moonbattery.gif


« Moonbat Quote of the Week | Main | California to Flush $600 Million Down Global Warming Research Center »


April 10, 2008

British Court Backs Al Qaeda

Abu Qatada, regarded as Osama bin Laden's "Ambassador to Europe," will have plenty of leisure time to pursue his extensive terrorist activities, now that the quisling moonbats ruling Britain have granted him a lifetime supply of free milk from the taxpayer teat.

Due to an insane ruling from the Court of Appeal, Qatada will soon be released from his high-security prison. Then he'll be eligible for £1,000 per month in welfare benefits.

Taxpayers also get to pay a fortune to keep him under 24-hour surveillance. Since hanging him would make too much sense to be feasible, and he can't be kept incarcerated, it might be nice to deport him back to his native Jordan. But no: the gibbering lunatics who run the courts in Britain have declared that would be a violation of his "human rights."

The ruling could effectively be overturned by the House of Lords. But then Qatada could just appeal to the moonbatty European Court of Human Rights, which is hardly likely to side with Western Civilization against al Qaeda.

Abu_Qatada.jpg
Abu Qatada sneers at the West, which is helping him destroy it from within.

On a tip from Essemess.

Posted by Van Helsing at April 10, 2008 8:56 AM

Comments

Maybe they're keeping him as eye candy.

Yeah, I just threw up a little in my mouth too.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 10, 2008 9:47 AM

Want to see what happens when you dont vote? 1594 students out of 8000 at Slippery Rock U have decide they should all waste $40,000 a semester on God only know what. How long before the moonbats do the same thing nationwide?

http://www.pittsburghpostgazette.com/pg/08101/872149-100.stm

"Students at Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania have voted in favor of paying $5 extra per semester to support environmentally friendly projects and awareness programs.

Of 1,794 votes cast in the campuswide student referendum, 1,548 -- or 86 percent -- were in favor, announced Dan Cannon, a senior who is a leader in the effort. Slippery Rock has about 8,000 students.

"It's a big move, and I'm really happy with the results," said Mr. Cannon."

Posted by: Anonymous at April 10, 2008 9:56 AM

"Maybe they're keeping him as eye candy.

Yeah, I just threw up a little in my mouth too." - Jay

Super-ugly, anti-social guys like this dude and Adam Gadahn must find literalist Islam appealing because they would never be able to land any women on their own merits in a free society. Or maybe they were just born evil. I don't know which, but most of these cretins are pretty damn ugly.


Posted by: forest at April 10, 2008 10:42 AM

Dude - is this Eddie Munster all growed up?

Posted by: Texan at April 10, 2008 10:57 AM

He's a jolly ol' soul!

He know's when your sleeping, he knows when your awake.
He knows when you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake!

Posted by: UCA at April 10, 2008 11:23 AM

Ugliest...man...ever...

Posted by: Sam Houston at April 10, 2008 11:25 AM

He doesn't look like a mass murderer at all, huh?

Posted by: Jimbo at April 10, 2008 11:32 AM

On day, while trying to prepare halal food, Abu Qatada leans a little to close to the stove. After he grew his beard back, he declared the stove anti-multicultural and demanded a new one.

Posted by: conservativeteen at April 10, 2008 11:48 AM

I've seen homely men like him in my nightmares... kind of a cross between an evil, nasty troll and Chuckie!!! No wonder they have to buy off/intimadate parents to sell them little girls... he's too ugly and insane to attract a normal,grown woman. ICK!!!!

Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at April 10, 2008 11:58 AM

Is this the same guy who claims to be pregnant? He looks like he's cradling a pregnant belly there.

Posted by: Lyle at April 10, 2008 11:58 AM

the first liberals to slither on the earth have been found:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7339508.stm

:)

Posted by: furballz at April 10, 2008 12:27 PM

There is a "cure" for traitors, spys and mad dogs. Oddly enough, it's the same in every case.

Posted by: KHarn at April 10, 2008 1:46 PM

It's mental illness not to recognize when an animal needs to be put down for its own good or the good of greater society. The UKtards need to rethink their strategy.

Posted by: skh.pcola at April 10, 2008 2:09 PM

And we're the "Apes & Pigs"?

Posted by: DANEgerus at April 10, 2008 2:40 PM

Why do these foul bastards always look like they swallowed a goat and haven't bathed in years?

Gad! What an ugly cuss!

*shudder*

Posted by: benning at April 10, 2008 4:56 PM

I don't they think swallowing is what they do to goats. But I get your point.

I'll bet he smells bad as he looks.

I'm afriad if I'd be too tempted to put a red dot between his eyes and squeeze.

Posted by: anon at April 10, 2008 5:25 PM

It's mental illness not to recognize when an animal needs to be put down for its own good or the good of greater society.

No, what you're suggesting there is national socialism. Get a grip.

The UKtards need to rethink their strategy.

The problem we "UKtards" have here is that despite a lot of people claiming this guy has done various things, nobody seems to have any evidence to convict him of anything under the law. I apologise for us "UKtards" inventing the common law system that a certain fine nation called the USA adopted from us, and has by all accounts done rather well with, but it is actually based on a principle that you actually have to convict people of crimes before punishing them. You want to just kill people you don't like, fine, go live in fucking Iran.

Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at April 10, 2008 5:44 PM

I've been exposed to plenty obnoxious Moonbat visages... But this guy just makes me want to punch his ugly, sneering mug.

Posted by: BURNING HOT at April 10, 2008 6:51 PM

Meanwhile Christian fundamentalists rape and abuse their own children. Where is the condemnation?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080410/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat;_ylt=AnluqfDII4hj_nVietKVYmWs0NUE

Posted by: Anonymous at April 11, 2008 12:19 AM

"You want to just kill people you don't like, fine, go live in fucking Iran."

Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at April 10, 2008 5:44 PM

First Ian, ya'll aren't UKtards. You just unfortunately have a "moonbat infestation" that is truly terrifying, as you well know. And now we are seeing it emerge in many of our own states.
Things are sometimes said that are born out of fear, rather than solid reason. I enjoy reading what you post and learn much from you.

And to cite an example of English jurisprudence in the US, our 4 Commonwealth states still have the most absolutely "English" version of legal and judicial systems here. Especially Virginia. (not so much Massachusetts which has bowed to moonbattery for years...) In Virginia they don't mess around and runs almost like a police state. Because they are a Commonwealth, they can circumvent federal laws many times with their own laws. It is pretty fasenating to see how the subtle nuances work. I have nothing but respect for the many wonderful freedoms I have enjoyed because our founding fathers managed to "steal the better parts of the UKs system to create this country.

Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at April 11, 2008 6:08 AM

Is he saying "I just ate a baby and Im STILL HUNGRY!!!"

Posted by: Anonymous at April 11, 2008 6:24 AM

Anon,

Christ didn't rape children, but mohammad did. Mohammad was also a polygamist, and Christ was not. So, these problems are often mainstream in Islam for these reasons, yet they are not in Christianity Any "Christians" who do these things cannot support their activities as can Muslims who choose to do them.

anyway, the polygamist freaks are being covered quite adequately by the liberal media and in the few non-liberal media outlets, so it's not really much of a blog story. And yes, I'm outraged, but it just isn't Christian doctrine, so quit trying to equate Christianity to Islam. It's making you look dumb.

Posted by: forest at April 11, 2008 6:25 AM

Anonimous is trying the "moral relativism" plea, FORREST. It never works.

So how come the "moral relativism" argument isn't used to justify WATER BOARDING, Anonymous? Come on, the MUSLIMS do far worse for MINOR crimes, so how come people like you don't say that it's OK for other countries to do it as well? Your kind keeps saying that "no culture is worse or better than another", after all.

Posted by: KHarn at April 11, 2008 11:32 AM

This craptastic F-ing piece of human filth would benefit from a .45 caliber lobotomy. Any volonteers?

Posted by: Ron Simpspn at April 11, 2008 12:21 PM

oh god, here we go again, Kharn. One more time. Just because I criticize Christian behavior, and yes these people ARE Christians, dosen't mean I approve of Muslims. Why can't you bring yourself to condemn the Christian fundamentalists?

forest, Mohammed has NOTHING to do with this case. Jesus Christ does. These people and others, and there are a significant number of them, beleive they are following Christian doctrine. They use the Bible to justify their behavior, because frankly, the Bible can be used to justify ANY behavior. Your personal interpretation of the Bible differs, so what?

ANd let's get one thing clear, these people are not simply polygamists. They are child rapists and pedophiles. These are things the Church has a long "mainstream" difficulty with. This is not some "one off". Their are literally hundreds and thousands of cases of child abuse stemming from the church, no matter what denomination, or sect of Christianity you look at. But for a start take a look at the Catholic church, and tell me there is not a significantly alarming long term issue with child abuse there. Look at the history of some of the Popes, way back. Child abuse and the church are no strangers.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 11, 2008 12:21 PM

Hey Burning Hot? Did you read the story you posted?
It is about MORMON Fundamentalist. People that even the Mormons have kicked out and are castigated roundly by American society.
Don't be such a fucking idiot.

Posted by: Ron Simpspn at April 11, 2008 12:24 PM

Once again, an anonymous troll thinks that anybody who says "I'm a Christian" must be a Christian, regardless of doctrine, conduct, theology, etc. Somebody, PLEASE buy this dimwit a dictionary...

Posted by: PabloD at April 11, 2008 12:49 PM

so these popes and priests and cardinals caught up in sexual abuse scandals weren't Christian either?

Why do you get to decide? Jesus is their lord and saviour and they are going to heaven when they die according to the Bible. Who the hell are you to deny that? Jesus! Their have been sainthoods given to pedophiles, and you are going to claim they weren't Christian.

On the other hand you are very very quick to accept it as truth when anyone calls themselves a Muslim.

Hypocritical swine!

Posted by: Anonymous at April 11, 2008 1:07 PM

"forest, Mohammed has NOTHING to do with this case."

Then why are you posting it under a story about an Islamic degenerate who models his lfe after Muhammad? Either you chose this thread randomly for a completely off topic post, or it is a lame tu quoque. I'm guessing the latter.

Posted by: forest at April 11, 2008 1:45 PM

Here is what Jesus had to say about people claiming to speak for him.

[15] Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
[16] Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
[17] Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
[18] A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
[19] Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
[20] Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
[21] Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
[22] Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mark 7:15-22

Posted by: LeftHandedRightWinged at April 11, 2008 2:32 PM

"Why can't you bring yourself to condemn the Christian fundamentalists?"

I have, but it's drowned out by YOUR ranting against ALL Christians. For you, it's "safer" than to criticise muslims.

Posted by: KHarn at April 11, 2008 2:45 PM

The question is, why are you guys even answering the stupid anonymous troll?

Posted by: V the K at April 11, 2008 3:47 PM

Ian, you are obviously not a UKtard, but "killing people that [I] just don't like" sounds like a great strategy, when faced with a jurisprudence system (such as the UK's) that has abdicated all liberal principles of justice. Your legal system has set free murderers, terrorists, and rapists because of an atrophied sense of multi-cultural "understanding" (or fill in the blank with whatever guides the assclowns who pass as judges and juries in your once-great country).

You posit that there is "no proof" that he did anything illegal...I have to wonder if any amount of proof would be enough for a nation controlled by moonbats on a suicidal mission of avoiding glaring societal problems.

I'll not be moving to Iran any time soon. I was close enough to it when I was in the sandbox during the first Gulf War and have no desire to live in squalor.

Posted by: skh.pcola at April 11, 2008 4:17 PM

Hypocritical swine!

Posted by: Anonymous at April 11, 2008 1:07 PM

And you making judgments when you can't even give a single verse in the Bible that defines what Christians are, and cannot "prove that what you are saying is even remotely the truth" since you have obviously never read the Bible, are what???

A miserable, half witted, babbling troll!

Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at April 11, 2008 7:15 PM

Hoosier mom, the bible is irrelevant. You see; I don't have to quote Scripture, because I don't believe in it. You have to quote to support your views. Look at Left handed's post. A bucnh of nonsense about trees and fruit that sheds no light on what good or evil is. Just gobbdedly gook, and poorly written gobbedly gook at that. How do I know that you are not the false prophets and that the mormons involved in this case are the real Christians. My gut instinct tells me that these Mormons are decidedly more devout in their beliefs than you are, that's for sure. You should probably look up to them.

But you refuse to answer my questions. Were saints, popes, priests, etc who were pedophiles Christians. Are they burning in hell now? Do you want me to give you a ┬┤list of popes, and other "holy" christians who have been celebrated by the church despite their pedophilia?

I'll let the Mormon's quote scripture to back up their beliefs, because frankly, any free thinking intelligent individual has to admit that the Bible as a whole makes zero sense, as evidenced by the meaningless post of scripture above.

Hell, one thing that's clear as day is the Commandment "thou shalt not kill" yet you have given your own son your blessings to be trained as a killer. How do you reconcile that? You really believe that Jesus would approve? You Christians always take what you want to hear from the Bible and interpret the scriptures any way you want to fit your preconcieved opinions. Killing is justified by Christians all the time, always has. Despite clear orders from your God agianst it.

Come on then, quote scripture that clearly and and decisevely condemns polygamy and pedophilia. The burden of proof is on you to prove the Mormons "not Christian". Not me.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 12, 2008 4:32 AM

the ultimate irony is that Jesus himself probably looked a hell of a lot more like the guy in the picture above then the blond haired, blue eyed surfer dude image we are all so much more familiar with.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 12, 2008 7:57 AM

Step 1: Troll howls for someone to show him a passage in the Bible that says "XYZ."
Step 2: Another poster cites several relevant Biblical passages.
Step 3: Troll says "The Bible is irrelevant!" and then proceeds to quote scripture in criticism of others.
VtK is right; I refuse to waste any more time on this fool.

Posted by: PabloD at April 12, 2008 10:19 AM

well Pablo, you just did waste more time. Although not nearly as much time as you have wasted scouring the Bible searching for meaning.

Let's set the record straight though, prior to left handed's post, I NEVER asked anyone to quote scripture to prove anything! So you are lying.

Two, since you blockheads insist that the Bible supports your own individual interpertation on scripture, I asked as a hypothetical follow-up for someone to show where in the Bible it EXPLICITLY and DECISVELY forbids polygamy and pedophilia. Because, I happen to know that for every passage you quote that may imply polygamy is wrong, there is another passage to be found that supports it. This is the way the Bible handles EVERY issue. You will always find whatever you are looking for in it. Believe me, if a simple commandmant like "Thou sahlt not kill" is open to interpretation, so is polygamy. Thoriughout time there have been a significant number of Christians who have "found" evidence that supports polygamy in the Bible.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 12, 2008 11:35 AM

Step 1: Pablo can't support his views through reason.
Step 2: pablo gets angry.
Step 3: Pablo continues to be incapable of articulatiing his views in a coherent, logical way.
Step 4: Pablo insults nemisis.
Step 5: Pablo throughs his hands up, says he's wasting his time, and believes he's "won" the argument.
Step 6: Pablo huddles in a corner with his bible and his ammo, waiting for Armageddeon.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 12, 2008 11:39 AM

"the ultimate irony is that Jesus himself probably looked a hell of a lot more like the guy in the picture above then the blond haired, blue eyed surfer dude image we are all so much more familiar with."

The "surfer dude" image you cite was created by the HIPPIES in the sixties. The "Black Jesus" was created by the "Afro-American" radicals about the same time.
These are YOUR people, Anonymous at April 12, 2008 7:57 AM, the destroyers of civil society.

Posted by: KHarn at April 12, 2008 2:49 PM

I'm just posting a random thought... not a reply to a troll... If I had a "nemisis", which I don't, he/she would probably be somebody who could spell the word "nemesis" correctly.

Posted by: PabloD at April 12, 2008 4:12 PM

ANd let's get one thing clear, these people are not simply polygamists. They are child rapists and pedophiles.

So far as the story you've linked to says, Anonymous, they seem to be alleged ephebophiles if anything, not paedophiles. In either case, the -phile suffix is a medical term denoting a fascination with a particular thing. A person who has one relationship with a teenager among other relationships with older people is not an ephebophile (let alone a paedophile); if they're specifically sexually interested in teenagers they're an ephebophile, if they're specifically interested in children they're a paedophile. I'm sure as a stickler for science and accuracy you'll want to get all this straight.

So far as can be told from the article, they're a bunch of creepy religious weirdos with a different view of what the age of consent ought to be. Considering that varies within the USA from state to state, and across the world, with all sorts of complex differentials (e.g. 14 year olds can have sex with somebody up to 17 type rules) it's a bit tenuous to start throwing around psychological diagnoses. It's also worth mentioning that these days in the UK for instance somewhere around a third to a half of girls start their sex lives before the age of consent (16, here), most of them with older men.

So all you've got really is a religious sect with an earlier marriagable age than some other places, versus a religious sect who want to destroy western society by threat and violence.

Bit of a weak comparison really.

***

King Edward II married his wife Isabella of France when she was 12, described at the time by Geoffrey of Paris as "the beauty of beauties...in the kingdom if not in all Europe." Unfortunately Edward was ghey. She later raised an army and deposed him. lolz.

Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at April 12, 2008 5:04 PM

hey Pablo, more time wasted!

Step 7: Pablo continues to lack a substantive argument to back up his poorly or unreasoned opinions.
Step 8: Pablo denys he is responding to previous critical comments.
Step 9: Pablo lashes out at nemesis's spelling!
Step 10: Pablo dashes back to his basement to huddle again with his Bible and ammo.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 13, 2008 12:22 AM

You do realize, Pablo, that in this thread,as with most of your comments, you have not posted a single thought which would or could substantiate your views or any view, for that matter.

Instead every single one of your posts is either an angry frustrated insult or a comment on my spelling. Mighty Christian of you!

Posted by: Anonymous at April 13, 2008 12:30 AM

WTF 1,000 pounds a month is only slightly less than what i make for working full time (professional position, thanks for asking, trolls) and millions of people worldwide make money off what i spend 50-70 hours a week writing.. oh well guess the nanny state does have its advantages huh (as long as you'd be okay with living off other people's taxes i guess)

oh btw for the liberal moral equivalist crowd here, al qaeda = thousands of deliberate murders of civilians for political/religious reasons in the last few years, fundamentalist christians = approximately 0 for same purpose. yeah it's probably all in the nuance but hey i prefer to look at the numbers, whaddya say?

Posted by: mandible claw at April 13, 2008 8:57 AM

Do you recognize his wristwatch? It is a Breitling Navitimer Montbrillant. It retails for about $3500.00. Seriously. That is an expensive watch. Jeez.

Posted by: Anthony at April 14, 2008 3:34 AM

I have friends who are atheists, who have read the Bible from cover to cover. They can go to it and point out exactly what they have a problem with. They also know how to define a Christian based on the "teachings of Jesus Christ". Even Jesus himself taught that not all who profess it are truly a part. How can you not believe in something you never read, let alone make judgements when you don't know the facts? One makes a believable arguement if they have read about what they disagree with. I read Marx in high school and because I read it, I know what it is about and can make the logical assumption that I would not want to live in a socialist society based on having read it and seeing history play out. You are entitled to believe what you will, but to make generalized statements about Christianity based on zero knowledge of the subject... well I don't respect those opinions.

Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at April 14, 2008 10:00 AM

ok hoosier mom, i'd really liek to hear you quote some Marx...."I read it in high school"-what a laugh!

Posted by: Anonymous at April 14, 2008 9:40 PM

you see I've studied some history and based on how Christians have behaved throughout it, I can make the logical assumption that I would not want to be a part of formal Christian society. I can do all this without reading the silly book of fairy tales that accompany it.

I'm curious: have you read the Quaran from cover to cover?

Posted by: Anonymous at April 14, 2008 9:43 PM