It’s good to see that some people take pride and “ownership” in their work.
Besides, he is a model employee! He doesn’t bring home his work or work dilemmas. He has a clear conscience for what he is doing.
That’s good, isn’t it? After all, he’s just doing Allah’s work. Right?
My favorite quotes:
“He is coming to the show straight from work and will be joining us soon” (”He was delayed because he is busy carrying out an execution.”)
“Yes, I have beheaded many people who were my friends.”
Q: “What was your most difficult beheading?”
A: “An execution is an execution. If the heart is compassionate, the hand fails.”
“Everyone person is a bit worried when he starts a new job.”
“On a personal level, I am very normal”
“I finish the job, and go home. It’s all very normal”.
Note: These are screen grabs of this video. They are small and a bit hard to read. I highly recommend pulling out your readers or magnifying glass to read through. It is worth it! (Then go watch the video.)
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
41 Responses to “Chopper: An Interview with an Executioner”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
We live in the 21st century and this is what we have evolved into? Amazing!
BTW first.
You mean devolved?
this is disgusting. send it to a liberal friend.
I am glad to see this thread here today. Just last night on the Discovery Times channel, there was a show called Execution in Iran. It was about a woman offed because she had sex outside of marriage.
Where are the feminists on this? This should outrage them. Isn’t it their body to do with as they please? I guess it is like that female circumcision thing. Their values and beliefs fall before the altar of multiculturalism and tolerance.
When are the environmentalists, women, and minorities going to realize that conservative capitalism is the best way to obtain a better way of life for all?
Multi culturalism stops just short of Judaism and Christianity. Jews and Christians are aggressive barbarians when dealing with those that sever the heads and melt the flesh off of innocents. On the other hand, Muslims are ‘quaint’ in their beliefs. Sharia law is ‘OK’ with libnuts when chopping off the head of a law breaker (and it doesn’t have to be for murder) or the hand and foot of a thief. But, Put a convicted cop-killer, child murderer, on death row here and see the reaction. Remember Gary Graham, Mookie Williams, where’s Danny Glover on this one?
They’ll beat a woman for driving a car or wearing makeup. But, that’s OK because that’t how they do it there.
Here’s a sample of how they treat a woman.
http://www.homa.org/Details.asp?ContentID=2137352725
I will get arrested, beaten, and sometimes even executed if I wear make-up, nylons, bright colors and specifically the color of red.
Koran says that “Men your wives are your tillage. Go into your tillage anyway you want”. This means that a man is allowed to sodomise his wife and she cannot complain.
In Islam, the age of majority for a girl is 9 years and for a boy is 15 years. This means that a 9 year old girl and a 15 year old boy are considered to have the same level of maturity. Now, if girls reach maturity six years earlier than boys, then why did God place men in charge of women?
In Islam, if a 6 or 7 year old girl is raped by an adult man, she will be the one that gets punished. It is her fault because she provoked it. The parents then will burn or kill her because she has dishonored the family.
I’d love to see a Leno Jaywalking episode on the following.
1. What does sodomize mean?
2. What do muslims do to women who are raped?
3. What does Sharia law state the punishment is for a woman who drives a car by herself?
How do we get this info out to those who read People magazine and watch Survivor and Dancing with the Stars???????????
I feel like I am preaching to the choir. (PTTC)
This is just not right. How utterly gruesome. He assumes with much pride that it is worthy work. I know a part of the maniacal brain is missing a tiny link to humanism. I guess this is similar to the person who administers the lethal drugs to death row inmates. A life for a life.
I saw the video. His response to the question “Have you ever beheaded anyone that you knew?” was basically “Yes, I have, but if they committed an offense they brought it upon themselves.”
He speaks of killing people in the most casual cold-blooded way imaginable. The news anchors ask him questions like “do just do executions or do you cut off hands and feet,” and “what do you have for breakfast?” [before running off and decapitating a friend - ed. note] They smile all the while and the executioner has his children sitting in his lap while he discusses what an execution is like, what he sees, how utterly NORMAL this all is.
The cool detachment is more frightening than the wild rantings of the lunatic radicals. Human life means nothing, nothing at all to these people. Read the thread at Little Green Footballs.
Saw this last night on LGF. This kind of $hit really needs to be brought to the attention of the libnutz around the world front and center. Keith Ellison should be made to watch this whole friggin interview. Islam is not a religion, but a bunch of barbaric rituals and hoaxes.
In islamic countries your identification and passports have your religion. Imagine a Texas Driver’s license with “Jew” or “Christian” on it so you can be readily identified (and persecuted) by authorities.
#7
While not a huge proponent of the death penalty, the difference here is the attitude. They both do their jobs, but I believe that in America (1) there are multiple opportunities to appeal and make sure that the punishment is valid, (2) we try to be as human as possible-though there are arguments that beheading is not any worse than the injection that puts you to sleep first, (3) I cannot believe that the people who perform executions here area as callous about what they do than this robot in the video, and (4) we certainly do not parade this on TV and the news anchors would certainly not be smiling and asking asinine questions, and (5) you would never find the child of the executioner sitting on his lap as he describes the corpse on TV.
“news anchors would certainly not be smiling and asking asinine questions”
Yes, they would..
#12
I stand corrected. Asinine is as asinine does.
I guess the Christians didn’t have executioners during the Inquisition.
Islam is a religion, just like Chistianity is a religon, Islam just hasn’t matured and learned to be selective enough in which verses’ of the Koran to disregard so that they are “civilized” like us Christians.
Well, so what? We have Mr. Robert Durst.
As it has been said about the executioner- ‘He hath no feel for his work’
dugger — Are you a Christian?
sure
dugger — What is a Christian?
One who believes everything in the Bible is the Truth.
Just as a muslim believes everything in the Koran is the Truth.
Why the Query about my religeon?
dugger —
“Islam just hasn’t matured and learned to be selective enough in which verses’ of the Koran to disregard so that they are “civilized” like us Christians.”
You seem to imply in the quote above that Christians disregard verses in the Bible. You say you are a Christian and that Christians believe everything in the Bible is Truth. This seems a bit contradictory. I just wondered where you were coming from with your # 14 post.
Some websites you may want to check out re Islam/Christianity:
http://www.studytoanswer.net/islam_myths.html
http://www.rim.org/muslim/quranproblems.htm
From the books and internet research that I’ve engaged in, Mohammed essentially was trying to combine the major religions of the time into one all-encompassing religion, of which he would be the head. Hence comes his factual errors in the Koran, which are glossed over by Koranic scholars and followers. The misunderstanding of the Christian concept of the trinity (which has been called “silly” by one imam) is reflected in Islam’s erroneous insistence that Christians are polytheists. The relationship between Miriam and Mary reflects his ignorance of the Jewish history when he tried to roll the Jewish faith under the Islamic umbrella.
Maybe Mohammed was camel-riding under the influence (like peyote or some other local plant) when he tried to create this religion. But you have to admit, he was a shrewd military strategist - what better way to unite your conquered than by a single set of beliefs? This sets up an “us versus them” mentality and there are many that would die (and kill) for their God, as we have seen. Merely conquering would have made it difficult to manage the conquered, but when the peoples share a religion, it unites.
First of all, Islam is not a religion… it is a psychopathic disorder. Any “religion” whose prophet originated from the ass of a camel, is not a true religion.
Seccond, if Katie Couric interviewed this guy, she’d take his comments with an accepting nod, and then proceed to ask him if she thought President Bush was doing a good job…
Unless we get back control of the media, our cause is lost… television molds the opinions of the masses.
Heck, this is nothin’….we have O.J.
Is O.J. christian?
Yeah, no worse than Christianity….
More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.
http://www.crisismagazine.com/october2003/madden.htm
Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingyear.html
More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/violence/death95w.htm
19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ESPYdate.pdf
23. Tedtam,
I think Constantine used a similar technique when he had his Vision of Marching under the Sign of the Cross in his first big battle, thus making Rome a Christian country.Not a bad idea as it turned out.
Then to unify the Christians years later at Nicea by putting the oppossing factions together and telling the not to “come-out” until they had agreed on a unified Christian theology.
22. Quicksilver
You are not to far off in your reasoning of my statements. Before Martin Luther The Pope told everybody how the Bible was to be interpreted. After Luther, each man could begin to interpret the Bible more or less as he saw the Truths in reading the Bible himself. Thus, alot of interpretations now exist that did not in early Christiandom.So what I believe is Truth you may not believe is Truth. And we’re reading the same book. I find it all quite contradictory at times.
/restraing effort to catechize regarding Holy Spirit, Deposit of Faith, and other Catholic teachings
You all have a blessed Christmas - no matter what religion you are!
fasternu426
Just a little heads up
3 or more links will get your post sent to moderation.
I usually catch it and approve, but there are those times when I or the others with the whip and chair over HAL are earning OBSCENE PROFITS and don’t catch it in time.
#27 dugger
Actually, this type of assimilation has been practiced for thousands of years. The “missing tribes of Israel” are missing because it was common for conquering countries to take their captives back to their countries. There, they would be forced (or “strongly encouraged”) to integrate with the dominant society by intermarriage, practicing the religion, etc. Those Jews became part of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires, as did other peoples of that time. It’s not a Christian or Islamic idea - it’s a military idea.
This is greusome. We cannot let islam control our country…EVER.
These are very graphic pics of what they are doing to Christians and other non-islam persons.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2006/11/islamic_jihad_i.html
O.K. time to buy another case of .223 and a new upper for my AR-15.
to #14, etc, etc, etc:
Folks, it’s an “apples and oranges” issue. What the radical Islamists have done in the past one year, or the past ten years, cannot be accurately compared to what happened in the Crusades, from the 10th through 13th centuries. In those days, religion and politics were inextricably intertwined; a war labelled as being religious in nature was, at least as much, a political battle for control of territory. Particularly in what we now call the Middle East, religious affiliations could shift (back and forth), depending upon the prevailing advantage to a given ruler; i.e., depending upon which of his allies or enemies were of whichever religious persuasion.
Think back to medieval Europe. The leaders in the Church had as much political power (if not more) as did the Crown, particularly in England and France. Look at Ireland; the strife there is cast as being Catholics vs Protestants, but in truth, it is a politcal war. Look at the Pilgrims. They didn’t escape England to escape religious persecution; they left because of political persecution delivered under the guise of religion. Go back and read the First Amendment of our Constitution; it’s there to keep the state out of the church, it’s not there to keep the church out of politics.
– Ken
Squawk, I figured I was pushing it with that many links. I justposted and ran, hoping it might make it. You guys do a great job
and it is appreciated!
Ken, The East never experienced the Renaissance that brought the West out of feudalism. I still say that we are seeing that difference today. Travel to the old line that divided East and West Roman Empire (295AD) and it is quite amazing to see the contrast even today.
-Jim
Yeah, LST rocks!
Those are good links, too. I’d love to watch a lib stumble over the last one. More dead on 9-11 than executed in 65 years.
I guess you have to feel a little sorry for libs - their brains just don’t work very well…
ThunderHawkk
The links come from here:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
I check the site just about every day to see what our “whacky muslim neighbors” are up to….
#37 fasternu426
Lots of ‘whacky stuff’ here. I have lead a very sheltered life.
Sometimes I see and read things I wish I didn’t.
#35, Normal/Jim —
Actually, I’m not arguing with your point. My point is that it was the desire for political control (geopolitics?) which used then, and still uses now, a religion to justify the efforts to obtain world domination. If nothing else, go back to the question of tolerance for other religions. Even the Romans allowed the conquered countries to excercise (within certain limitations) the right to practice whatever religion they had, prior to becoming a conquest of Rome.
It’s just that, now, transportation and technology have largely eliminated that geographic line, but not the centuries-old mentality which was behind it. And if one pauses to stop and think about how things “could” be, it’s actually very sad. The people in the Middle East sit on billions of petrodollars, but live in a mentality which is a thousand years old.
– Ken
Ken - I agree, it’s just that the Renaissance was the watershed event that moved the West forward. That was a point in time (a couple 100 years) we see the dramatic divergence….that’s all. That being said it gives clarity to thier odd behaviour. It only seems odd to us, not to them.
Sad to say for most history begins at birth and these thoughts fall on deaf ears.
- Jim , aka - normal_fault