Religious Defamation

Since the U.N. passed a resolution against religious defamation, would it be insensitive to name this guy Muslim of the Week?

18 Comments

  1. A. The un is a worthless leftist organization and should be nuked.
    B. muslems are useless humanoid feces and should be nuked.
    C. Should you be required to do something extraordinary to be named muslem/dung/that one of the week? Blowing yourself up because you are to stupid to be a homocide bomber is par for most of the islamabombobamorons.
    D. Why don’t they ever have great video of one of them loser offing themselves. That would make for hours of laughs.

  2. That is insensitive, Frank, especially if you start talking with an accent, like this:

    “Islam Islam.”

    “I slam Islam.”

    “I slam Islam with moose limbs.”

    “Islamo slam slam Alah aalaaa alala aalalala Achmed.”

    So, yes, we must always try our utmost to be sensitive to these things.

  3. So, it’s now a bad thing to call them towel-headed, camel-buggering, pedophile-following, women-fearing pansies? I guess we can still call Hindus, “Dot-heads”, Christians, “Bible-thumping clinic bombers”, Jews, “Money-grubbing sons-of-swine.”, etc.?

    Hmm. Interesting. You know, we could take care of the terrible mockery that Islam must endure rather easily. A pogrom against muslims. I mean, since they think we should all convert or die, we should return the favor.

    Could the UN be anymore irrelevant, or do they have new ows to which they will sink and surprise us all.

    I say Nuke Turtle Bay.

  4. I think we should honor this Muslim’s sacrifice by nominating him for the Darwin Awards…where only the most imbecile, idiotic, monumentally stupid acts are recognized. Of course, given that this idiot was just following the established methods of procedure…should we not just nominate the entire ‘Jihad Squad’…which includes pretty much every 18-40 year old Muslim male who sees the US as the Great Satan?

    It would certainly make things easier and simpler…and would have the added benefit of heaping just a wee bit more contempt on our One-World friends in the U.N.

  5. The only thing wrong that that guy did was not have enough explosives on his vest to take out the entire camp. I wonder what happens to him in Islam heaven now? 72 San Francisco chicken-hawks? We ought to tell these guys that if they suicide bomb the UN, they’ll get 144 virgins…or better yet, as Walter (Jeff Dunham) says, “72 slutty broads that know what they’re doing!”

  6. Why should anyone in the US care what the UN says? If we ignore them what will they do? 1) pass countless meaningless resolutions condemning us, and then possibly 2) send in American troops. Umm…okay.

  7. I read that at the end of WWII, some Japanese Kamakasi pilots were less than 100% enthusiastic about their missions.
    At least one strafed his own base before flying off to meet his destiny.
    This fellow might have resented the fact that his buddies were so eager to send him on his way.
    “Comrades! Let me embrace you one last time! (suckers!)”
    Hopefully this will mark the beginning of a new trend.

  8. Pingback: IMAO » Blog Archive » Question

  9. Pingback: Steynian 342 « Free Canuckistan!

  10. It’s good to laugh.

    “Instead of looking at books and pictures about the New Testament, I looked at the New Testament. There I found an account, not in the least of a person with his hair parted in the middle or his hands clasped in appeal, but of an extraordinary being with lips of thunder and acts of lurid decision, flinging down tables, casting out devils, passing with the wild secrecy of the wind from mountain isolation to a sort of dreadful demagogy; a being who often acted like an angry god – and always like a god.
    … The diction used About Christ has been, and perhaps wisely, sweet and submissive. But the diction used By Christ is quite curiously gigantesque; it is full of camels leaping through needles and mountains hurled into the sea.
    … Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian.
    … The Trememdous figure that fills the gospels towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on His open face at any daily sight, such as the far sight of His native city.
    Yet, He concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their anger. He never restrained His anger. He flung furniture down the front steps of the Temple, and asked men how they expected to escape the damnation of hell.
    Yet, He restrained something. I say it with reverence; there was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation.
    There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our Earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth.”
    – GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.