ostracize other members. Whew.

I kind of liked to imagine myself at that time as a sort of Deep Throat or Voice of Conciousness within the union. In reality I was probably just more of a big prick. But there is no more firm a believer than one who was once an anthiest.

I was once a socialist but when I saw the light, it was bright and it showed socialism for the dirty thing it is.

Socialism is racism, it’s modern day Nazism. It discriminates, condemns groups of people, sets societal norms, dictates to the media, controls and corrupts politicians, employers, and people. And it tells lies about utopia to hide its true objectives: putting power into the hands of a select group of people. Racism you ask? Is hiring people based on color anything but racism? Is keeping groups of people on aparthied like slabs of soil not racism?

One thing socialism does well, which parallels Nazism in an extraordinary manner (Read Hitler’s Scientists) is to infect Universities and chase out voices of reason by hiring those who fit their political standard. John Cornwell does a great job of showing that while not only did Hitler appoint politico hacks as Department heads, there were many Nazis and those of like mind within the universities already. The 1930’s were a different time in some ways. If you don’t think so, read Tommy Douglas’ Master’s thesis sometime. The one where he argues that poor people should be sterilized. Remember also that Nazism involved state control of production in ways similar to socialism, not capitalism like some socialists seem to want one to think.

When I first saw that the Britain’s University and College Union (UCU) enact a motion to boycot any Israeli university seminar, meeting, journal, and scientist/academic I though to myself wow boy that sure is myopic and typical of bored unions with nothing better to do but sit on their ivory tower jobs. But I forgot about it like most people tend to do.

So why is a university professor’s union doing this? Well to solve the problem with the Palestinians not having a country, naturally. Why is this myopic? Because the reason the Palestinians don’t have a country (they do have one) has a lot to do with it being their own fault lately, especially since the Palestinians receive more aid per capita than any other nation yet manage to elect stupid leaders like Arafat who steal most of this money and fund gangs of terrorist that kill their own people. Palestinians kill many more Palestinians than Israelis do. Under pressure from the United States Israel has made many accomodations and appears ready to make more. The Palestinians from the start have been the bouncing-ball plaything of the national goals of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia since Israel first clawed itself into a nation. An objective look quickly demonstrates who has hurt these people more. (Before the second intifada for which Arafat held a high degree of blame, a peace existed where 20 percent of Palestinians went to work in Israel daily and the Palestinian GNP grew at 5% a year).

My favorite part of Stephanie Gutmann’s book, “The Other War: Israelis Palestinians and the Struggle for Media Supremacy” in her chapter, Travels With Faraj were these lines which sum up pretty much the entire problem. She’s speaking with a common Palestinian shop owner, a nice guy who she describes as wanting a variety of things just like the rest of us.

The proprietor soon had a new, seemingly “saved up” question for the Westerner who had landed in his restaurant: “Why do the Americans hate the Palestinians?” he demanded.

“Our government doesn’t hate the Palestinians,” I said. “They support an independent state next to Israel. They send money to the Palestinians, millions a year. Why do you think they hate the Palestinians?”

“Because they do no kill Arafat,” he stated matter-of-factly. “They don’t like Saddam; they go get Saddam. So why not Arafat?”

Given the news accounts had recently been full of heads of state and such calling Arafat “the personification of the ideals of the Palestinian people,” I groped for the words for a few seconds, and then stated carefully: “I think… the Americans believe… that Arafat is your guy; that you elected him; that he speaks for you… ”

“He is a crook and a thief,” the proprietor interjected.

Anyhow, does the UCU expect that every Israeli is going to commit self immolation in order to resolve this issue because a bunch of university professors expect them to based upon their myopic view of things? Israel contributes much to scientific literature, and it’s a democratic country where each person gets one vote including the non Jews who become members of their parliament. It’s a Middle Eastern country most intellectual liberals should be proud of.

Well there’s nothing like insanity to fuel the flame of irrelevance. With a smug backhanded blow from the ammunition of the press release, my Queens University stated that they deplore the actions of the UCU.

is antithetical to the core value of academic freedom, which is cherished by Queen’s and other universities around the world.

Freedom of inquiry and expression carries with it responsibilities – to encourage open debate and dialogue, and to listen to and learn from the views of others. We must defend these freedoms of speech and inquiry even as we engage with those whose views may differ greatly from our own. Contemporary society calls for leadership that respects but can also bridge social, cultural, economic and geopolitical divides. I therefore denounce the actions of the UCU and absolutely reject its approach.

Those of us who devote ourselves to the learning and discovery that characterizes the academy must defend the freedom of individuals to study, teach and carry out research without fear of harassment, intimidation or discrimination.

Accordingly, I join with many of my colleagues in stating that, if the British UCU pursues its ill-advised course, we will have no choice but to add Queen’s University ­and many other universities around the world ­ to its boycott list. We are proud to align ourselves with those  who deplore the UCU’s unacceptable attack on the values and principles that define us.

Of course they say one thing. But do another. Queens wants to select more minority admissions so we can all pat ourselves on the back about how progressive we are. Like minorities cannot decide for themselves where they’d like to go in Canada so we have to tell them.

These socialists. If there is one thing that the Middle East has given to universities that the academics want to recognize, instead of the actual historic scientific contribution from the East, is the keffiyeh. These socialists all around the university wear the traditional male arabic headress around their necks in the form of a protest against anything western and in support of Palestine because, I suppose, Arafat wore one. What they don’t want to recognize is that western  culture stands for democracy, human rights, liberties, property rights, peace, tolerance, secularism etc. The only thing I think these gangs in Palestine stand for is terrorism, thievery, chauvanism, religious fanatacism, and indiscriminate death. They keep proving it. These Imams are so revered that if they issued a fatwah on how killing people is satanic, the Middle East would probably be as peaceful as downtown Mariposa. So why don’t they?

The worst thing is that the very gangs like Hamas that these UCU folks support, would in a minute turn on their supporters and cull them for being apostates.

(The woman in the top photo wears a keffiyeh “in support” of Palestine at a rally, meanwhile the guy holding the sign up at the bottom is saying what every socialist there is thinking. In reality the gangs they are supporting, like Hamas, are simply criminals who couldn’t give a damn about human rights. hat tip zombietime)

(For SDA visitors the video link is here) 

When the tragety at Virginia Tech broke out, so to did the hypocrites in their rush to politicize what is really a rare event. An event all first world countries have faced from Sweden to Italy, Canada to the USA.

Guns, they tell us, should be banned.

The problem is that there is no proof that banning guns accomplishes anything (other than possibly harming people). Studies have examined  rates of gun associated crimes between US States that allow carry and conceal vs. States that have strict gun control and find, on average, no difference. There are some criminologists who demonstrate that indeed the carry and conceal States have lower violent crime rates due presumeably to the deterrent of an armed woman while other criminologists argue that the evidence concludes otherwise. In the end my examination of the studies leaves me with the conclusion that there is no proof either way.

Liberals have lost their way on the route of classical liberalism, the philosophy that founded the USA, argueably the most inspirational nation for those great minds who in the 18th to 20th century deemed human rights the moral pursuit of humanity. The tyranny of the state has instead ambushed this moral journey and the old philosophy once mandated by the very people liberals sought to supplant still reigns. The state knows better than the individual.

(Its been a long time since politicians like these were bred.)

Recently self serving frauds like Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and Toronto Mayor David Miller have started calling for handgun bans. Outright bans that is. To possess a legal handgun in Canada is an intense process of which I will not delve into here, but one can easily find information on the procedure. In essense the process is as next to a ban as one can get. McGuinty and Miller are adept at diverting the issue from the real problem: criminality, for which they lack all vision and direction. What is worse, for a politician to say, “I have no solutions for this issue” or to construct a diversion? The media should be all over that type of behaviour - but they aren’t.

What simpler political process is there than to find a rather defenseless scapegoat and legislate a maze of bureaucratic laws for which to point to at the end of the day when you have to explain to the numb public all the work you and your politico hacks have been doing. Nothing looks better than a thick pile of laws to these guys. And it is simply too easy for the media to find numerous ivory tower think-heads to put on TV to repeat the government’s enlightened thinking.

Which brings us to today’s point, the Media and its Hypocrisy. From the days of the first printing press, which enabled commen men to cheaply  print and widely broadcast their own philosophy to a large audience, the founders of journalism have never been said to be unbiased. The opposite, in fact, was expected. Many political parties in the blossoming democracies of Britain, France and the United States long had ties with particular pamphleteers and newspapers for which they could expect favourable exhaltations.

�
(The Discoverie of a Gaping Gulf whereinto England is like to be Swallowed by another French Marriage. 1579. This pamphlet published by John Stubbs cost him his writing hand by decree of Elizabeth I. However it can be said that in the days of the all powerful monarch, the ability to sway large numbers of the public with cheap pamphlets lead to the spread of the ideals of democracy. One writing hand at a time.)

In the 20th century the new schools of journalism started to establish ethical guidelines for integrity in journalism. These involved the lofty ideals of unbiased reporting, covering all sides of an issue, facts based reporting and facts validation, refraining from personal opinion, and refraining from ambush style tactics. Remarkeably like most intelligent ideas, these caught on without requiring any silly laws from the government.

So it is with chagrin, but with no degree of suprise that I see the current mainstream media in Canada, such as CBC and CTV, attempt to “instruct” the rest of us with their “progressive” ideas - ideas garnered from the ivory tower of universities where people with degrees in ecology and biochemistry seem to know more about economic theory, and foreign relations than they do about their own subjects of study*. Sadly, it seems, the mainstream media will even stoop to lying in order to spread their ideas.  In fact they become quite savage when their progressive leftist ideas are challenged.

You see time and time again you’ll hear them on CBC and CTV moan on about how same sex marriage is nobody else’s business (I agree) and that we shouldn’t be telling others how to behave or what to do, ie: abortion. Yet the hypocrites, with one sniff of someone wanting to collect handguns or big trucks will suddenly fly into a self-righteous rage. The same kind of rage they mock when it comes from a Catholic right winger railing against abortion or cloning.

Because when it comes down to it CBC and CTV know best what’s good for the rest of us. Sadly I’ve seen the media ramp up its efforts in this direction in regards to almost any political issue. There is no integrity anymore. One of the worst transgressors is Jane Taber of CTV (#24 of the 101 people who are ruining Canada) who regularly inserts her own opinion when moderating a political panel on Question Period. Still the number of schlocks that are not experts who make it onto the newswaves such as Bono, Gore, or Suzuki (all true hypocrites, check out Suzuki’s stink here) compared to the people who may actually know what they are talking about amazes me.

Stockwell Day must have rued the moment he tried to out-media the media and instead got avalanched like a brontosaurus in a mud-slide. It appeared that the only direction Day was going was extinction, his memory simply another fossil in the evolution of Canadian politics. The media hates Day, because he represents the very opposite of what they self-righteously pat themselves on the back all day for. He is against abortion and cloning, he believes in creation, he calls terrorists: “terrorists” instead of “militants”, and Stock thinks the Firearms Registry is a waste of money. Incredibly Day has turned out to be a very competent minister.

(Hey is that thing burning those mythical fossils? Look at the Greenhouse Gasses this guy wastes.)

So when asked once again by McGuinty and Miller to “ban handguns”, Day correctly points out that the increased control of firearms in Britain has not lead to a decrease in criminality and gun crime. In fact other than one sole year, gun crime has increased. Day is pounded in the media for this statement. The Toronto Star states, “Day’s statements, however, don’t appear to match with the facts.” Unfortunately for the Star, Day’s facts garnered from the UK Home Office are correct and it appears that the Toronto Star just decided to not read the full report. Instead they prefer to insert their own bias into the story, and an evident bias it truly is. Day proves that even though he is a Jesus loving Texas North freak, he still can read his letters better than any Toronto Yankee.

However nothing is worse than this pathetic media harrassment of a young Asian man in Virginia called Wayne Chiang who happens to have some resemblence to the psychopath that did the Virginia Tech massacre. The only resemblence I can find is that the two men were both “Asian”** and they both have guns. Basically this guy gets harrassed and stalked by a bunch of internet warriors because they mistake him for the Virginia shooter. Geraldo picks up the story and ambushes him on air. Soon like the second class stepchild that they are, CTV runs the story and Paula Todd makes a complete fool of herself on air by mocking Mr. Chiang. 

In particular, CTV makes a mistake and accidently broadcasts the off-air discussion between Todd and her crew where she calls Mr. Chiang a “freak”. Her moral superiority just stinks, but it affirms what I originally thought when I saw the interview for the first time: she was mocking Mr. Chiang on air and attempting to make him look stupid and even dangerous. In particular two questions she asks sum up the mentality of the ivory tower today.

“What is your most {…} efficient weapon?” She asks. What does she mean here I wondered? The most efficient for killing people or perhaps she’s wondering which one produces the least Greenhouse Gas output.

and

“Do you know as many people in your age group with as many weapons as you have?” She wonders. Mr. Chiang does know many, probably because he is a member of a gun club and a collector.

Paula Todd simply appears to want Mr. Chiang to apologize for owning guns. It appears the intelligent young man even picks up on her subtleties in the interview. Overall Mr. Chiang presents himself in the interview as an articulate, intelligent, and law-abiding human being. He is no more a freak than anyone else with a hobby. Are his interests worth less than mine or yours? I wonder.

Todd presents herself as an arrogant elitist. In fact when she gets off-air with Breslin her fawning college-girl behaviour is absurd. She perfectly fits the stereotype of the ignorant anchorperson. Something which should be beneath her considering her education. She should be interested in facts.

Mr. Chiang’s story is best described by himself on his own blog, here.

The worst part of this whole debacle is when CTV airs a slideshow of the Virginia Tech shooter which includes pictures of Mr. Chiang amongst those of the murderer. Talk about a smear.

Now watch the three videos (you’ll have to download them because of bandwidth issues):

The Interview where Mr. Chiang gets ambushed

The off air discussion where Paula Todd calls Mr. Chiang a freak

The Slideshow

(Please note the off-air discussion has been banned from YouTube by CTV. I found a link to the file.)

So what other confabulations have the mainstream media been responsible for? What agenda are they pushing? The regretable part of this story is that most people come home from work tired and dump themselves in front of the TV and ask no questions as they absorb the slop from the dirty trough.

And perhaps it will be the internet that saves us from tyranny much like the pamphleteers of old with their cheap media were able to usurp Kings, sway public policy, and teach others to question the implied truth and seek the undeniable facts.

(Is this Grail the Truth or a Legend?)

* If I had a dollar for every time I heard a flower child studing the mating habits of Polar Bears tell me the intricate details behind labour theory and cost accounting and the effects of globalization on market share I’d be a rich man and wouldn’t need to join the Canadian union of old economists who became doctors.

**Whatever Asian really is, is a mystery to me because they’re all as different as a Pole is from a Scot when it comes down to it but still the equalization bean counters like to put them in that slot if they come from somewhere east of Russia and West of the USA.

Dear Enlightened Sirs,

It is with deep regret that I “turn in” my friend Carlo Artieri, however I feel that I must for the good of human relations to denounce this heretic of the worst kind. While many of my friends and colleagues are heretics, Carlo is sufficiently far enough away from me as I write this that he cannot punch me in the head or singe me with the flame of his dangerous evilly evil-ness.

(Carlo won’t be laughing long when the PC police burn his hide on a pile of faggots)

Recently your esteemed organization the UN Human Rights Commission (noted for the fact that none of its works has helped anyone, see the video below) passed this resolution on religion. By religion I take it to mean all UN approved religions including Christianity, one of the religions Carlo always attacks.

Alarmed at the continuing negative impact of the events of 11 September 2001 on Muslim minorities and communities in some non-Muslim countries and the negative projection of Islam in the media, and the introduction and enforcement of laws that specifically discriminate against and target Muslims, Alarmed also at the serious instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence based on religion or belief, intimidation and coercion motivated by extremism, religious or otherwise, occurring in many parts of the world and threatening the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Noting with concern that defamation of religions is among the causes of social disharmony and leads to violations of human rights,
Noting with deep concern the increasing trend in recent years of statements attacking religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums,
1. Expresses deep concern at negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still in evidence in some regions of the world;
2. Strongly deplores physical attacks and assaults on businesses, cultural centres and places of worship of all religions as well as targeting of religious symbols;
3. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions, and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities, in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;
4. Expresses deep concern that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism;
5. Also expresses deep concern at programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at the defamation of religions, in particular when supported by Governments;
6. Deplores the use of the print, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam or any other religion;
7. Recognizes that in the context of the fight against terrorism and the reaction to counter terrorism measures, defamation of religions becomes an aggravating factor that contributes to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of target groups, as well as their economic and social exclusion;
8. Stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, Islam and Muslims in particular especially in human rights forums;

In favour (24): Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Philippines, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Tunisia.

Against (14): Canada (Damn you McKay, you non lap-dog of progressive thought), Czech Republic, Finland, France (WTF), Germany, Guatemala, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

Abstentions (9): Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Ghana, India, Nigeria, Peru, Uruguay and Zambia.

Carlo continually offends humanity by defaming, criticising and attacking religion so its high time for him to be hauled up on the pulpit of the International Criminal Court. Like right now. In fact I hope you don’t wait because he may defame me soon. Carlo can be found in Canada somewhere and I expect that he will be quickly deported to the Hague because unlike that nation of evil gun-toting inbred Jesus worshippers in the United States, we quickly signed off on our citizens and subjected them to the whims non Canadian judges and laws.

(Burn you mother of all deniers)

Defame, is defined via Websters as to “harm the reputation of by slander or libel” and to “humiliate by a superior showing”. Libel can also be defined as “the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures.”

Carlo does all this. (And he’s done it like seven times seven times.)

Carlo’s particular modus operandi is attacking creation, which is a sacred tenet of all important religions like Islam and Christianity, but specifically Islam because its like the most importantest (bless the war-prophet). (Judism doesn’t count because they’re subhuman democratzi-Nazi-wank-off posers in the eyes of the glorious Human Rights Commission and deserve what they get. And should get it as much as possible.)

Some may notice that the signers of this Human Rights Council declaration are well noted for their esteemed beliefs in and strident protection of Human Rights. Of course someone like me, a good Canadian socialist trough feeder, would never consider them complete hippocrites. After all the one religion noted in the declaration would never be intolerant, right?

(All your bases are belong to us)

But listen up all you other fundamental fook-twads. This is currently allowed:

(Before: Ancient Buddha statue in Afghanistan)

(After: Take that you lame ancient statue, yeah.)

Taking the “fun” out of “fundamental” every time. But with quotes like this you cannot go wrong:

Ishaq:470 “We attacked them fully armed, swords in hand, cutting through heads and skulls.” - YEAH!

Qur’an:61:11 “Believers, shall I lead you to a bargain or trade that will save you from a painful torment? That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive and fight in Allah’s Cause with your property and your lives: That will be best for you!”
Qur’an 61:12 “He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens under which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Eden: that is indeed the Supreme Achievement. And another (favor) which you love: help from Allah for a speedy victory over your enemies.” - Gimme my reward!

Tabari IX:25 “By Allah, I [Mohammad] did not come to fight for nothing. I wanted a victory over Ta’if so that I might obtain a slave girl from them and make her pregnant” - Stupid women, weak subspecies.

Thanks UN Committee I’m glad my taxes go to you.

 - langmann

PS

(This guy thought he ended all the fundamentalism with quotes like “love your enemies” etc.
Look where it got him. Oh yeah.)