Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.

 

« Previous | Next »


Prepare For Operation: Desert Troll

Political pictures - Prepare For Operation: Desert Troll


Trolling the Tea Party
is apparently too easy for 4chan, so they’ve decided to ramp up their political trolling to the next level with the implementation of Operation: Desert Troll. I love watching Anon do what they do best, especially when major news organizations pick up their stories as fact.

I’m almost certain we’ll see something about Hamid Karzai converting to Christianity before the end of August from at least one of the major media outlets like Fox News or MSNBC. But who will it be? Who will fall for the rumor? Anyone care to make a guess?

Incorrect source or offensive?
  • Share on Facebook
  • Copy & paste this:

» 508 comments

  1. Some Guy says:

    You know, I strive to consider every group of people on the face of this planet in light of their accomplishments and not just their failings. Every people group has something to contribute to our global society; some unique nuance that betters us all as people.

    But no, I realize it’s a crock of bullcrap when I consider 4chan. Pretty much devoid of any use.

    • Pulse says:

      Someone here said that 4chan is actually a site most frequented by Furries and is really a forum with all kinds of bizaare stuff on it.
      Sounds about right for this kind of mentality.

    • Derp Derp says:

      @Some Guy

      That is the whole point of 4chan and more specifically Anon. They do what they want, when they want, because they can for not other reason than because they can.

      • Zipper says:

        ‘what they want’ as long as it doesnt include actually getting in physical reach of the people they act against.

        Defacing facebook pages — ooooh thats real ‘risky’ and heroic

        Bunch of fecking script kiddees who are ‘great’ in their own minds and probably shunned by normal people in RL. Real hackers dont associate with feebs like that.

        • Philly Mom says:

          Whatever… heh… more than 240 characters & I don’t read it.

          Down with TowlHeads! hur hur…

        • kurisu7885 says:

          Yeah, because they totally didn’t protest outside of the church of scientology, which is extremely risky giving how sue happy that church is.

          • Zipper says:

            People who have no money dont have to fear lawyers in civil cases much.

            So they were in ‘danger’ from lawyers??? Riiiiight.

            • Anon says:

              No, they were in danger from the Church of Scientology’s harassment tactics. It doesn’t matter if you have money or not, Co$ will do everything they possibly can to make your life miserable. And they’re very, very good at it.

            • jklinders says:

              They are considered a harmful cult in more one country for a reason zippy. Do a bit of research on them. They are down right scary. Same goes for 4chan

              • I Like Peanut Butter but Don't Like Peanut Butter says:

                Scientologists will send Tom Cruise to your house. Nuff said.

                • Naliord, proud AANM member says:

                  I think that works the same way as nuclear weapons – the threat alone is enough to quell any danger of attack.

        • Wicket says:

          I’m amused when the ignorant try and explain subject-matter that they obviously have no freaking clue about.

        • Shipoopi says:

          i’m at a loss for where someone said it was supposed to be heroic

    • Serifina says:

      And yet 4chan (and /b/tards in particular) have done helpful things, such as actually catching a murderer.

      It’s not all a cesspool people make it out to be. It’s just that the cesspool is easier to find, and more visible, there.

      • Skeptic says:

        Really? What? When was this?

        I want details so I can see the story for myself. Story link or it didn’t happen.

      • Zipper says:

        some perp posted on 4chan (the furry site) and they cooperated with police — is it something like THAT which is ‘catching a murderer’ ???

        • danielsangeo says:

          So, these would be other subjects (4chan and furries) that you don’t know anything about?

          Oh, and cooperating with police is helping to catch a murderer, so yes.

        • Serifina says:

          You’re a troll, and another person who’s never been to 4chan. It’s not a ‘furry’ site, no more than ICHC is a furry site for posting kittens. I believe there’s a single board there dedicated to furries, but there’s boards there dedicated a lot of different things.

          And yes, cooperating with police is helping to catch a murderer.

      • Obsyd says:

        Saying 4chan has done something helpful or useful is like saying that since syphilis might have contributed to the death of Ivan the Terrible it’s not all bad.

        It’s still a crappy disease just like 4chan.

    • TomTom says:

      Rude and offensive.

  2. manchowder says:

    Probably see it on msnbc (mslsd), they usually broadcast made up nonsense.

  3. Icesnake says:

    How can you mention “major news outlets” and “Faux News” in the same paragraph and not sh*t yourself laughing?

    • danielsangeo says:

      I can do it. “The major news outlets should be different from Faux News in that they need to report on the facts, not opinion.”

      • Zipper says:

        ‘need’ (or rather should) and what they ACTUALLY do (spew out leftard pablum for people like you) are very different things. Libtard media doesnt even bother to lie anymore by denying accusations that they are leftwing-biased as they did for more than a decade.

        • danielsangeo says:

          Dude, if you knew ANYTHING about the left-wing, you’d know that the major media outlets are anything but “left wing”.

          • manchowder says:

            Man, what are you smoking? “Major” media not left wing? Wow, thats really really funny!! Even they admit it!!

            • danielsangeo says:

              [citation needed]

              • Paws4thot, the PK Booty Caller and founder of the AANM says:

                Ok.

                Manchowder, I’m writing you a ticket for a 701 – being a right-wing @ss-hat in a public place. Pay the fine to 4chan. ;)

                • danielsangeo says:

                  Awww, leave him alone. He doesn’t know any better. The poor little dear.

                • manchowder says:

                  Not a right winger at all. I am a proud independant, and I don’t like what is going on in Washington. Looks to me that someone had a little too much kool-aid today. Lay off that stuff, it will rot your brain!

                  • danielsangeo says:

                    Translation: “Right winger but don’t want to admit it.”

                    • Dr Oh-No says:

                      “kool aid” is a give-away, like “tax payer dollars.”
                      It’s kinda cute that they have code-words. :P

                      • OutOfTheBox says:

                        does s/he know what “independent” means?

                        an independent can be right or left wing, simple or radical. just means they’re not affiliated with an organized political party.

                        so s/he is an independent, I’m sure. s/he is certainly way out there in the stratosphere alone (notice how s/he has this fixation on masturbation? definitely alone.)

                        but also extreme right-wing.

                      • jklinders says:

                        Love it when these fellows use 40 year old insults like they are fresh and innovative. Then you have the other insults which were obviously taken from overhearing an argument between 2 12 year old boys.

                  • Wino says:

                    You can be a right winger and still be an ‘independent’ or even a proud one at that.

            • kurisu7885 says:

              Care to explain to me how Glenn Beck is left wing?

          • Zipper says:

            Delusional just as they want you to be.

            • danielsangeo says:

              Sorry, but you’re not qualified to make that statement. Your knowledge on a wide range of issues is nonexistent, but that doesn’t stop you from just making stupid crap up and trying to pass it off as real.

              As soon as you start showing that you have a clue about what you’re talking about, perhaps my perceptions of you will change. However, until that time…

  4. TinCanOnAString says:

    Hey! Did you guys hear the news? Hamid Karzai converted to Christianity.

  5. TC says:

    This is actually kind of scary… why are people trying to stir up the the nut jobs attacking civilians and our soldiers? Do we really want to lose more American lives over someone’s twisted idea of a joke?

    • Green Beard the Canuck says:

      Ummm… when did you engage in combat with Iran?

      Last time I checked the US was all for (though hands off) the Iranian dissidents in their fight to put Karzai to the curb. Anonymous is international so this can’t be blamed on any one nation (I’m sure the US will get blamed anyway, but can legitimately claim innocence in this case).

      Deep breaths. Not everything done by someone you don’t agree with is a personal attack.

    • notapunk says:

      Um, I don’t have any hard numbers or anything, but I don’t think an internet-based rumor campaign is going to really have much of an impact on the average Afghan. In a place where “Hi-Tech” is running water I don’t see tweets, reddit posts, or even google bombing doing much in the way of swaying public opinion.
      Just sayin’….

  6. OCELOT525 says:

    posted the fake news on the republican nation commitee page, and the positively republican page on FB

  7. Obsyd says:

    yay… lets try to get someone killed.. After all Islamic extremists are known for their well thought out decision making and for debunking possible rumors before killing people.

    You know, there are times when I really hate the anonymity of the internet and usually it has to do with something 4chan has done.

    • Green Beard the Canuck says:

      Sic semper tyrannis.

    • danielsangeo says:

      With all the publicity that 4chan is getting nowadays, could 4chan’s days be numbered?

    • bababababa says:

      You do realize your argument is “They’re insane, so let’s not say anything that might piss them off.”

      • Dr Oh-No says:

        I can work under those rules. :)

        • murky 2.0 says:

          Bababababa is correct. Are we supposed to be slaves to political correctness? Being pvssies never helped anyone but the terrorists cringing behind their civilian meat-shields. When a bully threatens you and everyone you know with total annihilation for merely EXISTING, do you shut up and hope that if you try real hard to not offend them they will go away? NO!! You kick their ass and grind their teeth into dust. These people could not possibly be offended by us any more than they are, so it is up to us to preserve the integrity of the ideals that pissed them off in the first place.

          • Dr Oh-No says:

            So nuke the country? It ain’t that simple in war, not like a schoolyard fight. That’s yet another reason why the countries=individuals analogy fails.

            • murky 2.0 says:

              “So nuke the country…” Hm. I remember saying something about civilian meat shields, not suggesting nuclear annihilation. It’s really my fault, I should have been more clear that my point is we are fighting a war of politics just as much as a physical war. If we pander to these extremists, not only have we lost half the battle but let the world know that our beliefs in freedom are not even worth SAYING ALOUD.

              • danielsangeo says:

                Right, because that’s exactly what the left wants to do: Pander to terrorists. Get real.

                • murky 2.0 says:

                  Sweet Jesus on a stick, WHY IS EVERYONE PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH?! For goodness’ sake, if you disagree with anything I’ve said, feel free to argue! But don’t invent things that I NEVER SAID and disagree with them!!

                  • danielsangeo says:

                    Okay, then who wants to “pander to these extremists” (your words)? The right wing frequently says this same exact thing so I apologize if it appears that you’re using the talking points of the Right.

                    • murky 2.0 says:

                      Doesn’t it seem as if few whole groups of people say definitively that “Islam has gone too far”? I’m not talking about groups, you see, but individuals.

                      • danielsangeo says:

                        I’m still confused about which person “panders to these extremists”. I don’t know anyone that does.

                        • Anon says:

                          His point is that by being politically correct and trying to appease the terrorists, we’re telling the world that our ideals aren’t worth fighting for. Also, they’re not going to stop hating us just because we try to appease them, so we shouldn’t sacrifice our ideals for their sake.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          And who is trying to be “politically correct and trying to appease the terrorists”?

                        • murky 2.0 says:

                          Bababababa:”…so let’s not say anything to piss them off’” Dr. Oh-no:” I can operate under those rules :)

                      • Danbala says:

                        Errr. I don’t understand what you are saying. I’ve read it three times, and it makes no sense. Can you rephrase it for those of us who are .. well, me, I suppose?

                • Furthermore, which side are YOU on? The corrupt Republican theocrats that will drive you babbling and paranoid-schizophrenic within a month? Or do you prefer the limp-d!ck Democrats that blow everything completely out of proportion and waste untold trillions of dollars trying to create a dystopian nanny state? Bullocks, I say. Moderation is what keeps me semi-sane.

                  • murky 2.0 says:

                    I dun goof’d! God dammit, iPhone…

                  • danielsangeo says:

                    Democrats don’t do that.

                  • Wicket says:

                    I like how you claim it’s the Democrats that “blow everything completely out of proportion and waste untold trillions…[sic]…trying to create a nanny state”. Were you asleep for the 8 years that Bush was in office, or maybe you just forgot about the ungodly amount of spending the W’ administration thwarted on two unpaid wars and the most irresponsible tax-cuts that emptied any hint of a government surplus. If you don’t like “Nanny-State” Government then you might want to look up the Home Land Security Act of 2002…you already live in one. I’m not claiming either party is great or horrible, i’m just pointing out that your over-generalized accusations are not that accurate.

                    • murky 2.0 says:

                      Well, I couldn’t go into detail because my comments are already insanely long. By omission, can I say that you agreed with my general assessment of the radical Republicans? So what’s wrong with my general description of radical liberals? And BTW President Bush sold out his own corrupt party, making him an a$$hole SQUARED in my book. I’ll remind you that at that time congress was democrat as well.

                      • danielsangeo says:

                        Because radical liberals are not the same as radical Republicans?

                        Simply being “Democrat” doesn’t make you a liberal.

                        • Wicket says:

                          ehh. being a liberal or being a conservative is subjective at best. you can be both and i’d assume many people are. Both sides have decent parts and both sides …ahem… have dirty parts. Voting Republican or Democratic however, is not subjective and there is a definite Yes or No answer. Not sure where i’m going with this, I think i originally disagreed with your post and then, while responding, I convinced myself otherwise… :???:

                      • Wicket says:

                        Democrats weren’t elected majorities in both Houses until 2006. This blame game can easily go both ways, it’s counterproductive. My goal is to get you to stop babbling misinformation about subjects that you don’t seem to have a complete grasp on.

              • Dr Oh-No says:

                You hang out here and you don’t understand exaggeration for the sake of emphasis?

          • Obsyd says:

            That’s a noble sentiment and I agree. The difference again (in this case) is that this is not you kicking their ass. It’s more like you grabbing another kid putting him in front of the bully and telling the bully he called his mother fat. If you want to stand up to the bully do so, but don’t throw someone else at him and pretend it’s you fighting back.

            • murky 2.0 says:

              Thank you. And really, I understand and agree with your position: sacrificing Karzai does no one any good. Obviously that includes the president. I was taking a more defensive stance-WE are not the ones that should be silenced in our own country! I know that(to a limited extent) we can shout our disapproval of the horrors of terrorism, and I find the mere suggestion that we should be silent for fear of aggravating them repugnant. To reiterate: we should be able to draw as many Mohammeds and write as many editorials as we want, but spreading dumped to harm the president is wrong.

          • danielsangeo says:

            You’re right. We shouldn’t use PC terms. It might offend people.

      • Obsyd says:

        Not really my argument is let’s not lie about someone converting to Christianity when it can get them killed. I don’t really care if we piss them (The extremists) off legitimately, I supported the free expression of the political cartoonists who wish to draw Mohamed, as well as Southpark both of which really piss off the extremists. The difference is that they know what they are getting into ahead of time, Karazi however did not convert to Christianity. If he had actually converted that is one thing, but disseminating false information like this is reckless.

        • Rae says:

          So, what are you saying? Now they try to kill him because of a rumor? How is that honestly any different from all the other times they’ve tried to kill Karzai? He’s been the target of assassination attempts before and will continue to be a target until he does die regardless of all this.

          • Obsyd says:

            I’m saying there is a good chance you could get someone who was wishy-washy to attempt to kill him as well. While yes he is working with the western powers he is still Muslim and some sects place a “do not touch” on him because of that. By starting this rumor it removes that little layer of protection, Why add to the number of extremists trying to kill him? It’s a cowardly action done by people who have no concept or care about others. typical 4chan crap.

      • Oddly enough, this is my coworkers argument as well.

      • kurisu7885 says:

        If we followed that rule no one would ever say anything, ever.

    • Scott Thong says:

      Hey, y’know what’d be teh irony? If a month later, an Anon regular grievingly reports that his brother just got offed in Afghanistan by some Taliban psycho who was screaming something about “kaffir Karzai!”

      In the real world, actions have consequences. Sometimes, your own get hit by them.

  8. zarkosy says:

    great, now counter-bloggers would get ahold of this picture, and use it as proof that the rumors aren’t true… just like they did to Justin Bieber’s death, and his deportation to North Korea. ._.

  9. CodeRed says:

    What if this is just a fake story about 4Chan starting a fake rumor? I don’t even know whats real anymore. Damn internet!

  10. vt says:

    that’s not cool…

  11. ftc08 says:

    RULES 1 & 2.

  12. Pulse says:

    Sounds like something done by a bunch of people who have no real life.
    Bedwetters usually try to divert attention from themselves in a similar fashion.

    Actually that rumor is virtually the same kind of accusation done years ago by muslim opponents.

    It really doesnt matter because Muslims are just as happy to kill each other as they are to kill people of other religions.

  13. Aaron Hong says:

    This is far too idealistic even for those Anon brats.

  14. Scott Thong says:

    Dude, as if not enough Islamic Rage Talibannies are trying to off him already…

  15. ScruffyKat says:

    This is no rumor: Afgan Parliment want to execute any Muslum who converts to Chrtistianity or Hindu. Why do we support racist terrorists?

  16. T9001 says:

    Karzai is a former oil company employee which of you Union Oil Company of California. CALIFORNIA!!!!

    That means he is a Cyborg form the Future! behold!

  17. Neil Hoskins says:

    Final proof, if any were needed, that in the western world, people now fail to distinguish between what’s real and what isn’t. THIS WILL COST LIVES, YOU MORONS!

  18. Freerefill says:

    Anon is the Internet equivalent of Gotham’s Joker. They do what they want, when they want, for no reason other than their own enjoyment, and nothing you can say or do will stop them. Yes, for a grand part, they do limit their physical accomplishments to that of a lazy typist. Yes, for the grand part, they are immature (in the mind-bogglingly largest sense of the world), lewd beyond imagination, and heartless.

    Yet, they organized massive real-life protests against the Church of Scientology. They use their hacking skills to locate people who are stupid enough to boast about their real-life law breakings. They are proficient lateral thinkers and often find practical solutions to everyday problems.

    The point being, you can hate them and they won’t care. You can like them and they still won’t care. You can crack corn and, yes, they still won’t care. The only way to survive in a world with a Joker is to laugh with them; otherwise, you’re just going to be happy.

    But, that’s just my two cents. Ultimately, you, like Anonymous, are going to handle this however you want.

  19. SemperGunny says:

    Not getting into the right or wrong or consequences of such a rumor.. but does this not strike anyone else as a tongue in cheek response to the “President Obama is a secret Muslim” story that one of our… ahem, ‘news’… stations likes to play to ad nauseam.

  20. June says:

    Funny how this person who posted the instructions for this intended prank (or whatever they want to call it) assumes “Islam’s hatred of all things Christian.” Clearly this person is unaware of the Qurans teaching and veneration of Jesus, Abraham, and other Biblical figures. (Though clearly some Muslims are unaware of it as well)

    Also, what the heck is “Islamic turmoil” supposed to be? Turmoil is turmoil. Just like a terrorist is a terrorist. No need to ascribe a culture or religion to such terms.

    • Paws4thot, the PK Booty Caller and founder of the AANM says:

      Or maybe, even though they’re aware of it, they’re also aware that most true Muslims consider “Islamic terrorism” to be un-Islamic, and against the Qu’ran itself.

      • June says:

        Er, whom does “they” refer to in your sentence? The poster from 4chan or the Muslims (really I meant to say “Muslims”)? I really hope I don’t come across as an ass, I really just want the pronoun clarified, sorry. :-/

      • Molly says:

        Too many people believe that all Muslims are terrorists because the Koran says anyone who isn’t Muslim should be killed.

        No, seriously, I actually had this argument with someone. I pointed out that her Bible is in favor of stoning people to death and she replied that she didn’t follow that part.

        At that point I realized she was never going to get what I was getting at and gave up.

        • danielsangeo says:

          Except, of course, that the Qu’ran doesn’t say to kill someone simply because they’re not Muslim. In fact, the Qu’ran forbids it.

          • OutOfTheBox says:

            I think more people should actually READ some of the Koran, or talk calmly and intelligently with an American Muslim who lives near them. They would be astounded.

            But, then, they would also have their ignorance, fear, and hatred taken from them. There are some idiots who highly prize their ignorance, hatred, and fear; they don’t want to lose them.

            • itsybitsy says:

              I have a friend who was friendly to her muslim neighbors and their sons even palled around together. Then their son went back to his homeland to learn about his culture. When he came back they wouldn’t even talk to my friend anymore or her son.

              • OutOfTheBox says:

                I know there are exceptions.

                however, I have had conversations with and been friends with, quite a number of Muslims, both American and non-American.
                Not a scientific sampling, I admit, but a larger one than your friend’s.

                I have never found one who had the response that was experienced by your friend.

                But I have many times seen that response in so-called Christians to Muslims.

                I noticed you didn’t say anything about reading the Koran. I once had no knowledge of it, either, and had strange assumptions about it.

                Then one day I attended a professional development workshop (teacher thing). We were each given a copy of ten religious quotes, and asked to mark each according to their source: Old Testament, New Testament, or Koran.

                Having done a lot of Bible study in years of Sunday School, it was easy for me to spot that most were from the Old Testament, and a few from the New Testament. None mentioned Mohammed.

                Then we were told the correct answers: all were from the Koran.

                I later sponsored the Muslim Student Club and the Hindu Student Club at my school. (The Jewish students asked me to sponsor their club, too, but the admin said no. so I helped them find another teacher to sponsor.)

                The meetings were kind of like little Sunday school lessons. enlightening. uplifting. I actually learned how to be a better Christian from these meetings.

                • danielsangeo says:

                  The biggest enemy to bigotry is education.

                  • OutOfTheBox says:

                    amen! …or whatever response equates with that, in your religion or non-religion.

                  • Justacarolinian says:

                    Sura 5:33 The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.

                    • Dr Oh-No says:

                      Well I certainly can’t fight what I don’t believe exists, so I’m safe right?

                      Point: interpretation is all, no matter how absolute the statement seems on the surface.

                      • danielsangeo says:

                        And I’m certainly not going to fight against God (considering I don’t believe that or any other deity exists) or his messenger (who is dead). I also have no issue with the religion of Islam itself.

                        I do take issue, however, with fundamentalism, of any stripe. :)

                        • Dr Oh-No says:

                          Woo! *secret atheist handshake*

                          I once told a Christian fellow that Jesus and Mohammed were quite similar and, when pressed for an example, joked, “well, they’re both dead!” He replied fervently, “the Lord Jesus is not dead.” Kinda killed the conversation. :(

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          And here I thought Jesus died for our sins…..well, crap.

                  • I think it’s disgusting how people try to discriminate against an entire religion when it’s a few bad eggs that ruin it. My boss is a Muslim from Eastern Europe, as well as a few others at our store, and he doesn’t give a rat’s ass what religion anyone else is.

                    • Justacarolinian says:

                      *thinks back to all the times Rando has talked about how miserable of a boss he has*

                      • First of all, I wasn’t talking to you. Secondly, he’s mellowed out a lot since problems in the past. Thirdly, being a miserable boss is not the same as being an Islamic terrorist. Seriously, dude. WTF kind of post is that?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          First of all, you made a post on an open forum.
                          Secondly, obeying Sura 5:33 isn’t a terrorist, it’s a commandment to the muslim. (one of many to kill those that don’t fall into the line of islam or decide to leave it)
                          Third, it’s pointing out how you always play things to suit your opinions.

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          Dammit Rando!
                          You know you weren’t supposed to acknowledge its posts!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          That’s right VNV. A little bit of honesty in your world is harmful!

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          Well I wouldn’t expect it from you. You are a lying sack of sh1t. That’s why we recommend avoiding you. ;)

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          This from the ego who claims that those who don’t agree with his opinions are idiots. I’m flattered!

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          Pssh… its not like anyone is gonna believe you. Geez. Everyone here knows you are a troll.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          No, only the little “I’m a cool kid” insecure clique.

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          Just keep on lying. How dishonest…

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Aw, vain attempts to insult me.

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          If you could be honest, even with yourself, you would know its just me telling you the truth. You need more honesty in your life, since yours seems void of it.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Be careful VNV, you keep making sure you have the last word. Keep it up and someone will come in here and declare how evil it is, and how THEY must have it.

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          Now you are being dishonest about that. Its you who keep responding to me.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          We respond to each other, and you LIE and say it’s not you!
                          Oh the irony!

                        • Kestrel MacKnight says:

                          Sura 5 in it’s entirety calls for killing of those only in defense of your lands, never attack.

                          Would you like a long list of how Christians have been called upon to kill or murder because of their God?

                          Same God, Different story, learn the religions and use the whole phrase if you really want to get all pissy. The preceeding and following verse prove you to be what we’ve known all along… you’re a bigoted idiot who has an imaginary happy place to make themselves feel better.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          KM, give me ONE scripture commanding the Christian to kill. (not the Hebrew, Christian)

                        • Kestrel MacKnight says:

                          If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

                          Furthermore, You can’t have the Christian Bible without the Hebrew Old Testament… so I don’t know WTF you’re smoking there.

                        • Wicket says:

                          !~!FLAME WAR!~! wait!….let me get the popcorn going. *settles into comfy chair* ok, I hope i didn’t miss anything. go ahead…proceed.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Zac was a *ahem* Hebrew prophet. And you are right, the old Testament is an important part of the Bible. But that isn’t a commandment to the Christian to kill anyone.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          *munches popcorn* Wicket, is the Orville Redenbacher?

                        • Kestrel MacKnight says:

                          So you’re trying to tell me that the Old testament… the VERY BOOK that Jesus himself preached from (because any student of history and theology knows that the new testament came after the death of Christ, because Jesus himself was a Jew) is not commanding of the Christian faith?

                          Guess the 10 commandments don’t matter, and the whole Noah’s Ark thing not important, Genesis, We could just point out all of revelations… That’s an INCREDIBLY bloody section commanding all of the earth to fight to the death.

                          It’s good to know that you can throw out half of your own religion to make yourself feel better… just like the Islamic extremists can ignore the parts of their religion that promote peace in order for the mortal extremists to grab more power… just like the Christians have for centuries. Completely different, I can’t believe it. Your wisdom knows no bounds… because it simply is non-existent.

                        • Green Beard the Canuck says:

                          Luke 19
                          26- He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away.
                          27- But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Luke 19:27 is Jesus talking about a King. Not him commanding anyone to kill. Go back to verse 12 to see the beginning of the parable.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          KM, I’m not throwing out half of my religion. I fully admit what was done in the old Testament. However, there are not any scriptures telling me, or any other Christian to kill.

                        • Cricket says:

                          Oh, wait, you’re asking him to read that verse in context? What a novel idea!!!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          YEAH! I read it in context. And instead of trying to pretend it’s Jesus telling people to kill, I knew it’s about a king in a parable who was angry and ordered killing.

                        • Cricket says:

                          So therefore, by your own reading of the scriptures and the stories and teachings therein, you’d say that context is a pretty important thing to consider when quoting a verse?

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          This thread is horrible dishonest of you JAC… you should be ashamed….

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          It is. And context is what proves that sura 5 isn’t about invaders or war in islamic nations. How do you kill/maim/disgrace someone for waging war against a man that is dead?
                          See, sura 8 mentions war. Not fighting. If it were a misinterpretation, both suras would have used the same arabic word, and be interpreted the same. They do not. And sura 8 specifically mentions battle plans and such. The 5th sura mentions fighting against allah or muhammad. The context is out of place for war.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Wow! VNV coming back for one more insult. I’m flattered the great ego took another swing at me.

                        • Cricket says:

                          I’m glad you can read Arabic so you can get the full nuance of the words. I’m sure that makes your job much easier.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I can tell when there are 2 different words being used. And I can look up definitions for them. You should try that.

                        • Green Beard the Canuck says:

                          Matthew 15

                          3- But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

                          4- For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

                        • Cricket says:

                          I can look up Mandarin Chinese. That doesn’t allow me to understand the nuance.

                        • VictoryNotVengeance says:

                          I am not swinging at you JAC. I just wish you would start being honest. Your lies just turn people away from you. I feel a little sad for you. :(

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Again, Jesus quoting old Testament commandments to Hebrews. Not Christians.

                        • Kestrel MacKnight says:

                          You are incorrect in that. Islam is exactly as violent as Christianity. I would wager that more Islamic people follow more of their religion than modern day Christians follow the tenets of Christianity. Depending upon the fraction of Christianity they follow. With so many denominations, it’s kinda hard to honestly call them all one religion.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          It allows you to understand that there are 2 differing words being used for a specific reason. Add in the war against a dead man part, and well……. And if you still need convincing, read the 8th sura and it specifically mentioning battle plans. Oh, and more than 1000 years of practice kind of set the context too!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          KM, not one scripture to the Christian to kill. Unlike islam. Where there are tons of them.

                        • Jane St.Clair says:

                          So old testament commandments don’t apply to Christians? Oh good, I have this shiny golden calf that I’ve been wondering what to do with…

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Jane, I wouldn’t worship it. There are plenty of places in the new Testament telling the Christian to flee idolatry.

                        • Kestrel MacKnight says:

                          You claim the old testament does not apply to Christians, I say you’re not only ignorant of Islam, but of your own faith because you discredit the foundation of the faith.

                          Yet Jesus himself said to “Obey the mortal law” which at the time was the law of the old testament… So… um… yeah, the laws of the old testament were the laws you must follow as a Christian.

                          Of course you’ve yet to actually follow even the simplest of your religion’s tenets and commands, such as turn the other cheek, love thy brother, and give of yourself whenever asked. That much is obvious.

                          I pity those who claim their faith is great and do not follow it.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          You know nothing of my giving, or anything about my private life. Standing up to people like you isn’t failing to turn the other cheek either. Jesus himself did it.
                          And we are to obey the law. It was fulfilled. Paul has many nice teachings about the law and how it fits into the Christian life vs the Hebrew life, both before and after the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Christ for the atonement of sin. Instead of the blood of animals for the covering of sin.
                          To quote Paul, “All things are lawful, but not expedient.” And he tells us too about commandments to the Christian. And none of them are to kill.
                          You sir, are the one ignorant about Christian scripture and the quran.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Yeah, you go ahead and look for that. I’ll wait. I may attack christianity, but I don’t remember ever attacking Israel or judism. I will continue to attack christianity whenever I think christians are being hypocritical. Yeah, go ahead and bring Cricket into this. It should be amusing, as you seem to think she’s going to defend you…about ANYTHING. ROFLCOPTER

                          I’ll be waiting for that “proof” that I’m anti-Semitic.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Well crap. That nested in the wrong place. LOL Let’s try again!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Ivan, I didn’t say that Cricket defended me. I said she defended your attacks against Christianity that are actually attacks against Judaism. Like several above, who quote Hebrew law and try to apply it to the Christian.
                          Now are you going to actually pretend that you didn’t post that link?

                        • JAC, JAC, JAC. Jesus does not enjoy your dishonesty. You make a lousy, lousy Christian. I’m relatively certain He would turn His head from you in shame. Very sad.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Rando, considering the way you go on around here, I’m quite glad for you to think I’m not a Christian.
                          Nothing I have said was dishonest. You may differ in opinion, but there is not a single thing you can point to and say I lied.

                      • mabsba says:

                        WTF? Are you HONESTLY FVCKING saying that Rando’s boss is a miserable boss because he’s Muslim? After all YOUR endless complaints that not all Christians are like the WBC? That has to be one of the most disgusting things I’ve ever heard anyone say.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          That isn’t what I said. Nice FAIL at twisting my words.

                        • Cricket says:

                          Now now, Mabs, it’s not bigoted if he meant well.

                        • Cricket says:

                          You’re equating Rando’s boss being a bad boss (based on what Rando has said about him) to the fact that he’s a Muslim.

                          I’d say that Mabs hit the nail on the head.

                        • mabsba says:

                          HOW is that NOT what you said? It is EXACTLY what you said. Say ‘hi’ to your friends in the WBC.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Cricket, oh Cricket. What a pathetic attempt to twist. I point out how Rando talks out of both sides of the mouth, and you try to turn that into bigotry? That’s low, even for you.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Show me “equating.” I pointed out that Rando complained about the man. But when he wants to make a strawman argument about he’s a nice muslim, he talks good about the man.

                        • Cricket says:

                          He didn’t say anything about him being a “nice Muslim.” You’re reading things that aren’t there.

                          He said that his boss, who happens to be Muslim, doesn’t care about what religion anyone else is.

                          Geez. I know See Spot Run was a few years ago for you, but I figured you knew how to read.

                        • Cricket says:

                          And quack.

                        • mabsba says:

                          Bye bye. I’m sure you have a soldier’s funeral to go picket.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Ok, brush off your reading abilities. “Nice” was a polite way of saying “he doesn’t give a rat’s @ss.”

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Awww Mabs? That the best fake insult you can come up with? You didn’t even brag on your level of education yet. I’m offended. You’re not up to superhuman genius level yet.
                          All that talk up there about actually reading the quran and how peaceful it is, and it turns out some of you don’t know what you are talking about.

                        • OutOfTheBox says:

                          and before the Christians, it belonged to the pagan Romans, and before the pagan Romans, it belonged to….

                          you could go on and on ad nauseum. [and probably will]

                          but the long list of who owned what and when was not my point.

                          my point was that every nation, religion. or any other demographic category, has its share of those who are decent human beings, and those who are not.

                          to single out one group and say that they, intrinsically as a group, are evil, is to teeter on the edge of genocide.

                          and we should never go there again; that way lies madness, and the extinction of all that it means to be human.

                        • OutOfTheBox says:

                          dear justa,
                          you’re still not getting it.

                          I didn’t bring up the point about scripture.
                          I was replying to it.

                          I didn’t bring up the point about land ownership.
                          I was replying to it

                          I said both these points scripture and land) were moot.

                          scripture:
                          1. Someone can always find, remove form context ,twist, use, abuse any statement in order to justify their actions.
                          2. I believe that’s what the crusaders did. I believe they found something and twisted to justify their crusades, used it as an excuse.
                          3. Not being truly justified by scripture, the crusades were really motivated by … what?

                          ownership:
                          justifying the crusades on the basis of: “they were just taking back the land that was taken from them.” is also inadequate justification for the crusades.
                          1. That land had not belonged to the European crusaders in the first place.
                          2. It had not belonged to any one group consistently; it kept changing hands. A stole it from B who stole it from C, etc.
                          3.Not being truly justified by a claim of land ownership, the crusades were really motivated by… what?

                          I believe it was prejudice, the kind of all-encompassing prejudice that labels an entire demographic group as inherently evil.

                          I believe that is what many of the majority demographic group in this country are doing today. Vilifying and an entire religious group.

                          It is terrifyingly similar to the very beginning of the “Final Solution” in Nazi Germany.

                          HERE IS +MY+ POINT, (RE)STATED BELOW:

                          Every demographic category has its share of good people and bad.

                          To single out one group and say that they,
                          as a group, are intrinsically evil, is to teeter on the edge of genocide.

                          and we should never go there again: that way lies madness, and the extinction of all it means to be human.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          OOTB, see, you miss it yourself. I didn’t point out a group. Or an individual. I pointed out the scripture that DOES command killing.
                          You are jumping to conclusions.

                        • OOTB–Don’t waste your time trying to argue with JAC. He’s not a real Christian anyway.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Hey Rando, you remember that part about every idle word?

                    • Cricket says:

                      I think it’s disgusting, Rando, when people take a single verse of a book out of context and use it to make a point they don’t understand.

                      • Justacarolinian says:

                        You want a dozen more saying nearly the exact same thing?

                        • Cricket says:

                          IN context?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          The first one is. Read the entire 5th sura. Verse 33 is just the one that specifies the penalty for those who fight “allah,” and there are just as many about anyone who speaks against islam, doesn’t profess muhamed to be THE prophet, or that Jesus and Paul are false prophets.

                        • Cricket says:

                          You’re misreading context. Again.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Really. It says “is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.”

                          That’s out of context? I guess now you’re going to say that the quran doesn’t promise 72 virgins to martyrs?

                        • Dr Oh-No says:

                          The point is what it means to fight, isn’t it? (Or “speak against” or what have you.) If Muslim scholars disagree on what it means, who are you to presume you know what it means, absolutely and for everyone?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          JAC, JAC, JAC….

                          Those verses talk about what to do in times of war when the enemy is attacking you without cause. These verses tell you how to defend yourself from your attackers and to kill only under very specific conditions.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          It’s kind of hard to miss the whole kill or maim them so they will be ashamed.
                          muslim scholars do agree that it’s ok to lie to non muslims in order to promote islam. So that whole thing about “fight” being interpreted different ways is moot. At SOME point, no matter HOW you try and twist it, islam is saying to kill those whom it chooses.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Daniel, not they do not. I can paste the entire sura. And the one dealing with war. They are not the same. But you knew that! (nice attempt at a lie, but a failed attempt)

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          You even admitted that it’s about war without cause!

                        • Dr Oh-No says:

                          But to kill those whom they choose is exactly the point of interpretation. That’s what “treason” or “enemy combattant” or any number of other words that we all use to justify murder are about. By your own definition, JAC, politics and ethics of every sort are just ways to kill those we want. Islam is no different.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Admitted it’s about war without cause? Where? And please tell us all what sura DOES deal with killing nonbelievers of islam in war? (since you know so much)

                        • Cricket says:

                          “…and they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword.”

                          “…then it shall be that he who is taken with the accursed thing shall be burned with fire, he and all that he has, because he has trangressed the covenant of the Lord…”

                          “and they struck them down, so that they let none of them remain or escape.”

                          “…he utterly destroyed them – all the people who were in it. He let none remain.”

                          “And all the spil of these citires and the livestock, the children of Israel took as booty for themselves; but they struck every man with the edge of the sword until they had destroyed them, and they left none breathing.”

                          “You shall hamstring their horses and burn their chariots with fire.”

                          Now, I could continue, and I could find you some really juicy verses where God directly commands the annihilation of entire groups of people; men, women, and children; but you’d just scream that I needed context for those verses to understand them.

                          I think you need to follow your own (supposed) advice.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          “Those who fight Allah”.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Yes, those are commandments to the Jews Cricket. I remember a conversation on here where YOU were defending them from some of the local atheists. That whole thing about none of them applying to Christians. I thought you did a great job defending them.

                        • Cricket says:

                          How do you know that’s about the Jews?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Daniel, that isn’t me saying it’s about war without cause. Swing and a miss….. Brrrr at the breeze in here.
                          You forgot to tell us what sura DOES deal with war.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Oh, so you DO care about context, but only where it comes to the Bible…

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Because I’m familiar with the old Testament. As are you.
                          Plus that whole part about “Israel” mentioned there.

                        • Cricket says:

                          Ah, so you’ve read the Old Testament, are familiar with it and the context in which those commandments are given, and know why they’re necessary?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          What sura Daniel? (you don’t know, do you?)
                          And it’s not about context. The commandments to Israel don’t apply to Christianity.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          And yet, that’s exactly what Sura 5:33 says:

                          “Those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land should be punished by death”

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Yes. I am. And you did a wonderful job explaining it yourself a few months ago. Bravo!

                        • Cricket says:

                          Bazinga.

                          That, ladies and gentlemen, is a clear cut case of what we call “shifting the goalposts.”

                          Now, if we’ll move along to our next troll, you’ll see it’s a frother. Mind that you don’t get any spittle on you.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Wow, Daniel CHANGED the words to fit his meaning. Why am I not surprised. (it doesn’t say war in any quran I can find. That’s a different sura. One that Daniel can’t name)

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          And now you try to lie to weasel your way out.

                          {http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/005.qmt.html}

                        • Cricket says:

                          Whoops! Ladies and gentlemen, if you’ll go back to our previous display, I forgot to point out a unique feature of this particular troll: deliberate obtuseness. He figures that if he just pretends not to understand the argument, he’ll win.

                          In this case, he’s pretending not to know there are different language and interpretive styles used with the Q’uran, the same as with the Bible.

                          Moving along now……

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Yes! Cricket vainly tried to move the goal posts! She can’t come up with the sura for war either, so she tried to tie the old Testament commandments to Israel to Christianity.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          {http://www.submission.org/suras/sura5.html}

                          The authorized English translation.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Hey Cricket. Does that obtuseness include YOU trying to falsely tie old Testaments commandments to Christianity?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          And even if Cricket comes up with Suras mentioning war (such as 5:33), JAC will simply either ignore it or claim that Cricket is making it up.

                        • Cricket says:

                          I’m sorry, would you point me back to where I mentioned Christianity? I must have forgotten I did that……

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Your “authorized” citation (kind of like stating the King James Version of the Bible is the correct one) says the SAME EXACT THING!

                          “The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed”

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          It’s rather obtuse, but here it is.

                          “Cricket says:
                          August 12, 2010 at 6:26 pm

                          How do you know that’s about the Jews?”

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Fight =/= war.

                        • Cricket says:

                          So that’s me mentioning Christianity (oops! Second time!) how?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          In English.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          JAC: Can you read my citation now and then apologize for lying?

                          http://tinyurl.com/98zrrn

                          (The URL got cut off by the site formatting so I had to TinyURL it.)

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I’m still waiting for the sura about war!

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Let me repost (there was an unfiltered URL in my post so it got caught to await moderation):

                          JAC: Can you read my citation now and then apologize for lying?

                          {http://tinyurl.com/98zrrn}

                          (The URL got cut off by the site formatting so I had to TinyURL it.)

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Sura 5 talks about war!

                          (How friggin’ dense can you get?)

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Daniel, you are absolutely right. You didn’t change it. But considering your past record, I think I had good reason to be suspicious.
                          And that site? It doesn’t fit in with other translations. Or the context of the rest of the sura. (or that verse, FWIW)
                          Still waiting for the sura that DOES deal with war.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          No, it states (even in your version) against muhamed. A dead man. Can you make war against a dead man? No, you can’t.

                        • Jane St.Clair says:

                          Daniel’s past record of changing things? You could, perhaps, provide proof of this?

                        • Cricket says:

                          Still waiting on when I mentioned Christianity, outside of the three times now that I’ve mentioned it…..

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I already told you. See above.

                        • Cricket says:

                          That’s not a mention of Christianity (four times). And you misused the word “obtuse.” Which just proves you are.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          “Those who fight against God and his messenger” means “Those who wage war against Islam”.

                          This is my last post to you about the Qu’ran. You obviously do not understand it whatsoever and then baselessly attack people that do. You claim that people are making things up (and then wrap up an apology in a further attack on my integrity). And then you claim that your translation is the ONLY official translation when you know good and well that any translation from one language to another is going to be missing something and adding something based on the perceptions of the translator.

                          The point is: Sura 5 talks about war. In one translation, it uses the word “war”. In another translation, it uses the word “fight”. You say that “fight” doesn’t equal “war”. In the Qu’ran, it does. You’re AGREEING with those those that distort Islam (such as OBL).

                          So, good night, JAC. And good luck.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Actually, it is. If nothing but by inference, since you were talking Biblical scriptures, and asked about if they belonged to Hebrews. A slick twist (that obtuse thing) at trying to say it without actually saying it, but you did.

                        • Cricket says:

                          Wait, when did I mention Hebrews?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Ok, Daniel. You expect people to wage war against a dead man? (see the whole fight things means those who would fight against his teachings. It’s been taught that way since the beginnings of islam) LOL. That’s weak even for you.
                          It’s the 8th sura. And the language is specific.
                          It is you who have been deceived by those distorting islam. Changing fight to war to make it look docile. BTW, 5:33 isn’t the only place that talks about killing those who don’t believe islam. Or killing those who leave islam.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Excuse me. Israel. (whom are Hebrews)

                        • Cricket says:

                          I’m sorry, where did I mention Israel?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Cricket, you’re right. You specifically said “jews,” a term often used in a derogatory way to refer to Israel/Hebrews.

                        • Cricket says:

                          And how does that tie back in to you thinking I said anything about Christianity?

                        • Wicket says:

                          omg, it’s never-ending.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          This is the thread that never ends
                          It just goes on and on, my friends
                          Some people started posting in it
                          Not knowing what it was
                          And they’ll continue posting forever because…

                        • Cricket says:

                          This is the thread that never ends
                          It just goes on and on, my friends
                          Some people started posting in it
                          Not knowing what it was
                          And they’ll continue posting forever because…

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Let’s see. You mention the same God of Judaism and Christianity, then imply that it may be or not be about Israel.
                          Wicket, pass the popcorn.

                        • Cricket says:

                          I’m sorry, when did I mention God? I must have missed that part.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Sherry Lewis FTW!

                          This is the thread that never ends
                          It just goes on and on, my friends
                          Some people started posting in it
                          Not knowing what it was
                          And they’ll continue posting forever because…

                        • Jane St.Clair says:

                          Wait a minute. “Jews” is a derogatory term? Since when?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          {http://punditkitchen.com/2010/08/11/political-pictures-desert-troll/comment-page-1/#comment-380585}

                          “Now, I could continue, and I could find you some really juicy verses where God”

                        • Cricket says:

                          So how does that tie back in with me supposedly mentioning Christianity?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          This is the thread that never ends
                          It just goes on and on, my friends
                          Some people started posting in it
                          Not knowing what it was
                          And they’ll continue posting forever because…

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Hey Jane, ask Micheal Jackson about using jew in a song? (or at least look it up) It’s quite often used to refer to someone who cheats at business.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I already told you that Cricket. You bring God up, then imply that it may not be about Israel. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

                        • Cricket says:

                          Wait, when did I mention Israel again?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          *throws fuzzy wool poo at the King of Obfuscation*

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Throws real poo at the anti-Semite*

                        • Jane St.Clair says:

                          ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?! Yes, calling someone who is a greedy business person a “Jew” is derogatory in the SAME WAY that calling someone a terrorist just because they happen to be Muslim. The word “Jew” is not inherently derogatory. I know this because JEWISH PEOPLE CALL THEMSELVES JEWS ALL THE TIME.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          *hands Ivan a wipe to clean poo from himself*
                          Cricket, you call the jews, I call them Israel. We’ve been over that.

                        • bad fairie says:

                          going to nit-pick a couple things here –
                          Jew is capitalized, just like G*d;
                          Jew is also a person and/or religion,
                          Israel is a nation,
                          Israelite is a person who lives in Israel.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Wait, you didn’t just imply that by calling you an anti-Semite…that I am an anti-Semite, did you? And can one not paraphrase that as…

                          wait for it…

                          “I know you are, but what am I?”

                          Because you’re going to have to show me any comment I’ve ever made that shows me to be anti-Semite.

                        • OutOfTheBox says:

                          any of you guys ever hear of the Crusades?

                          that’s where a bunch of “Christian” European nations (not just non-gov orgs) sent huge armies (not just a few terrorists) into Islamic nations to wage war… some really brutal war crimes, if you read the accounts. repeatedly. and they went as God’s holy warriors, with big Christian crosses on their uniforms.

                        • Zipper says:

                          Actually the crusader armies werent that big and they were going to take back places the Muslims had conquered from Christains previously.

                          It was the muslims who first taught the Christians about ‘holy crusade (jihad) — invading mediterranean lands and many parts of Europe for centuries before the First Crusade.

                          Please dont be so selective about the history you cherrypick and leave out very important bits that turn most of your argument.

                        • OutOfTheBox says:

                          and before the Christians, it belonged to the pagan Romans, and before the pagan Romans, it belonged to…

                          you could go on and on ad nauseum.

                          but the long list of who owned what and when was not my point.

                          my point was that any nation, religion, or any other demographic category, has its share of those who are decent human beings, and those who are not.

                          to single out one group and to say that they, as a group, are intrinsically evil, is to teeter on the edge of genocide.

                          and we should never go there again. that way lies madness, and the extinction of all that it means to be human.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          OOTHB, there isn’t a single scripture to support the crusades. Not one.
                          Ivan, since you imply that I’m an anti-semite, I want you to show where I’ve said anything against Israel or any Hebrew. In fact, I’ve spoken up to defend them against YOUR attacks based on the old Testament commandments from God. Cricket did a nice job of putting you in your place then too.
                          And Jew, capitalized or not, goes all the way back to Judah himself. It was a derogatory name used to insult him for his business practices (which were bad, at that time) and is used rather ignorantly by people of all races.

                        • Paws4thot, the PK Booty Caller and founder of the AANM says:

                          I didn’t bother to read the entire thread properly, but JAC is pretty much correct. The Cursades were a wa about power, using religion as an “acceptable (to the masses of the day) excuse”.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          JAC: What about a friend of mine who is Jewish and calls herself a “Jew”?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Daniel, what about blacks who call themselves by the N word?

                        • OutOfTheBox says:

                          dear justa,

                          and where did I say it was supported by scripture?

                          that wasn’t my point.

                          I clearly said what my point was.

                          please re-read and reply to what I said, not what you would have liked for me to say.

                          as far as the scripture thing goes, there probably are some scriptures that the crusaders used/abused at the time to justify their crusades. most extremists do have a way of taking things out of context and twisting them to fit their hate.

                          I just don’t want to start on the concordance thing again, or research the voluminous history of the crusades. I don’t have the time now. it is starting to get old. and it’s a moot point, anyway.

                          what really matters is that there is a great danger in ascribing inherent evil to an entire demographic group.

                          as I said before, it leads us to the brink of genocide. not a good place to be.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          If it’s a moot point, why did you bring it up?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          JACass, you are making things up as you go along, aren’t you? I’ve NEVER “attacked” Israel, or Judaism. Show me where you think you and Cricket (and I’m sure she’s going to be upset that she is lumped in with you about ANYTHING) “put me in my place” about the issue. You can’t, because you’re MAKING IT UP to defend yourself. And yes, the things you’ve been saying IN THIS THREAD show you to be anti-Semitic.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Ivan, learn to read. It isn’t in this thread. I said it was in the past. You don’t remember posting the “evilbible dot com” link? Because you did. And Cricket handed you your hat. (along with others) Granted you were trying to tear down Christianity, but the things you were saying were attacks. And the scriptures you were using were about the Hebrews. And calling God and the people in the Bible evil. Now it was months ago, but I can go find it, should you deny it.
                          And you can’t show me one thing I’ve ever said against a Hebrew. In fact, several of you claim I called someone a terrorist. When in fact, I did not. I actually stated that the man wasn’t a terrorist.
                          What I did do was point out one of many scriptures in islam that command the muslim to kill.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          JAC: Did you seriously just equate the word “Jew” to the N-word for back people?!

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          “black” not “back”.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Daniel, did you seriously pretend that Jew wasn’t used as an insult to all Hebrews?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Yeah, you go ahead and look for that. I’ll wait. I may attack christianity, but I don’t remember ever attacking Israel or judism. I will continue to attack christianity whenever I think christians are being hypocritical. Yeah, go ahead and bring Cricket into this. It should be amusing, as you seem to think she’s going to defend you…about ANYTHING. ROFLCOPTER

                          I’ll be waiting for that “proof” that I’m anti-Semitic.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          As I said above to your nesting fail.

                          Ivan, I didn’t say that Cricket defended me. I said she defended your attacks against Christianity that are actually attacks against Judaism. Like several above, who quote Hebrew law and try to apply it to the Christian.
                          Now are you going to actually pretend that you didn’t post that link?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          No, I’m pretending nothing. I do (and will continue to) attack christianity. The link I posted was directed towards christianity in general, and most likely (as I don’t remember the specific reason I posted it, but the fact that you do is sort of…creepy and stalkerish) YOU in particular. The extrapolation is your problem, as I was in no way addressing Israel.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Wow, weak attempt to label me as a stalker. Weak.
                          You posted evilbible dot com and made claims to all the old Testament commandments as if they applied to Christians. And continued to assert that it was so very evil and such. When all along you were talking about the actions of the Hebrew people. (trying to pass it off as the evil actions of Christians)

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          And now, on top of everything, you’re a conspiracy theorist. LOL

                          JAC, growing up, my parents forced me to attend church 3 times a week. My father was a deacon in his church. The OT was taught right along with the NT, and this was a regular old baptist church. Are you trying to say that christians don’t teach the OT? If you are, then you have completely lost all shred of credibility. You know very well that we were discussing christianity, not judaism.

                          And this has all become so absurd that I’m outtie. JAC, feel free to have that last word that means so much to you.

                        • Captain Wow says:

                          JAC You dumb@ss! The people are called JEWish. They are JEWS. I have countless friends that are in fact JEWS and call themselves JEWS.

                          If you want to talk about a racist word for a JEW I know of one… probably one you’re familiar with and use on a daily basis. And it’s just as disgusting as you are.

                          STFU for once in your entire life.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Hey Ivan, teaching the happenings of the old Testament is not the same as Christians being commanded to do them. You tried to pass those commandments off as the actions of Christians. You went on about how evil they are. And since you decide it’s evil actions, then you must be against the Hebrews, as they are the ones who did them.
                          And Capt Wow, where do you think the name Jewish came from? (It was a slur used against all the sons of Jacob, based on the actions of Judah)

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          *has a hearty laugh at JACass’s expense*

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Keep laughing, it only shows your own personal insecurities.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          I’m not the one that’s insecure. I’m also not the one that is claiming that “jew” is a slur.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          I’m going to file this one away, and from now on, every time I mention christianity, I’ll add a disclaimer that JACass believes I’m actually talking about judaism. IT’S A CONSPIRACY BLARGH BLARGH ENUMERATED POWERS BLARGH!!!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Oh Ivan. You most certainly are insecure. All the cool kids comments (and such like) together with the resorting to the nasty names? It shows who you really are.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Aww, Ivan. I’ve YET to see you talk (accurately) about Christianity. All those evilbible dot com scriptures you have posted were Hebrew commandments!

                        • Let’s sum this up real fast: JAC, you’re a filthy disgusting bigot, and Jesus would more likely turn your water into pee instead of into wine. Muslims, Jews, and Christians are all good people. You’re the sick mother fvcker.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Aww Rando got his feelings hurt.

                        • How did I get my feelings hurt? You’re the lousy Christian here, not me.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I’m lousy because I told the truth about islamic scripture. Hmmm. I don’t see that in the Bible.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Except you didn’t. You lied about what the Qu’ran said and ignored attempts to correct your misrepresentations.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Ok Daniel, the atheist Bible/quran expert. Please tell us why arabs murder each other because they declare each differing sect to be fighting allah/muhammad?
                          If sura 5 were about invaders, then what scripture do they use to justify Sunni/Shia killings?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          No dice, JAC. You can’t try to divert the conversation.

                          You misrepresented the Qu’ran. Deal with it.

                          I won’t respond to another attempt at diversion.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          That’s not diversion. That’s proving what sura 5:33 means.
                          It can’t be an attack against them, as muhammad is already dead. Those who kill in the name of Sunni/Shia wars will tell you that the oposing sect is fighting allah/muhammad. It’s in MANY of their videos. It’s in islamic history for more than 1000 years.
                          It’s only in recent times have clerics tried to twist sura 5:33 to mean invaders. But if you look at sura 8, you will clearly see scripture referring to invaders. And yet when the choice comes to the wording, sura 8 actually says war. If sura 5 was meant to mean war, it would use the same arabic word as 8.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          I see. Muslims say that the Qu’ran is only about war against people that attack and you that they’re lying.

                          I’ll take their side over yours…especially since you don’t have evidence for your assertions.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Evidence? You mean posting the sura right here for everyone to read? Cause I did.
                          And while you try to change the wording fight into war, when you use that context, it doesn’t fit the entire verse, and it doesn’t agree with common practice in islamic nations.
                          So, do tell us what scriptures sunni/shia use to kill each other with?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Anyone that reads Sura 5 will know the context. You don’t. That’s all there is to it.

                          I’m done debating with you on both of the subjects in this thread. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

                          Now, I’m quite sure you’ll have some followup response, but I won’t be reading it.

                          Everyone else reading this thread? I suggest you do the same.

                          Thanks!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Yes, they will. You can’t go to war against a dead man. And you have yet to explain how the muslim justifies killing other muslims.

                        • Wow, JAC sure does hate Muslims. What a bigot.

                      • danielsangeo says:

                        Yes, I’m disputing that the word “Jew” is a slur for Hebrew people.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Then please explain to us where the term comes from.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          “Us”? You have a mouse in your pocket, or is that the royal “us”? LOL The rest of us know that it is not a slur. I guess if it’s a slur to YOU, the fact that you love to use it all the time must mean that YOU are casting the slur whenever you type the word “jew”.

                        • Captain Wow says:

                          The English word Jew continues Middle English Gyw, Iewe, a loan from Old French giu, earlier juieu, ultimately from Latin Iudaeum. The Latin Iudaeus simply means Judaean, “from the land of Judaea”.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          The word “Jew” is only offensive if it’s done simply to ridicule someone based on their religion or express stereotypes of the religion. It’s not offensive to simply call a Jewish person a Jew. Because, err, that’s what you call them…like a follower of Christianity is a “Christian” and a follower of Islam is “Muslim”: a follower of Judaism or an ethnic person from that land is called a “Jew”.

                          What other term would there be?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Damnit Daniel, you really need to create a FB account and come over, because you’re missing half the conversation.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          And it’s high-larious! ;)

                        • Cricket says:

                          DO IT, Daniel! DO IT!!!! *starts chant* FaceBOOK, faceBOOK, faceBOOK!!!! Hell, we’re less distracting over there than the frothiness over here, if for no other reason than we actually respect one another and differing opinions. And we don’t believe stupid things like calling someone a Jew is a slur. :-)

                        • dissimilitude says:

                          Cricket, you Caucasian….Christian, you! Lol….

                        • Cricket says:

                          Why, how dare you, you FEMALE!!!!!

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          And yet none of you can explain where the term comes from. *sigh* Some days it’s just too easy.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          You’re kidding, right? Can’t you SEE? Or (as you like to accuse everyone else) can’t you READ?? Both Captain Wow and Daniel provided you with explanations, but you are choosing (once again) to pretend no one is as smart as you are. You are SUCH a douchenozzle, I swear. No wonder you were kicked out of PKI2.0

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Cant you see? They didn’t explain where it comes from. No where in the Bible (or the Torah and Talmud) is the word jew or jewish used, except for a slur.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          You mean from the Kingdom of Judah? Judah, who was born from Jacob, meaning “praise”?

                          I don’t know what you mean.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          See Daniel, it’s another perk of PKI2.0, it’s a place that this fvckweasel was kicked out of for being…well, a fvckweasel. LOL

                        • pizzaburger says:

                          Please don’t use PK as a place to insult people directly with names like do*chenozzle and fvckweasel. I do not want to go back to filtering everyone. This comment is meant for everyone.

                        • Danbala says:

                          “Jew, duh”?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          No, from Judah, one of the patriarchs of the nation Israel. Son of Jacob.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          The Bible uses the word “Jew” or “Jewish” as a slur? Since when?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Isn’t that what I just said, JAC?

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Sorry for a possible inevitable triple-post:

                          I come here for the frothiness, to be honest. I’m here for the debate. I’m not really interested in the social networking side of things.

                          But, like I said, thanks for the offer to join FB. I’m just not interested.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Actually you said both Judah the man and the kingdom.
                          Do some searching on what Judah was called because of his business practices. I know what the name Judah means. Now tell us where the term Jew came from.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          No matter what, JACass will go to any lengths to prove himself right, even if his premise is so far fetched as to be…laughable. Now it is his life’s work to prove that the word “Jew” is a slur, on par with the n word to blacks. This has to be one of the funniest discussions I’ve seen in a long time, and I’m waiting breathlessly for JACass to produce a citation for his assertions.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Cite the “name” that Judah was called, please.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Hey Ivan, you make the claim to know so much about the Bible. Tell us where Jew came from. How did Judah get abbreviated to Jew? Or did you miss that week when your Baptist Preacher father force you to church?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          He was a DEACON, not a preacher, douchenozzle.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Oh my god….

                          Jew comes from the Latin “ludeaus” meaning “Judaean/From the Land of Judaea”. It’s called the evolution of words from one language to another.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Deacon, preacher, whatever. You still don’t know. For all the bragging about how much you do know about the scriptures (because they were forced on you) the truth is you don’t know.

                        • Danbala says:

                          EVOLUTION!?!?!? NAUGHTY STUFF!!!

                          WHARRGARBL

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          That’s a big leap you took there Daniel. Try again.
                          Tell us where Judah was made fun of by outsiders for his business practices.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          No. Why don’t you tell us?

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          I was going to post a list of the many times the word “jew” is used in the bible, but it would have been monstrously long! Go to a bible look up, and do a search for the word “jew”. You’ll be there awhile.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Because you are gloating on how you know so much, when clearly you don’t.
                          I have never read a reference to the Hebrews in any scripture from the Bible/Talmud/Torrah that calls for a Jew/jewish people. It ALWAYS speaks of Israel or Hebrew.
                          Lets start with that.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Come on Ivan. Look at the Greek/Aramic.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Let me see if this helps you out;

                          The Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים‎ “Yehudim” IPA: jɛhuːdiːm), also known as the Jewish people, are a nation and ethnoreligious group originating in the Israelites or Hebrews of the Ancient Near East. The Jewish ethnicity, nationality, and religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish nation.[6][7][8] Converts to Judaism, whose status as Jews within the Jewish ethnos is equal to those born into it, have been absorbed into the Jewish people throughout the millennia.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Or, the word “Jew” is not a slur. Ezra has a bunch of quotations with the word “Jew” used in generic terms.

                          Ezra 6:7
                          “Do not interfere with the work on this temple of God. Let the governor of the Jews and the Jewish elders rebuild this house of God on its site.”

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Don’t stop there Ivan. You’re leaving a lot out. Keep digging and tell us how the term Jew became a slur. And if it isn’t a slur, someone owes MJ an apology.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Look, I have a life. Just post your cite, or paste your quote, or whatever you need to do to make your point, so we can get on with it. None of us here believe the use of the word “jew” is a slur, so it’s on you to prove to us that it is. So get to it already.

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          No matter what you try to prove, I’ll never owe a zombie pedophile any apology.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          I don’t think he can. But I’ll wait for his citation (won’t hold my breath, though).

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          Yeah, good thing you didn’t, because he’s got nothing.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I told you where to look. And be sure to check it in aramic, not english.
                          I don’t care if you agree or not. I will always use Hebrew, Israeal or Israeli when referring to the descendants of Abraham though Sarah.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          You didn’t tell us where to look. Cite chapter and verse or go away.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          You would just argue about the context. I told you where to look. Please, tell us all where the outsiders were slamming Judah for his behavior.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          I can’t find you telling us where to look. Why are you so evasive?

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          I’m not evasive. I already told you. You love twisting things to suit your meanings. I’m not going to argue with you over context, when I’ve already seen you twist the quran to fit your views. Add in that you talk like you’re such a Bible expert, and yet you can’t tell me where Judah was insulted.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          Okay, cite it once more for me because I can’t find it.

                          I’ve read the Bible cover to cover and I honestly can’t remember the word “Jew” ever being used as a slur in the book. If you don’t cite it after this post, then I’m going to assume you don’t have the citation at all.

                        • keithybabes says:

                          I know a lot of Jews. I even married one (which theoretically makes my children Jewish). Haven’t met one yet who didn’t call him/herself Jewish, or who objected to being called a Jew. This thread is hilarious.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          You’re pretty good at assuming. So do it anyways. I’m not getting into one more battle with you dancing in the wind over wording.

                        • danielsangeo says:

                          You’re done, JAC.

                        • Justacarolinian says:

                          Only in your mind.

                        • Cricket says:

                          So where in the Bible is the word Jew used as a slur again? I must have missed that part……

                        • Ivan Teh Sock Monkey says:

                          “Oh, I know where it’s at, and I can only vaguely refer to it, and then act all superior when called on it. I really don’t know what I’m talking about, but I’m still gonna act like I won.” JAC, you are SUCH a douche. Put up or STFU. I’m with Daniel on this; you can’t produce a cite.

                          And Pizzaface, you can bite me about the “personal attack” sh!t, since you don’t seem to want to reign in zipper aka manchowder.

                        • Wicket says:

                          *scratches off “doucheweezle” from the list of unmoderated words

                        • dissimilitude says:

                          Found it….it’s in the Book of Cartman, 7:23.

              • Jane St.Clair says:

                Ah yes. One jerky person that a friend of yours told you about is indicative of an entire religion that has over a billion followers.

        • Coolidge says:

          Yes, actually the Quran doesn’t say anything about killing anyone because they’re non-Muslims. The verses which are often misquoted to support that misleading notion deal with the non-Muslims of that time which had attacked and killed Muslims.

          Indeed, the Quran clearly states that Muslims are to be on good terms – ” dealing justly ” – with non-Muslims who do not harm, attack or injure them.

  21. itsybitsy says:

    Just have a “draw cartoons of Mohamed day” – that should do it.

  22. me says:

    who falls for it first? fox of course.
    i bet within the next week.

  23. joe says:

    I find all this 4chan bashing ironic, given that the Cheezburger network (of which this site is a part) was built entirely on the backs of 4chan’s anonymous humor contributors.

  24. Nekon says:

    This post… broke the rules hardcore… way to put it out there that it’s a hoax before it even begins…. =.=

  25. haithur says:

    I have to admit, some of the arguments in this comment section made me lol.

    Also, not all Muslims are terrorists. I have a friend from Turkey who is a muslim… granted, not a strict one… she doesn’t wear a hijab and she listens to Metallica.

  26. Anna says:

    I like that any mention of 4chan turns the thread it’s mentioned on into /b/. You people are more entertaining than these so called lulz could ever hope to be.

    • Wicket says:

      oh its’ not just 4chan. it’s religion, guns, politicians, patriotism. If you hit a hot button here, you get a flame war. which i think (behind the scenes) is the basic point in the first place. a place to talk, debate, argue issues that may or may not matter to you, in the context of a Lol caption site…so we get sarcasm and fart jokes too.

  27. insidoroutside says:

    Actually, i heard that 4chan is fighting ACTA on a major scale, do you even know what it is? 4chan might be a lonely bunch of script kiddies and such, but they’re trying to protect privacy/constitutional rights.

  28. SO SCARED says:

    Anon would start the apocalypse for the lulz

  29. Selkceb says:

    Who here thinks Pedobear looked hansome in that suit?

  30. franken poo says:

    Antidisestablishmentarianism!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Newsletter Sign-up