Now that it’s illegal to do so…
…I’d like to take this opportunity to point out that Islam is not a religion, but a death cult with the usual sexual component of female subjugation and underage rape.
Have a nice day.
19 Comments - Join in the conversation below »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
“Illegal”??
What, the Evil Islamist Subway Not-Bomber wasn’t enough dramatic fiction for a week?
A UNHRC resolution isn’t binding in any way on anyone on the planet.
Comment by balbulican — March 28, 2009 @ 7:29 am
Islam turns people into foaming barbarian monkey savages who are fit only for display behind bars, whether those of a prison or a zoo. This vile false “religion”, which was founded by a perverted, demon-possessed, camel-urine-drinking child molester from the desert is a blight upon the earth, and must be erased from history.
Comment by BillyHW — March 28, 2009 @ 9:14 am
That’s why I love your site, RG. It’s the sophistication and theological subtlety of the readership.
Comment by balbulican — March 28, 2009 @ 9:23 am
wendy, you racist bastard! LMAO!
I am still hopeful that as we continue to give the muzzies leeway and latitude that the sleeping giant that is freedom is beginning to get really pissed off. We shall arise from our catatonic state, firmly plant our collective boots in the asses of our “leaders” and exercise the righteous indignation that is ours.
In the land of Labatts, tooks and kooks, the good people of the prairie and plain - AL, SK & MB, need to remember their values and beliefs are the guiding principles and tenets of life. It’s not what some bidet full of human rights commissioners have deemed to be right.
Rise up and challenge. Stop the insanity. If civility fails, take it to the next level, but do not allow it to go unchecked. Look at Malmo. Look at the Paris suburbs. Look at Amsterdam. Is that what Canadians and Americans want for their countries, for their people, for their families???? I think not.
Sorry to be so verbose, but I am one of those people who has done all that was asked to defend and protect my country and it’s people, and now I see it all being given away without a fight. And I am simply not prepared to give up without a fight.
As was said in a movie long ago…..”WOLVERINES!!!”
KP
Bonum certamen certavi, cursum consummavi, fidem servavi.
- 2 Timothy 7
Comment by KP — March 28, 2009 @ 9:23 am
Now, now, you are exaggerating. As a worshiper of the pedophile priest, I assure you that the only times I worship death is when one of my female family members shames my honor by exposing her ankle in public. Well, that and when I get the chance to kill any infidels, but that isn’t really a “death cult” is it? I think you misunderstand. I bring peace to people. Eternal peace.
And sure, I occasionally have to “discipline” my women, but they deserve it, and I always apply the “rule of thumb”. I have not broken any bones in several days, at least.
I will not even respond to the underage rape charge because my attorney has informed me not to do so.
It is so wonderful to be accepted as I am in my “adopted” country. I could not continue to live the way I do if not for the, what are they called, oh yes, USEFUL IDIOTS, who defend my cult, I mean religion, as being simply a choice of conscience. I mean, really, how stupid can a person be? One has to wonder if, while sending them to Allah, they wouldn’t ask, I mean gurgle, “why are you doing this?” As if it were ANYTHING other than a death cult, I mean religion of peace. It isn’t like the expansion of Islam across the globe has been drenched in blood. Ok, it has been, but we are different now. I mean, there are a billion of us, doesn’t that, by default, mean we can’t be evil?
Comment by Ifuckah Acamel — March 28, 2009 @ 5:54 pm
Poor Balb. He wanders the blogosphere searching for a place where his self-righteous outbursts will cause someone to pause and listen to him.
Comment by Louise — March 28, 2009 @ 7:12 pm
Heh. And poor Louise grimly follows Balb, adding nothing to the discussion but a sophomoric insult - as always.
Just correcting Wendy’s error, Louise.
Comment by balbulican — March 29, 2009 @ 7:10 am
Is this meant as parody?
“Heh. And poor Louise grimly follows Balb, adding nothing to the discussion but a sophomoric insult - as always.”
The person who assures us that: anyone who might think that a person yelling about rights and Osama bin Laden, and shouting Allah Akbar, can’t possibly be considered a potential terrorist and ADDS NOTHING TO THE DISCUSSION BUT SOPHOMORIC INSULT, then accuses it in another? Too funny!
You really can’t make up this kind of stuff. We parody the Lefturd as a simpering, childish coward with nary an original thought, and then one comes along and proves without a shadow of a doubt that they are indeed, simpering, childish, cowards who can only regurgitate Leftard talking points created by others.
They then congratulate themselves for being “progressive” or “reality based”.
Please, balbulican, for RG’s sake, for the sake of all that is decent, don’t stop. Every time you post, you assure us that RG is indeed “right”, in more ways than one.
However, I am sure you make the Imams of the world VERY pleased. Useful idiot indeed!
Comment by Marshall Gill — March 29, 2009 @ 9:21 am
Let’s look on the positive, shall we? Now if a preacher says “homosexuality/abortion/same sex marriage is wrong, according to the bible”, it will be illegal to criticize. Wait, that’s not positive… I’ve never had a problem defending my beliefs… and I don’t need a law to protect me from criticism either.
Comment by Heather Cook — March 29, 2009 @ 9:53 am
“Please, balbulican, for RG’s sake, for the sake of all that is decent, don’t stop.”
Not to worry. I certainly won’t. Since it seems the subway dude wasn’t, in fact, a terrorist, and since the UN resolution hasn’t made ANYTHING illegal, it seems you really DO need someone to help keep you in touch with reality. Only to happy to be of service, and thanks for the encouragement.
Comment by balbulican — March 29, 2009 @ 1:31 pm
[...] GIRL ON THE RIGHT– “Now that it’s illegal to do so… I’d like to take this opportunity to point out [...]
Pingback by Steynian 341 « Free Canuckistan! — March 29, 2009 @ 5:28 pm
“the subway dude wasn’t, in fact, a terrorist”.
“In fact”? Don’t you mean “the OJ jury did not convict the subway dude of terrorism”? There is a BIG difference, one even a Leftard could possibly understand.
Typically, the Leftard attempts to hide reality through the use of language. Since the worshiper of Mo’ caused people to be terrified, for GOOD reason, he IS a terrorist, even if not convicted by the “justice system” in Canada.
Does the Leftard now claim to look into the hearts of people and know if they are experiencing terror? More “reality”?
You do provide a service. I claim that the Leftard is mentally challenged and that they can’t make coherent arguments. I claim that they basically lack a soul. I claim that they are fatuous, silly, ignorant, and malicious. I can claim it all day long, but you prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Comment by Marshall Gill — March 30, 2009 @ 8:17 am
“Don’t you mean “the OJ jury did not convict the subway dude of terrorism”?”
Nope. What I mean is that a crazy dude yelled stuff in the subway, and that’s all. Nothing else happened. If you want to define “terrorist” as “someone who frightens people”, be my guest: but that’s not what the word means.
Now, would you perhaps like to try make the argument that a UNHRC resolution somehow makes something “illegal”?
Comment by balbulican — March 30, 2009 @ 8:40 am
balbu, I suggest you pick up a dictionary and see the definition of terrorist. Let me make it easy for you (I invite you to carefully read and try to comprehend definition 2, below):
terrorist Show Spelled Pronunciation [ter-er-ist]
–noun 1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
3. (formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.
4. an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.
–adjective 5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of terrorism or terrorists: terrorist tactics.
I know it’s a challenge, but don’t be a mindless twit. It’s bad enough that you are some kind of obamadroid…..
Comment by Kbob in Katy — March 30, 2009 @ 3:13 pm
Gosh, kbob - well, if that’s the case, then the little kid who pops a balloon behind another little kid’s head is a “terrorist”.
Now, think hard. Do you think that’s the meaning that Wendy and friends were suggesting?
Comment by balbulican — March 30, 2009 @ 4:48 pm
“well, if that’s the case, then the little kid who pops a balloon behind another little kid’s head is a “terrorist”.”
You’re ridiculous.
Comment by MissAlyss — March 30, 2009 @ 6:25 pm
Stunning rebuttal, MissAlyss.
Comment by balbulican — March 31, 2009 @ 5:51 am
Short, sweet, and to the point.
Comment by MissAlyss — April 1, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
And utterly devoid of substance.But that’s okay.
Comment by balbulican — April 2, 2009 @ 11:59 am