Everywhere I’ve looked today I’ve come across this story about a Malaysian woman who is getting caned for drinking beer. Oh, temptation! The BBC reports: “Malaysia’s majority Malays are subject to Islamic laws, while the large Chinese and Indian minorities are not.” Presumably, Ms. Kartika Shukarno was busted getting sloshed in a non-Islamic bar (Islamic bars only serve iced tea, I take it). Her punishment, caning, is (according to Wikipedia, which has an entire article on caning in Malaysia) the second most severe form of punishment in Malaysia–after the death penalty.
The bizzarre twist in the story comes when we learn that her sentence has been postponed until after Ramadan. Clearly, this is Islam’s version of compassion. It’s a dull story in my opinion, considering all the truly outrageous and awful things that happen in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan, not to mention Iran, for similar “crimes.” But wait, here’s the finale:
Ms Kartika, a 32-year old trained nurse and mother of two, asked last week that her caning be administered in public. She had told reporters she was calm about the prospect and was willing to be caned because she respected the law.
I respect the BBC for its ability to tell this story with a straight face. If Ms. Kartika indeed respects the law, then why was she sneaking a swig of beer in the first place? Doesn’t she know that old wives’ tale about the woman and the serpent? At this point, I invite anyone reading to chant the infidel mantra with me, “It’s a beer! It’s a beer! You medieval dickwads–it’s a fucking beer!!“
Marc Di Martino 
An excerpt from Ms Diamanda Galas (courtesy of her website)
*
This all leads us to the anal-glue, the American ‘hum,’ created in Iran, it is said. “Hum” was used just this month by the Iraqi militia to glue the anuses of “faggot infidels” shut before forcing them to drink laxatives: the result was drowning or an explosion of the gastrointestinal tract. The glee with which the phoneVids were then passed around must have really made an impression on Allah.
I guess He must have been watching.
After all, He must have been, if this is what happens to infidels. Is it His fault or the fault of those who, having read only one book, read it incorrectly; or is it the book which was written incorrectly? Is it possible to imagine the intentions of a man who has read one book? And one book only? Can he be considered a man under such ignoble circumstances?
Is it possible to imagine the intentions of a man who has read only the Old and/or New Testaments? And whose religion, like extreme Orthodox Judaism, airbrushes women out of all photographs and relegates them to second-class citizens because of “the book?”
Not really. These are the Varvaroi the ancient Greeks warned each other about with great disdain and not a little fear. These men can justify any action they commit, just as children do.
Why is sexual humiliation, used to torture and interrogate all infidels a practice that remains as popular today as it has been for centuries? Not just the killing but the rape of the enemy seems mandatory. Is this practice the planting of the seed into the ass or vagina of the infidel? Is it the rape of the enemy’s god? This sounds close.
Give me a man who has read 400 books and ask HIM if he would glue shut the anus of the “infidel”? That man laughs at the word and says, “You mean that bloke at the end of the bar who drinks Guinness? He’s alright – just bets on a crap football team.”
A man who has read one book is the tool of a savage god – himself. He is not even an animal because animals kill to eat, not to torture.
[…]
*