I apologize for the hiatus, but my computer has been on its own hiatus: I just got it upgraded by a good friend, but it took a week. Thus the reason for the lapse in entries. Now I'll be going on a golf outing "just for the guys" for a week, so it will be another week before my next post. This will give my limited brain time to come up with some ideas for this blog: I'll be taking notes.
First of all, I would like to draw your attention to the comments to my blog. The person who identifies himself as a "relative" has some severe problems, and I don't even know who he is. Mainly, he has not accepted Christ as his Savior. Other things relate to the inaccuracy of his comments...we wont get into that.
We now have a new President Elect. Congratulations to Barack Hussein Obama! He won the election fair and square. He defeated another liberal (though not nearly as liberal as he is) in a history making election. He has become the first person of "color" to win the office office of the president, but we must remember that he is the President of the United States; not the just First Black President of the United States. My prayers will be with him and his appointees for the entire time of his presidency. With that said, I encourage you all to pray for this man too. Like any leader; he needs all the help he can get, and praying for God's intervention is the best we can do.
It amazes me that John RINO McCain's advisers are now blaming Sarah Palin for his loss. Sarah Palin was the only bright spot in the McCain campaign. She united the conservative base which McCain could not do. She was the reason the election was as close as it was. I believe that we have not seen the last of Sarah Palin on the national front. She would have had a better chance of beating Sen. Obama than Sen. McCain. She is a true conservative.
I would like to thank the anonymous donor for the gift of "Meanings of the Quran" and "Seeking the Treasures of the Quran". I'll put these books along side of my word for word English translation of the Quran: a book Muslims are trying to get outlawed in America. Now I have to make up my mind as to whether I will trust what I read in the Quran or whether I will trust what a Muslim leader wants me to get out of the Quran. Boy this is difficult! I think I will go with the word for word translation, but these books will help me to understand where the Muslims stand, and what they are trying to accomplish. It still remains that the Muslims are the most violent group of people who have existed on the face of the earth. Their religion promotes violence against "the infidels". They are not a religion of love. Just look at how they treat their women and those who will not convert. You can say good things about them, and I personally know one who I love and respect, and if there is one there is bound to be more; however, the fact remains that it took from 9-11-01 to 12-13-01 for one of their leaders here in this Great Nation to say that what happened on 9-11 was wrong. That sure sounds like a religion of love to me.
The existence of any nation on the face of the earth is there because God so ordains it. All nations and governments exist because of Him. He is in control! There is nothing that happens without His approval. He is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. Everything that happens is known to Him before it happens. Therefore, Sen. Obama is a part of His plan, and he merits our respect for that reason. Let us not prejudge President Elect Obama before he takes office. Because I am an American before any political party or leaning I wish Sen. Obama nothing but the very best.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
61 comments:
Leviticus 20:9
If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.
20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.
20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death.
Deuteronomy 22:20-1 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house.
Exodus 35:2
For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.
Deuteronomy 7:1-2 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations . . . then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.
20:10-17 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . . This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.
Ezekiel 20:25-26 I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by; I let them become defiled through their gifts—the sacrifice of every firstborn—that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I am the LORD.
Ephesians 5:22-24 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Exodus 21:20-21 If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men.
2:18 Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.
Leviticus 25:44-45
Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.
"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)"
When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are about to enter and occupy, he will clear away many nations ahead of you: the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. These seven nations are all more powerful than you. When the LORD your God hands these nations over to you and you conquer them, you must completely destroy them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them, and don't let your daughters and sons marry their sons and daughters. They will lead your young people away from me to worship other gods. Then the anger of the LORD will burn against you, and he will destroy you. (Deuteronomy 7:1-4 NLT)
I'm not exactly sure what point you are trying to make. If you would like to take these verses one at a time, and explain your point, I will be happy to respond.
Oh, Don. I find it surprising that you don't know who this is. You've only been preaching to Pam and Ron about your wacky bullshit for the last several months via email.
You're famous now, Don. How does it feel? The Internet now knows who you are, and the Internet never forgets.
I admire your courage to continue posting your hideous ideas, despite the fact that I have proven you to be a complete idiot to the entire Internet. Your ideas are wrong. Your entire philosophy is wrong.
You are spineless.
I call into question your very existence as a human being, and I am ashamed to even call you family.
Quit preaching idiocy, or the attacks will continue.
Wow, a conservative who still thinks Palin had any inkling of a chance against Obama by herself. Denial runs deep in your head I suppose... If you ignore the obvious fact that she's a woman/white/whatever and focus on the actual ideas she was trying oh so articulately to convey, she'd still come off as a retard to both liberals and conservatives alike. The Republican party really got their asses handed to them because of Palin. They were looking for a promoter for their conservative, anti-intellectual, nepotistic, misogynistic agenda and instead ended up with a PRODUCT of that agenda: a woman with big sense of entitlement but limited in both education and ability by the very system and values she idealizes.
The so-called conservative base which Palin was suppose to unite and revitalize are composed of THE WORST EXAMPLES OF HUMAN BEINGS allowed to exist in this country. Racists, anti-intellectuals, and all manner of violent inbred retards suddenly found themselves and their views in the public eye, and for one redeeming moment, enough people were disgusted enough to stand up against them.
Do not profess to be on some sort of a high horse over religions such as Islam. Christianity itself has its share of violent methodologies when dealing with non-believers. I will concede that while most of today's religions seem to progress beyond stoning and beheading as methods of religious reinforcement, fundamentalist Islam seems to be stuck in the dark ages. However, fundamentalist Christian values such as those of your own are rapidly rivaling the levels of violence and intolerance you so arrogantly point out with Islam. In fact, many of the values you are advocating are remarkably similar to fundamentalist Islam to the point where I suspect that you secretly lust for the power and privilege you would be afforded under an Islamic society. Time to switch Sunday reading material?
I have a joke for you:
A pious man was walking along a dirt road, admiring God's creation when up in the distance, he sees a convoy of elephants headed slowly in his direction. Feeling that his faith was especially powerful, he began praying to God to protect him. A traveling merchant passed the man and said, "You should get out of the road. There is a convoy of elephants coming down in your direction."
"Fear not kind merchant," boasted the man, "for God will protect me."
He then began praying even more intensely as he continued walking down the road. Next, he passed a family riding on a ox-drawn wagon, who told him about the same convoy of elephants headed his way, but again, his confidence in his faith led him to continue his travel down the same dirt road, praying more forcefully and loudly then ever.
When he finally reached the head of the convoy, the elephant driver shouted at him to get out of the way, but the man just kept walking until he was directly under the hoof of the first elephant and was stomped into the dirt. After the fifth elephant had trampled over him, the man, crushed and battered but barely alive thanks to the dirt yielding just enough to let him sink in a little, lamented at God for not protecting him.
"Oh why has thou forsaken thee my Lord?" he pleaded. God replied, "Well, first I sent a merchant to warn you, then that family, and then finally coerced the elephant driver himself to give you a shout out..."
WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE PICTURES OF THE MAN STRETCHING OPEN HIS ANUS RENDERED BEAUTIFULLY IN MADD ASCII GRAPHIX?!?!? ALSO, HOW DID YOUR DATE GO WITH THAT LEATHER DADDY DON TRIPPE FROM SUCK GA!?!?!?
Hey Don, its me, Dereck. We met online at www.gaydaddycentral.com.
I just wanted to know what size butt plug I should bring over for our "date." I can bring over several different sizes and shapes if you wanna try em all out, but if you have a specific color, shape, or diameter in mind, it'll be easier for both of us since I'll have room to bring over some of the more "FUN" toys. Also, do you want to be the top or the bottom this time?
Ian, I wasn't sure which of my cousins was involved in the vulgar comments left on my blog. There are a couple of things you need to know. First, I will be glad to discuss any point with you one on one. The sharing of ideas is a very therapudic exersize. Second, I have never personally attacked anyone, and don't intend to start. I find that those who resort to name calling have no real ideas or solutions; all they have is resentment. This is why I left the Democrat party more than 17 years ago. They bacame a party on zero ideas who resorted to personal attacks because they became only interested in power at any cost. I, on the other hand, was then and still am about the preservation of our Great Nation and all that made it great; and the knowledge that God is the reason that we became great in the first place. You and I have never discussed politics, but I am willing.
You know what Ian, I am ashamed to call you "family". You come to the reunions once every 5 years. You don't know my father, and you should show some fucking respect. Just because you don't agree with his "wacky bullshit" doesn't give you the right to call someone who has way more experience in life than you an idiot. Especially an older family member of yours. But it doesn't surprise me. Reading your responses to my father's blog reveals your fascist ideologies. And before you ignorantly think that I am calling you a racist by using the term fascist, or am anyway comparing you to Hitler (who was not a fascist, even though some like to think that when calling people on the right fascists), do some research on the subject. Your intolerance of religion and other people's patriotism and ideologies is textbook fascism. Lighten up, homeboy; they're just his opinions. Your opinions my be different than his. I have an ass load of differing opinions than my father, but I know how to discuss them civilly and maturely. If you have different opinions than his, come to him like a man and debate it, instead of dishing out insults. He would gladly discuss differences in opinions, and who knows, maybe you will come to see his views more eye to eye, and vice versa. Don't let politics come between blood. That goes for all my family members....including my father.
Fascism:
A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.
– Robert O. Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism
So funny of you to mention fascism when by the very definition of the word, the views that your father advocates are all working towards the goal of a fascist society. The brand of patriotism and religion that your father is espousing is of the more intolerant variety, and deserves all the ridicule it can get whenever it pours forth from his mouth. No one is denying that he should be allowed to have these opinions and views, however disagreeable they are to normal sane people, but the moment they come out of his head and into the real world, they are subject to whatever criticisms and objections his audience may have. By putting them on this blog, he has made the entire internet as his audience. If your father is getting so worked up over a few vulgar obscene comments that he must ask his own son to speak out on his behalf, then I suggest he'd preach to a different audience, one which consists of his own close circle of bed-sheet donning, cross-burning friends.
First of all my father did not ask me to respond. He is a man. He can speak for himself. I am responding to you. Are you sticking up for your parents with your remarks? Secondly, if I may pick apart the quote you posted, "obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity". While you could misconstrue this excerpt to fit your agenda, what it is really stating identifies more with the left and their ant-individual and multicultural philosophies. Here's a quote from another expert on fascism, seeing that it is one of the hardest political philosophies to grasp:
"Fascism is a religion of the state. It assumes the organic unity of the body politic and longs for a national leader attuned to the will of the people. It is totalitarian in that it views everything as political and holds that any action by the state is justified to achieve the common good. It takes responsibility for all aspects of life, including our health and well-being, and seeks to impose uniformity of thought and action, whether through force or regulation and social pressure. Everything, including the economy and religion, must be aligned with its objectives. Any rival identity is part of the 'problem' and therefore defined as the enemy."
-Jonah Goldberg
It is arguable that extreme leftists in this country embody all of the above aspects. The point of a fascist society is to tear down everybody's beliefs, and make them drones to the state. Mussolini, the father of fascism, was not a pious Bible thumper. In fact, he hated Christianity, as you do, and even wrote plays and books about destroying Rome and the Catholic church.
And let's not forget that progressives in the early part of the 20th century, including FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Henry Ford, and Father Coughlin, admired Mussolini and thought he was doing a grand job in Italy before he sided with Germany.
Here's another quote for you:
"We do not distrust the future. The people have not failed. In their need and discretion they have asked for discipline and direction under leadership. They have made me the present instrument of their wishes, and in that spirit I take it."
To a liberal's ear, that makes them warm and fuzzy. To my ear, that scares the ever loving shit out of me. It shouts "power hungry dictator" to me. By the way, that's a quote from FDR. I only mention this because the left love to put FDR on a pedestal as a man for the people, and love throwing the terms "fascists" and "Nazis" around when talking about conservatives, when in actuality, he identified more with fascism than the religious right do. According to Robert Ickes, FDR's most important architect of the New Deal, FDR acknowledged that "What we were doing with the New Deal in this country were some of the same things that were being done in Russia and even some of the things that were being done in Nazi Germany. But we were doing it in an orderly way." And to think that the cover headline on Newsweek this week is "Obama's New New Deal."
Am I comparing Obama and FDR to Hitler, Mussolini, or Stalin? Certainly not. That would be ignorant and pigheaded. So would calling someone a racist cross burner for their religious beliefs, or acting as if Old Testament scriptures are comparable to Christian beliefs.
All this is beside the point. What pisses me off is the lack of respect you are showing my father. You can sit at home reading "The Communist Manifesto" and Friedrich Nietzsche and be pissed at the world for all I care, but you didn't have to disrespect my father the way that you did. What the hell is wrong with you? I would never in the world think of speaking to your parents the way you did to my father. Not only because they're family, but because they're older, too. Do they not teach manners in your re-education camp?
Hey Ian, I noticed that almost all of the Scripture you were quoting(Except for the Corinthians, and the Peter verses-which by the way you GREATLY misunderstood)were from the Old Testament. Why don't you read a little more from the New Testament, which focuses more on Love(since that is what Christianity bases it's belief on)? It is reffered to as the New Covenant because Jesus is preaching Love instead of the extreme measures taken in the Old Testament.
Here's a little fun-fact for you; All but two of the major conflicts going on in the WORLD right now involve Muslims. If that dosen't speak VOLUMES to you then i don't know what will.
P.S. Whoever is calling my father a fag better hope you're not a member of this family.
Wow, the Trippe crotchlings are out in force today. Where is good ole Don anyways?
Here's a little fun-fact for you; All but two of the major conflicts going on in the WORLD right now involve Muslims. If that dosen't speak VOLUMES to you then i don't know what will.
Here's another fun little fact: The second largest Christian denomination in the U.S.A. (The PCA) was founded based on the desire to keep maintain the institution of slavery, and had actively and violently campaigned against civil rights up to the 1960s.
Here's another little known fact: All abortion-related violence, from bombings to assassinations, were committed by Christian extremists.
Here's another fun little fact: Almost all white supremacy groups such as the neo-nazis and KKK are linked to the Christian identity movement, which is an offshoot of fundamentalist Christianity.
We can go back to the Crusades era and beyond with this. In fact, as your father so delightfully insisted, since the U.S.A. is and should be a Christian country, and is not only involved in many of the major conflicts of the world, but is actually the instigator in many of them as well, doesn't that speak VOLUMES to YOU about Christians? Of course not! Check your logic, I think it's broken.
Also, I call your father a fag because his actions and beliefs fit my definition of general faggotry. Your vague allusion to some violent reprisal over this fact implies you've known this all along but are still in the denial about it.
Great...another misinformed individual skewing the facts because of his/her Western/Christian/White guilt. Let me break down the Crusades for you:
It must be admitted that there is much to dislike about the European Crusades. If they are contrasted with the mission and ministry of Jesus and the first generations of Christians, then the Crusades do not look so good. But did the Europeans launch the first Crusade in a mindless, bloodthirsty and irrational way, or were there more pressing reasons? Were they the only ones to be militant?
The word 'crusade' (derived from the Latin word for 'cross') in an Islamic context means a holy war or jihad. It is used as a counterweight to the Muslim accusation that only the Europeans launched crusades. Muslims seem to forget that they had their own, for several centuries before the Europeans launched theirs as a defense against the Islamic expansion.
Here's a little time line. Feel free to do your own research. Read the writings of Tabari:
630: Two years before Muhammad's death of a fever, he launches the Tabuk Crusades, in which he led 30,000 jihadists against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting 'agreements' from northern tribes. They could enjoy the 'privilege' of living under Islamic 'protection', if they paid a tax (jizya).
This tax sets the stage for Muhammad's and the later Caliphs' policies. If the attacked city or region did not want to convert to Islam, then they paid a jizya tax. If they converted, then they paid a zakat tax. Either way, money flowed back to the Islamic treasury in Arabia or to the local Muslim governor.
632—634: Under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr the Muslim Crusaders reconquer and sometimes conquer for the first time the polytheists of Arabia. These Arab polytheists had to convert to Islam or die. They did not have the choice of remaining in their faith and paying a tax. Islam does not allow for religious freedom.
633 The Muslim Crusaders, led by Khalid al—Walid, a superior but bloodthirsty military commander, whom Muhammad nicknamed the Sword of Allah for his ferocity in battle, conquer the city of Ullays along the Euphrates River (in today's Iraq). Khalid captures and beheads so many that a nearby canal, into which the blood flowed, was called Blood Canal.
634: At the Battle of Yarmuk in Syria the Muslim Crusaders defeat the Byzantines. Today Osama bin Laden draws inspiration from the defeat, and especially from an anecdote about Khalid al—Walid. An unnamed Muslim remarks: 'The Romans are so numerous and the Muslims so few.' To this Khalid retorts: 'How few are the Romans, and how many the Muslims! Armies become numerous only with victory and few only with defeat, not by the number of men. By God, I would love it . . . if the enemy were twice as many'. Osama bin Ladin quotes Khalid and says that his fighters love death more than we in the West love life. This philosophy of death probably comes from a verse like Sura 2:96. Muhammad assesses the Jews: '[Prophet], you are sure to find them [the Jews] clinging to life more eagerly than any other people, even polytheists'.
634—644: The Caliphate of Umar ibn al—Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.
635: Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus
636: Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.
637: Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah
638: Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.
638—650: Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.
639—642: Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.
641: Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.
643—707: Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.
644: Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.
644—650: Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.
656: Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.
656: Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.
657: Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali
661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.
661—680: the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus
673—678: Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire
680: Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.
691: Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.
705: Abd al—Malik restores Umayyad rule.
710—713: Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.
711—713: Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.
719: Cordova, Spain, becomes seat of Arab governor
732: The Muslim Crusaders stopped at the Battle of Poitiers; that is, Franks (France) halt Arab advance
749: The Abbasids conquer Kufah and overthrow Umayyids
756: Foundation of Umayyid amirate in Cordova, Spain, setting up an independent kingdom from Abbasids
762: Foundation of Baghdad
785: Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova
789: Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; foundation of Fez; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.
800: Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia
807: Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non—Muslim prayer houses and of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem
809: Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy
813: Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country
831: Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy
850: Caliph al—Matawakkil orders the destruction of non—Muslim houses of prayer
855: Revolt of the Christians of Hims (Syria)
837—901: Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France
869—883: Revolt of black slaves in Iraq
909: Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia
928—969: Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969)
937: The Ikhshid, a particularly harsh Muslim ruler, writes to Emperor Romanus, boasting of his control over the holy places
937: The Church of the Resurrection (known as Church of Holy Sepulcher in Latin West) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked
960: Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam
966: Anti—Christian riots in Jerusalem
969: Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo
970: Seljuks enter conquered Islamic territories from the East
973: Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids
1003: First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed
1009: Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937)
1012: Beginning of al—Hakim's oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians
1015: Earthquake in Palestine; the dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses
1031: Collapse of Umayyid Caliphate and establishment of 15 minor independent dynasties throughout Muslim Andalus
1048: Reconstruction of the Church of the Resurrection completed
1050: Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.
1055: Seljuk Prince Tughrul enters Baghdad, consolidation of the Seljuk Sultanate
1055: Confiscation of property of Church of the Resurrection
1071: Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia
1071: Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine
1073: Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)
1075: Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia
1076: Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana
1085: Toledo is taken back by Christian armies
1086: Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca
1090—1091: Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands
1094: Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970
1095: Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099
But I'm sure you already knew all that. Douchebag.
The Trippe crotchspawn misses the point entirely. Let me spell it out for you in plain English:
You deride all Muslims and their entire religion as being characterized as such for the involvement of the few Muslim nations in today's major theaters of war. I merely pointed out that since your father keeps insisting that since the U.S. is a Christian nation, then their involvement in major conflicts (and in the most recent case, instigators of the conflict) would speak volumes about the violent and warlike nature of Christianity and all Christians by the same retarded logic you chose to use. It would seem that the fruit does not fall far from the decrepit and diseased tree which spawned thee, Alex.
You used the crusades as one of your examples. I merely pointed out that the Muslims actually started the crusades. I can tell you realized that you were wrong because you resorted to name calling....again. You're welcome for teaching you something you didn't know. And by the way, I would love to hear of the recent wars that Christians/Americans instigated. You keep stating that and not giving any examples. Leave the personal insults out of it, and let's have an intellectual debate. Asshat.
Attention retard with limited reading comprehension skills:
I brought up crusades as an example of just how ridiculous it is characterize Christians (or followers of any religion for that matter) by events involving countries or regions whose populations happen to contain a majority of their followers. Maybe if you read my previous post a few times, you might begin to realize who got "schooled".
I use name calling because you just proved that your reading skills need improvement, and repeatedly calling your father a fag seems to elicit an especially colorful response from you. The majority of your audience are trolls anyways. Get used to it.
As for the "Christian nation instigator" example, I'm surprised that you still aren't aware of what our troops are currently doing in Iraq. And to get your right-wing kool-aid out of the way, it's been confirmed that there were no WMDs and no links to 9/11 or Al-Qaeda. It also defeats most humanitarian purposes when you account for the civilian death toll.
I'm sorry. You're right. Saddam was a good man, and we shouldn't have messed with him. And we never found the fertilizer that he used to gas Shiite villages. And we never found Russian MiGs burried in the sand. And Hans Blix and Kofi Anan have no ties to the Food for Oil Scandal. And none of the Democrat Senators voted on going to Iraq. It was all a right wing ploy. And you never compared the Crusades with Christian violence in a past post. And you're an extremely intelligent individual who brings valid points to the table, and doesn't have to resort to inane name calling because of your lack of self confidence. So, like I said, do a little research and try to debate civilly, or don't read the blog. Why would you keep reading someones blog if it makes you irate enough to resort to insults? Calm down.
All valid points, but it comes down the the burning question: did we actually GO to war in Iraq over any of those reasons you've listed? I'll even throw you a free one: we even found chemical warheads, but they were filled with expired and inactive components that were already inspected and left behind by the U.N. from the first Gulf War, but does it really mater? Were these reasons even the focus during the initial invasion? You bring up these post-invasion justifications but what you are doing is being an apologist for an largely unjustified and poorly planned war.
I never said Saddam was even remotely a decent man but nice try at the derail. Still doesn't change the fact that you have reading difficulties. If you wanna continue characterizing entire religions based on their participation in today's conflicts, I would still keep calling you a douchebag ignoramus (among other choice terms). Where is your daddy anyways? I'd be worried if he suddenly started hanging around a bunch of new friends of the hairy, leather-vest/bondage gear wearing variety...
You love throwing out homosexual accusations. Maybe it's something in your subconscious. As I see it, we entered a war with a psycho dictator in the 90s and didn't finish it. Clinton sent a few bombs their way and it still didn't finish it. Now we're finishing it. Saddam was a threat to our allies. He promoted terrorism by paying family members of suicide bombers. I do believe he was trying to produce nuclear weapons. The horribly corrupt UN repeatedly threatened that they were going to inspect him for years. When they finally did inspect him he didn't have any nukes. You are correct on that point. But let me pose this scenario for you: If you were a kingpin druglord and the DEA called you once a week for years threatening to search your property, would you continue to keep drugs in your house?
I love throwing out the gay remarks because it seems to elicit the best responses :). Here's another bone for you: Saddam did have ~500tons of uranium stockpiled, but none of it was enriched nor even close to being weapons-grade level. They were left-over from when Israel destroyed the Tuwaitha reactor in the 80s. If he was developing nuclear weapons, and this was all he had (the Niger yellowcake purchases were outright lies), why oh why wasn't there any evidence of enrichment? You can continue to believe and suspect all you want, but the fact is, he wasn't making the effort and probably didn't have the funds to do it. I won't deny the possibility that he probably did keep up the pretense of trying to goad us into invading and score some sort of moral victory, however interpreted by his psychotic mind, but in the end, that's the extent of it. Also, keep in mind, we put this psycho in power a few decades ago.
If you were a kingpin druglord and the DEA called you once a week for years threatening to search your property, would you continue to keep drugs in your house?
Probably not, but better yet, would you continue to engage in drug-related activities while knowingly under such close surveillance and scrutiny?
Why do some Christians ignore the old testament if it's usually included with the new testament? Shouldn't it be crossed out entirely?
Also, Ian didn't post those old testament verses, nor did he include any input/inferences on them- so how could they be misunderstood by if nothing was said about them? They were posted for open ended discussion.
Thanks for being a presumptuous faggot who selectively chooses the words of our lord. The lord hates fags like you and that's why he's damning America.
http://www.godhatesamerica.com/
Amen Brother Phelps!
You can come up with any number of excuses, justifications, or unconventional/alternative interpretations for all the examples being thrown out there, Alex, but it doesn't change the fact that you are a prejudicial self-righteous faggot like your father. At best, I'd consider you to be maliciously ignorant. You pick and choose which facts to memorize to support your already-established worldview just like you pick and choose which dogma to follow to maintain a smug sense of religious and moral superiority or yours.
Wow. You keep throwing out the word "dogma". I'm impressed. But you don't know my views. You're jumping to conclusions. I love my father. He's my hero. That doesn't mean that I agree with all that he says. I'm just asking you to show some respect. I don't know who's posting these hateful messages about my father, but I hope it's not a family member of mine. Pam is one of my favorite relatives, and I hope it is not her son. Let's just agree to disagree, and let bygones be bygones. I don't want retarded tension at the family reunion. I respect Pam, and I would never ever say anything to disrespect her, no matter what our conflicting arguments are, and I expect the same from you in regards to my father. Lord knows I don't agree with everything he says, but he is an elder, and I give him the utmost respect. Please stop posting hateful remarks about him. If you disagree with his views, don't read his blog. It's an opinion page. It's not like any of this is going to matter in the long run. I would love to discuss these issues with you civilly, but leave the insults to my father out of it, please. Thank you. If you would like a mature debate, feel free to email me at alextrippe@comcast.net.
Name calling is the ultimate sign of ignorance.
I'm not sure if you are aware of exactly what happened with your father's blog, but to sum it up, it was introduced to a popular internet forum were his views were introduced to several tens of thousands of people who found them to be profoundly repulsive. They carefully documented their disapproval through various postings of gayporn, vulgar/obscene suggestions, and other insults in the comments section, in addition to actually finding out your father's street address, home number, and name of your mother and using the details to set up a bunch of fictitious accounts for gay dating and pornographic websites. Your father mentioned the promotional copy of the Koran he got in a previous post, but what he didn't mention were the likely piles of complementary subscriptions for hardcore gayporn and promotional sex toys he has been getting, not to mention the odd phone call from local single guys looking for a little manlove.
I don't expect there will ever be a rational discussion, at least not without extensive disrespect to your father's sexual orientation. It's unpleasant, but that is the way of things.
There ARE places with receptive audiences for your father's opinions. I suggest the forums at www.stormfront.org. They have been espousing the same views decades before the epiphany that led your father to develop these ultra-nationalistic, religiously fundamentalist views. You will also find out about the goals which these hate groups wish to achieve through this seemingly nationalist political angle, and probably realize why so many people find your father to be reprehensible. It's a hate-speech playing dress-up.
The greater question is: Why do you feel the need to speak out on his behalf? He's a grown man and can stand behind his opinions. Some might even say that given the consequences of his ideology, he has the responsibility to stand behind it. I'm sure he can also deal with a few smartass comments, whether on the net or in real life. You come here saying that you don't share his opinions and just want others to treat him with respect, but then you go and defend his opinions anyways. No one will take you seriously because of this. And the fact that you (un)intentionally came off as a jingoistic bigot with the Muslim war comment probably didn't help either.
So you agree with freedom of speech only of you agree with the other person's opinion? How patriotic of you. How bout this, fuckstick, if you don't agree with his opinions, why do you come to his site? Are you a sado-masochist? Your obviously don't believe your opinions are valuable because of the lame ass insults you dish out. "Fag this". "Gay that". Are you in third grade? Grow the fuck up and try posting a logical comment and stop hiding behind the "anonymous" title.
I think your brain just blew a gear. Freedom of speech entitles your father to say or believe whatever the hell he wants (short of yelling fire in a crowded church), it also entitles ME to respond in kind. He can post his opinions "wherever", but must also accept the reception he gets from "wherever". I actually encouraged him to step up and justify his remarks and opinions several times. How UNpatriotic of you to think my response of disapproval somehow denies your father's first amendment rights when there is nothing stopping him from spewing out more mouth garbage.
I include an insult or two into most of my responses to provoke anger and because it is fuckin funny to watch you fly off on a tangent. For teh lulz as they use to say. If you ignore the insults and the sarcasm, you'll find that the logic and reasoning of my counterpoints are sound. You should be grateful for this dedication. But like you said, this is not a rational debate.
My presence here is sort of a public service. I know this blog was intended by your father as a tool to reinforce his hateful and bigoted beliefs. All hate-groups start with a flawed idea that initially sounds good when viewed with an extremely limited perspective (i.e Islam is a religion of violence and terrorism inferior to Christianity cuz all them 9/11 hijackers were Muslim and Iraq happens to be a Muslim nation we are at war with). If allowed to grow and fester in an insular environment, it could eventually override a person's sense of logic and rationality, making him or her unable to recognize the fundamental flaw of his ideology when he finally encounters it, such as meeting an actual Muslim in real life and proceeding to assume that he must be:
a)violent
b)a terrorist
c)inferior due to his religious beliefs
d)all of the above
My public service is making your father aware of the flaws in his ideology before they have a chance to fester and grow, so that he may understand that:
a) Promotion of multiculturalism exists because racial prejudices never actually went away (which we've had the unfortunate privilege of realizing this during the presidential election)
b) Religious fundamentalism is harmful, violent, and can actually kill. It's negative impacts on society should not be ignored
c) Society and values change with time and insulating your kids from them entirely do to your own personal resistance to change may not be the best way to help them cope with it.
d) Christianity is not superior nor inferior to other religions for various reasons. A person's moral character is not determined solely by their religious following
If my efforts prevent your father from getting drunk one night and setting a mosque on fire or dragging some poor Muslim to death from the back of his pickup truck, it will be all worth it. You should thank me for this intervention. Gotta look at the bigger picture Alex! You really want your father to be that guy carrying a neon sign at a godhatesfags.com funeral picket?
Maybe your father wasn't finding enough like-minded individuals in Suche, Georgia so he turned to the internet for support. This was a mistake. I actually tried to help you by suggesting racial supremacy websites as a more receptive audience. Even you must know in your heart that this is true. This way, your father can wallow in his beliefs with numerous like-minded individuals, under the watchful eye of the hundreds of FBI agents monitoring the site who will intervene should he ever decides to do something violently stupid with his ideology. Your father will find no agreement nor civility here in the general internet population.
Perhaps it is YOU who should grow up and stop being a daddy's boy. Also, to get the gay shit out of the way, buttsecks.
No; I don't know who you are. That's just a chickenshit way to act like someone should know who you are while you still hide behind anonymity. Also, what the hell are you talking about? Racial prejudice showing itself in the election that just elected America's first black president? The only racial prejudice I saw were from people I know, black and white, who voted for the man simply for the color of his skin, and not by the content of his character. It is just as ignorant to vote for somebody because he's black than to not vote for him because he's black. And my father, like me, chose not to vote for him because he's an unqualified Marxist. It wasn't racial. You're putting words in his mouth because you disagree with his politics. Typical leftist move.
I assume you are the same "anonymous" that in past posts compared fundamental Christians with the KKK in order to densely continue to believe that there is not a problem with fundamental Islam. As a matter of a fact, sir/ho, it was the fundamental Christians that exposed the Klan. It wasn't the almighty North that came down to the South and broke up the Klan. It was southern Christians. That is something we are not seeing in the fundamental Islam community. Where are the Muslims turning in the psycho Muslims? And I'm sorry, but I have to say it's true; Islam is a intolerant. Every Muslim I know hates Jews. And they can hide behind the facade that they except me, but I know they don't. If they hate Jews, and there wouldn't be Christianity without Judaism, than it's safe to say that these people who smile to my face, don't really accept me because of my beliefs. Sorry, but it's true. See, I'm assuming that you are one of my cousins. Either the one that lives on a farm surrounded by nothing by white people, or one that lives in Nevada. Either which way, you're getting your opinions from CNN. You have no idea what it's like to live in a "multicultural" environment. I do. Lived in one all my life. I love it. But you like to express your wild opinions like you're a scholar of the world and condescend people because you think you're more intelligent because you've read a few books and watch CNN all day. All the while you live in the "as long as it's not in my back yard" bubble.
If you truly knew my father, you'd know he would never "drag a Muslim behind his truck". He doesn't have a truck. He'd drag him behind his SUV. Just kidding. I hope that offended you. Probably did, seeing that leftists have no sense of humor because they're so damned PC. You say religious fundamentalism kills. Name one today, besides Islam, that kills. Christians (don't say McVeigh, because he was agnostic, and don't say "the Crusades". I've already given you an outline of how that really started. The only argument you could have IN TODAY'S TIME is Eric Rudolph)? Buddhism? Hinduism? Judaism? Which one? Which other religious fanatics are able to talk young men and women into blowing themselves up? Or flying themselves into a building? Blowing up an elementary school? Hijacking planes? Killing people during the Olympics? Killing people in resort hotels in India? Take your head out of the sand. The only religion that has a problem with violent fanatics is Islam. I'm not stating that all Muslims are terrorists, but it seems to be that all terrorists are Muslims. There is something wrong with fundamental Islam. Marinate on that, chickenshit.
You want a sample of racial prejudice? Ask and ye shall recieve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0
Yeah, it's Al-Jazeera, but that doesn't somehow excuse the type of racist garbage that the people being interviewed are saying. I like that one Granny who somehow equated being black =/= Christian. Classy!
Also, regarding your history about the Klan, I'm not talking about Southern Baptists if that was the source of your confusion. SBC were actually pretty progressive regarding slave ownership and civil rights. I'm talking about the Presbyterian Church of America and it's historical roots opposing the abolitionist movment, civil rights, and racial equality. They make up a big part of the fundamentalist Christianity I was railing against.
Every Muslim I know hates Jews.
If this is the core of your justification against Islam, then your logical flaw has been made apparent. You don't know every single Muslim. Not all Muslims hate Jews, are terrorists, etc. Fundamentalist Islam IS a problem, but not every Muslim holds fundamentalist beliefs. Those that call for death against converts from Islam, stone raped women to death, throw acid on people's faces, or blow themselves up in crowded market places deserve to be beaten and shot. But once again, not every Muslim participates nor condones this type of reprehensible behavior.
I don't know if you are being stupid or maliciously ignorant with that boast about naming a fundamentalist religion that kills besides Islam. For the sake of argument, lets ignore the Crusades/Eric Rudolph.
I'm sure you heard of The Spanish Inquisition??? That went really well, especially against the Jews. Oops. I thought Muslims were the big Jew-haters out there. Salem Witch Trials? Did you forget that there were times when being a non-believer meant a one-way trip to a bonfire? I could go on.
What's that? You want MODERN examples? Sure:
People who killed/tried to kill abortion doctors:
Michael F. Griffon
Rev. Paul Jennings Hill
John Salvi
James Kopp (bonus points for multiple kills)
Shelly Shannon
Honorable mention for Clayton Waagner (didn't kill no one but mailing fake anthrax to abortion clinics still constitutes terrorism)
Since 1977, 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats were made against clinics while 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings committed were directed at doctors, nurses, and others who worked there.
Oh what's that, you want something not abortion-related? How about the various hate crimes committed by Christian-Identity affiliated hate-groups such as the Aryan Nations and the KKK? Biblical justification of racial inferiority form some of their core ideologies.
I pulled my head out of the sand a long time ago, Alex. Maybe you should too. It's come to the point where you are becoming as big of a bigoted faggot as your father. Congratulations. I made you look like a racist shithead.
Actually you just made yourself look racist by assuming I meant Arabs when talking about Muslims. Islam is a religion, and not a race. Dipshit.
If you truly care about the world you live in, go in your garage, fire up your pick-up and suck on the exhaust until you meet satan
Sweet blog dude. How's the child raping going?
Are you suffering from chronic DUMB because nowhere did I mention Arabs. Search this entire post and comments for the term "Arab" if your disbelief persists. In case you were too stupid to realize, we were talking about your irrational characterization of Islam and Muslims (followers of Islam in case you are too stupid to realize that as well). You can't even attempt to derail correctly. I call you racist in the same context by which I call your father a faggot; as an insult to his narrow-minded worldview, not for his willingness to suck cock and take it up the ass. If I were attempting to label you in accordance with your beliefs, I'd call you a bigot or Islamaphobe, but neither of the terms sound insulting enough.
However, it's nice to see that you recognize Muslims as not being defined by any specific ethnicity. Now if only you can recognize that Islam itself is not solely defined by the fundamentalist elements being paraded in your face in your own little "Foxnews/O'Reilly factor" bubble.
In some ways, I feel sorry for you. Despite proclaiming that you don't share or agree with all of his beliefs, your father's twisted views really did a number on your head.
Alex this may or may not be Ian, your relative.
Have you fathered any illegitimate nigger children?
Discuss.
No, but you did call me a racist. What racial slur did I use in any post to warrant that remark?
"I call you racist in the same context by which I call your father a faggot; as an insult to his narrow-minded worldview"
Nice cover up for your ignorance, ignoramus.
You've been systematically sticking your head up your ass. That's what warrants that remark.
Okay, you want a stretch, Alex? How about this: I call you racist because your ideology shares the same structure with contemporary racist beliefs.
You characterize Islam through the participation of Muslim nations in today's wars, and the extremist opinions of the Muslims you've met.
Replace Muslim with some ethnic group/race, say, "black people" and you've got a person who denigrates all black people based on the wars that a country with a predominantly black population (random African nation) is involved in, and the opinions of the few black people you've met and happen to disagree with. Pretty racist huh?
You kinda lucked out here cuz Muslims are not limited to just one ethnicity. I stand by my remark and reaffirm that the reasoning you give for your opinion of Islam is still retarded on several different levels and shares the same reasoning behind racist ideologies. Racist faggot.
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3022914&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=3
Dear lord, your father knows not what he hath bringeth upon his head...
Well, if this keeps up... this blog is pretty much fucked. Again. Have fun staring at gayporn and blasphemy for the next few days Alex... Sorry you couldn't see the error of your ways... Maybe I'll give ole Don a call one of these days... maybe introduce him to some new friends who aren't the same inbred trash that all seem to congregate in a 10 mile radius from your house...
That is a hell of a stretch. You call me racist because I say there is a major problem with fundamental Muslims, yet you and your cohorts go on and on about the evil fundamental Christians?
You only just started making the fundamentalist Islam distinction a few posts ago. Before that, you were laying the smack down pretty hard on all of Islam and Muslims in general.
Don, this is Lowtax. I'm the head honcho over at Something Awful, and I read your thread along with most of your blog.
I'm here to accept your apology you offered up to us in the forums provided you purchase another account and put your next blog post in GBS.
Praise Jebus.
Oh yeah and be sure to buy accounts for your sons as well.
They'll fit right in with the rest of us.
Actually, Steve, I never smacked down Islam. The only time I mentioned Islam was when I posted the time line. Which, by the way, came from the Muslim historian Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari. Nice try, though. I called your boy out and won that argument. You guys are painting yourselves into a corner.
Here's a little fun-fact for you; All but two of the major conflicts going on in the WORLD right now involve Muslims. If that dosen't speak VOLUMES to you then i don't know what will.
Did this mouth garbage spray out of your mouth? Or was there a retarded brother we don't know about?
"Here's a little fun-fact for you; All but two of the major conflicts going on in the WORLD right now involve Muslims. If that doesn't speak VOLUMES to you then i don't know what will."
Nope. I did not say that. Once again, nice try. You and your boys are running out of excuses for your racial prejudice remark. You are an asshat and a douchebag, sir.
I'm posting a link to this blog on 4chan.
Then I'm going to create a myspace account filled with your blog posts just for you, Don, because your son Alex is a tool and a bigot.
So, I suppose that would make your brother the racist shitbag and you a gigantic tool for defending him? You can just take all the racial prejudice accusations and stick it on his dumb ass for all I care.
Nobody here was berating all of Christianity nor defending fundamentalist Islam. We were however, criticizing the fundamentalist elements of Christianity partially in response to:
A)Your father's views
B)Your "brother's" bigoted remarks
Your argument against our criticism was to point out the extremist elements of fundamentalist Islam, which we also dislike. And this helps you how? Was it even on topic?
To summarize, you missed the point entirely, most likely due to chronic stupidity since your sibling seems to be especially affected. You're still a racist for trying to defend one.
Alex. Dawg.
You gotta start postin' on my website.
Trust me. It'll be fun.
Yo Capt. Anus, a.k.a. Nick, I was not sticking up for my brother. Read the past posts before you go running your fellatioer. I was accused of being a racist for saying that the vast majority of terrorist acts TODAY, NOT IN THE PAST (STOP BRINGING UP SHIT THAT HAPPENED HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO!!!!!), are done by Islamic fundamentalists. I was called a "racist" for saying that. I merely pointed out that the person who accused me of being racist, who goes by "anonymous" because he or she is a chickenshit, is in fact being prejudiced by thinking that I was talking about Arabs when talking about the RELIGION of Islam. Then someone said that my views on Islamic fundamentalists somehow shows that I am racist(?). I responded that that statement was hypocritical, since there has been nothing but bashing of my father Christian beliefs coming from you assclowns. This will be the last post by me, seeing that there are a bunch of thick retards who can only insult people they disagree with instead of debate with them, and obviously have a hard time with reading and comprehension of the English language. Adios, retardos.
Word, Lowtax, word.
Get this in your inbred head faggot. No one gives a shit about your views on fundamentalist Islam since most of us probably share them. What we do have a problem with is your father's fagtastic views and the manner by which he chose to share them. The fact that you were using examples from fundamentalist Islam to defend or somehow justify your father's opinions shows just how off-base you are with your entire argument. Citing fundamentalist Islam does not excuse the idiocy of your father's views. In fact, one can draw parallels between it and the fundamentalist Christian values he is advocating.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, racist faggot. Keep sticking your head in the sand and maybe one day, daddy will let you tie your first Muslim to his truck, oh I'm sorry, SUV, before he floors the gas and redecorates his driveway with blood and body parts.
░█▓░█░█▓▒░░░░░░▒▒▓▒░░░░░░▒▓█▒░░░▓█
█▒░░▓█░█▓▒░░░░░░▒▓▒░░░░░░▒▓█▓░░░▒█
█▒░░░█░█▓▒░░░░░░░▓▒░░░░░░▒▓█▓▒░░▒█
█▓░░▒█░░█▓░░░░░░▒▓░░░░░░▒▓█░█▓░░▒█
█▓░░▓█░░█▓░░░░░▒▒▓▒▒░░░░▒▓█░█▓░░▒█
░█░░▓█░░█▓░▒▒▒▒▒░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█░█░░░▒█
░█▒░░▓█░█▓▒░░░░▒▓▓▓▒░░░░▒▓█░█▒░░█░
░░█▒░░▒█▓▒░░░░▓█████▓█▀▀▀▀██▒░░▓█░
░░░█▒░░▒██▀▀▀▀█▓▒▒▒▓█▀▀▀▀▓▒░░░▓█░░
░░░░█▓░░░▒▓▀▀█▀█▒▓▓▒█▀▀▀▀▓░░▒▓█░░░
░░░░██▓░░░░▓▀▀▀█▓██▓█▀▀▀▀▓░▒▓█░░░░
░░░░█░█▓▒░▒▓▀▀▀█▒▓▓▒▒▀█▀█▒░▓█░░░░░
░░░█▒░░█▓▒█▀▀██▓▒▒▒▒▓██▀▀▀▒█▓█░░░░
░░░█▒▒░░█░▀▀▀█▓██████▓▓▀▀▀▀▒▓█░░░░
░░░█░▓░░▒████░▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒░░░░▓▒▓█░░░
░░░█░░▓▓░▒▓▓▓██░▒▒▒░██░░▒▓▓░░▓█░░░
░░░█░▒░░░░░▓█░░█░▒░█░░█▓░▒░░░▓█░░░
░░░█▓▒░░░▒▓█░░█▒░▓░▒█░░█▓░▒░░▒▓█░░
░░░█▓▒░░▒▓█░░░█▓▓█▓▓█░░░█▓░░░▒▓█░░
░░░█▓░░▒▓█░░░░░█▀▒▀▀░░░█▓░░░░▓█░░░
░░█▓░░░▓█░░░░░░█▓▒█░░░░█▒░░░░▓█░░░
░░█░░░░▓█░░░░░░█▓▒█░░░░█▒░░░░▓█░░░
I FOUNDS IT LOL
It is what it is, Alex.
Also, you should know that I pulled the personal info of the guy who introduced your father's blog onto my site.
The person who started this is not Ian, but in fact it is a Leland Verijas who happens to live in Redding, California.
I have banned him from my site, so that should be a small consolation for you.
Bob Goatse, your fine contribution to this discussion will go down in history.
I could go for some nigger burgers, how bout you, Alex?
HEY DON CAN YOU SOLVE MY NIGGER PROBLEM?
THEY WANT EQUAL RIGHTS WHICH I FIND TO BE DESPICABLE.
ALSO, THIS BLOG NOW HAS AIDS.
AIDS IS WHAT YOU GET FOR DOING FAGSECKS. ARE YOU DOING FAGSECKS DON?
My name is Don Trippe and I approve of Fagsecks to the 9000th degree.
If I contract AIDS as a result of my shameless homosexual lifestyle then that is a risk I am willing to take, for I like the cock.
Damn, Don. Maybe you're a queer after all.
Post a Comment