Monday, January 23, 2006


Shiva's doing all the work today, and doing it very nicely indeed:

Politically Incorrect Guide to-- GUESS WHAT

The Taliban found offense in the ancient statues of Buddha in Bamiyan, Afghanistan, and blew them to bits. These Muslims also found offense in several smaller and much easier to destroy ancient clay and wood-carved statues at the same location. All of these irreplaceable pieces of history were destroyed because some Muslims found them "offensive." Should the great pyramids of Egypt be destroyed if someone finds them offensive?

The Taliban also found music, flying kites, dancing of any kind, women leaving the house without a male family member, and balloons offensive. Any woman leaving the house without being covered from head to toe was so offensive that she risked being beaten to death.

Strict Islamics find the human female body offensive and believe that every woman should be covered from head to toe. Muslims will tell you that they cover their women out of modesty and respect but this simply isn't the case. Strict Islamics believe a woman is born in sin and is just one living, breathing sin that needs to be covered at all times so that the public cannot see her shame. If a woman crosses a man's path while he is praying, he must begin anew because the woman is offensive to Allah.

An incomplete list of people Islamics also seem to find offensive is: all Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, ex-Muslims, and all non-Muslims.

These days, it seems that Sunni Muslims find Shia Muslims to be offensive as well.

Also offensive is any reference to the Quran by non-Muslims that does not expound on how every word is perfect and written by God himself. Anything less than complete agreement is an offense that often carries a death sentence. Just ask Salman Rushdie, author of "Satanic Verses," who had to hide for years to stay alive, and Theo Van Gogh, who paid with his life for speaking the truth about Islam.

Strict Islamic countries find women wearing white socks sexually provocative and offensive. Pictures of humans or animals are offensive and men who shave their faces are offensive. Card playing is offensive. Girls attending school and receiving an education are offensive. Women who vote are also offensive.

A woman daring to leave her home without permission even to rush her sick child to a doctor is offensive. Of course, female doctors are offensive, so any woman requiring medical care can't receive it because all the doctors are men.

Islamics also seem to be offended by America, Great Britain, Poland, Israel, Australia, Spain, Italy, Japan, Russia, and New Zealand, just to mention a few countries. Interestingly, Islam doesn't seem to be as offended by France or Germany.

In fairness, what Islam doesn't find offensive should be examined. Many Muslims did not find the murder of 3,000 people on 9/11 offensive. Saddam Hussein, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of fellow Muslims, was not offensive. Forbidding the practice of other religions in an Islamic country is not offensive while daring to question what might be going on inside a mosque in America, is terribly offensive.

The murder of thousands of Iraqi Muslims doesn't seem to offend Islamics, as long the killing is being done by other Muslims. If an American soldier kills a Muslim trying to kill him, that is offensive. The beheading of helpless prisoners by "freedom fighters" is not offensive. Putting mass murderers in a prison camp that provides good food, allows time to pray, provides copies of the Quran and prayer rugs, gives medical and dental care, and allows Islamic clerics to provide the prisoners with religious council, is offensive.

The Quran touching the floor is offensive but urinating on or burning the Bible is not. Profiling people from Islamic countries that support terrorism is offensive but imprisoning Christians for wearing a cross is not.

Teaching people about Islam is encouraged, but teaching Christianity is a beheading offense.

Any American who does not want the Quran replacing the Constitution and who speaks out against Islam is immediately labeled an "Islamaphobe." When Islam is involved, there is no freedom of speech.

Another thing that doesn't seem to offend many Muslims is the killing of a ten-year-old rape victim. She must have been "asking for it." The little vixen soiled the family name and was probably wearing white socks. Also not offensive is the stoning to death of women who are merely suspected of "being with a man not their husband." Hanging college students who dare to speak out against oppressive and cruel ayatollahs isn't offensive to many Muslims either.

Muslims are not offended by the age-old Islamic tradition of forcing their young daughters to marry their 60-year-old uncles. Girls as young as 12 are forced to marry their cousins and occasionally even their half-brothers. This is done to keep the family money in the family. However, this practice also produces the genetic defects caused by constant inbreeding.

However, this practice also produces the genetic defects caused by constant inbreeding.


eyesallaround said...

Cute! My dogs find them offensive too, and snarl, growl and snap whenever we pass a "Darth Vadar" at the park:>) I think dogs can sense these things...

dag said...

Shiva is in the thick of things, and when he writes and posts graphics I have a lot of sympathy for him, concern, and admiration.

The last graphic is over the top, I think, but when one sees the result of primitive culture on the lives of children then really there isn't much left for the average man but to hate the people who do that. If your beast were to attack a monster who deliberately destroys the life of a child, who perpetrates the hotrors of genrations upon generations of inbreeding from a sense of xenophobia and greed, then I'd be proud to walk the dog some day.

t-ham said...

While discussing weighty matters with a friend, I remarked that it seemed to me that every photo of muslims I had ever seen had them either with their foreheads to the ground, or joining in some enraged bellowing, their veins bulging. Zero to sixty without much in between.

The fellow in the photo seems downright affable.

eyesallaround said...

They'd be proud to walk by your side, I'm sure of that:>)

dag said...

Tell them I say "Whoof!"

Jamie Ayse Oguzoglu said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jamie Ayse Oguzoglu said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dag said...

Jamie, I got your posts regardless, and I feel a great deal of sympathy for your postion. However, your good intentions do not resolve the problem many of your coreligionists raise in reference to canonical texts justifying exactly those acts you say they are wrong to commit. And though I've met many Muslims face to face, Islam is not a person, and the two are not the same.

Jamie Ayse Oguzoglu said...

After reading some of the other things you've written and the replies to them, I must say, I'm surprised by yours to mine.

I knew you'd get my comments, but after reading a few posts from others, I felt a little worried to have mine out there. Theres alot of hate in some of these posts people feel for Muslims. As these comments are not all directed to the psychos in the east, I felt it best to remain 'not so public'.

Therefore, I made my comments directly to you because it was to you with whom I wanted to discuss this with. I do however appreciate your answer to them.

Some or allot may hate Islam and even Muslims, but in my heart, I truly believe we will all have to answer to God. That includes any immoral things done, even if they say it's for Allahs beautiful sake. That only makes it ten fold wrong. And, I pray I am right in saying so.

Again, I've appreciated the correspondence.

dag said...

Jamie, I'm glad you returned to leave a message. In spite of my occasional moments of hysteria I do not feel any hatred toward anyone other than those who harm others for no reason whatsoever, and that includes Muslims as fully as anyone else. We, most of us, are humanitarians who hate violence against our fellows. If we see Islam as a source of violnce, which I do having lived in Muslim lands for too long, then it is morally imperative to end it. Without recourse to the authority of God, Jamie, with nothing other than intuitiion and reason, we fight evil as we see it, and in practice that means Islam. I have some nasty scars, I'm proud to relate, gained in defence of Muslims. Jamie, not I nor any man I know will stand by and let another hurt you. Not going to happen. Not one of us cares about your religious beliefs. We don't have to know you or like you or even want to be any where near you for all it matters. Your Humanness makes you our friend to the extent that we'll do what we must to save you from harm by others. Islam is harm.

Many of us know enough about Islam from living in dar al Islam and in our studies to state that we know Islam far better than the average Muslim. We also know that it's no good to trample on another's beliefs, to insult people personally, to express our hatred of their opinions. But, having made that point, I must go on to say that Islam is harm in itself. I can't, and I won't stand by idly as Islam poisons the minds of children who grow up to kill.

Lastly, I hope you can see that though I have no good feelings or experiences of your religion I have many good things in mind regarding Muslims. You, for example, seem to be a sensitive and decent person. That urges us on to do more to restrain Islam so that if you choose to remain a Muslim you can do so without fear of death at the hands of your fellows. If you wish to practice the path of Islam, it's not for us to say. Nor, though, is it for your fellows to define Islam, and they do, as you know. We in the West must then restrain our own dhimmi cheerleaders who extol the virtues of yours who would in time kill you. We have to rein in our own fools who've paid yours to go insane. Our own cannot continue to promote murder, cannot continue to finance HAMAS and send middle class children like Rachel Corrie to Israel to die trying to promote the corruption of Islamic fascism.

To save Muslims from the evils of Muslim insanity we have to make our own accountable for their support of terrorism and hatred. Dhimmis can't do a thing for you. I can. I can start by making my friends stop their support of those who would attack you. I can do my part by bringing back to reason my friends who might otherwise lose control in the face of torment and attack you because of your fellow religionists. How I do that might be unpleasant.

This harshness, (oh I hate writing this,) is for the good of all.

Jamie, thanks for writing.

Anonymous said...

"Strict Islamics believe a woman is born in sin and is just one living, breathing sin that needs to be covered at all times so that the public cannot see her shame. If a woman crosses a man's path while he is praying, he must begin anew because the woman is offensive to Allah."

You worked this out, how?

dag said...


parts of the body that are not supposed to be exposed to others. For men this is from the navel to the knee. For the women it is all of her body except the hands, feet, and face.

Please look further on your own. I'm busy.

Anonymous said...

OK, I'll make it harder to hide behind generalities:

"Strict Islamics believe a woman is born in sin" : You have no basis for this statement. Original sin is a concept found in Christianity. It would be interesting to contrast the beliefs of strict Jews and Christians if you're so keen to look at it from a religious point of view. But, of course, you have no time for this. :)

"If a woman crosses a man's path while he is praying, he must begin anew because the woman is offensive to Allah." : No basis for this statement either.

dag said...

Original sin is not the case under debate, nor is St Ausgusine. The uestion you lead me to believe, and that you think yu're asking Shiva, is about Awrah. Females are not born with original sin, they are born as sin itself. You have no point to make so far. If you can sthink clearly enough long enough to pose a question our readers and I can follow I'll find the time to address it.

Anonymous said...

Well if you choose to reproduce "Shiva"'s material you are obviously agreeing with an article full inaccuracies and thinly veiled lies.

His article is trivial and childish. He has simply assumed things about 'white socks' and being born 'as sin' that are completly ludicrous.

I didn't ask a thing about Awrah or St Augustine. I gave you two quotes from an article full of rubbish to comment on which you seem unable to respond to. Instead you are choosing to claim that you can't understand what I'm writing.

You're disappointing your legions of readers by being unable to respond intelligibly. :)