So Fox is no longer going to blame 100% of violent acts on Islamofacists?
9 comments:
Tog
said...
...Because every act of violence has to be attributed to a religion. Right? 'Cause he's the one who has spent the past several days trying to do exactly that.
Good lord, is Tinsley intentionally mocking himself? Or has he lost his shit to the point he no longer realizes he's arguing our point for us?
I'd really like to see our troll's reaction to this one. AWFU TINSLEY IS GENIOUS AND WE SHOULD ALL BE DRUNK AND WACKTOUTD LIEK HIM YERP U R ALL LIBREAL HATARZ GET A LIEF GNK GNK
(It's also an amazingly lazy strip--once again, one in which the visuals could be copied and pasted from thousands of other equally lazy MF strips--but then, that's the Tinsley Standard. You'd think he'd get tired of drawing the same image over and over and over and over and over...)
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
It's funny though, because Mallard apparently doesn't realize that those founding fathers conservatives have deified to the point where it is impossible for anyone in present times to be smarter, were in fact terrorists, men who used forceful political strategies and eventual guerrilla warfare to undermine the will of the majority (England and the Commonwealth.)
Yeah, good thing Protestantism hasn't had any kind of violent history, in this country or elsewhere. Whew. Have another bottle of research, Tinshley. Maybe you can call up your new drinking buddy who turned up here yesterday.
(Or was "Sasha" simply Anonyrast's inner, frightened eight-year-old -- the one he pictures whenever he's watching the the Disney Channel with the lights out -- coming briefly, tragically, to the fore? It would explain the naivete. And the spelling. Can we speak to "Sasha" now, Anonyrast?)
I can only refer Tinny to two things: 1) the wish that Nelson from spEak You're bRanes [sic] made regarding Stuart Booth's simplified immigration questionnatire; 2) the reply given by Private Eye's editors in re Arkell v Pressdram.
* 2.1 Animal Liberation Front * 2.2 Army of God * 2.3 Black Liberation Army * 2.4 Jewish Defense League * 2.5 Ku Klux Klan * 2.6 Symbionese Liberation Army * 2.7 Weathermen
2.3: probably not 2.4: probably not. 2.5: most likely Baptists
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism_in_the_United_States
I think the point is that Muslims, not Christians are terrorists and if you ignore The Ku Klux Klan, Anti Choicers bombing Family Planning clinics, "Family values" religious cults shouting "God hates fags" ate the funerals of AIDS patients and generations of Protestants and Catholics blowing each other up in Northern Ireland, you're probably rights.
Protestants and Catholics have been murdering each other in large numbers for ages in Europe, and oddly enough, they both apply the "they're terrorists, we're doing God's will" idiocy that Tinsley wishes he could be much more open about.
9 comments:
...Because every act of violence has to be attributed to a religion. Right? 'Cause he's the one who has spent the past several days trying to do exactly that.
Good lord, is Tinsley intentionally mocking himself? Or has he lost his shit to the point he no longer realizes he's arguing our point for us?
I'd really like to see our troll's reaction to this one. AWFU TINSLEY IS GENIOUS AND WE SHOULD ALL BE DRUNK AND WACKTOUTD LIEK HIM YERP U R ALL LIBREAL HATARZ GET A LIEF GNK GNK
(It's also an amazingly lazy strip--once again, one in which the visuals could be copied and pasted from thousands of other equally lazy MF strips--but then, that's the Tinsley Standard. You'd think he'd get tired of drawing the same image over and over and over and over and over...)
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
It's funny though, because Mallard apparently doesn't realize that those founding fathers conservatives have deified to the point where it is impossible for anyone in present times to be smarter, were in fact terrorists, men who used forceful political strategies and eventual guerrilla warfare to undermine the will of the majority (England and the Commonwealth.)
Yeah, good thing Protestantism hasn't had any kind of violent history, in this country or elsewhere. Whew. Have another bottle of research, Tinshley. Maybe you can call up your new drinking buddy who turned up here yesterday.
(Or was "Sasha" simply Anonyrast's inner, frightened eight-year-old -- the one he pictures whenever he's watching the the Disney Channel with the lights out -- coming briefly, tragically, to the fore? It would explain the naivete. And the spelling. Can we speak to "Sasha" now, Anonyrast?)
Lonely, single, pantsless guy, angrily watching TV by himself ...
Tin Eye's gyrations have unintentionally brought him 5% closer to reality today.
I can only refer Tinny to two things:
1) the wish that Nelson from spEak You're bRanes [sic] made regarding Stuart Booth's simplified immigration questionnatire;
2) the reply given by Private Eye's editors in re Arkell v Pressdram.
OK. Timothy McVeigh was a Catholic.
Do you suppose any of these were Presbyterians?
* 2.1 Animal Liberation Front
* 2.2 Army of God
* 2.3 Black Liberation Army
* 2.4 Jewish Defense League
* 2.5 Ku Klux Klan
* 2.6 Symbionese Liberation Army
* 2.7 Weathermen
2.3: probably not
2.4: probably not.
2.5: most likely Baptists
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism_in_the_United_States
Cheers!
JzB
I think the point is that Muslims, not Christians are terrorists and if you ignore The Ku Klux Klan, Anti Choicers bombing Family Planning clinics, "Family values" religious cults shouting "God hates fags" ate the funerals of AIDS patients and generations of Protestants and Catholics blowing each other up in Northern Ireland, you're probably rights.
Protestants and Catholics have been murdering each other in large numbers for ages in Europe, and oddly enough, they both apply the "they're terrorists, we're doing God's will" idiocy that Tinsley wishes he could be much more open about.
Post a Comment