Dear Dhimmis:
Do you find you have taken the evil victim-blaming immoral stance of nannystater kindergarten teachers everywhere to heart, that:
“Attacking is always bad – even in self defense! We immoral relativists pretend to believe that: There can be no good without evil, no pleasure without pain, and no attacks without defenders!”(?)
Is your cowardly position one of knee-jerk surrender to the moslems’ threats of violence:
“We have to let the violent criminals do what they want to us, or else they’ll do what they want to us anyway!”
If so, I have a few quick questions for you, and for those pretending to be “our leaders” in government:
Q: Is it an absolute fact that there are absolutely no absolute facts? All facts are opinions?
Q: If you attack an innocent person, who has never harmed you or others, are you a criminal – or not?
YES – or NO?!
(AND – If you can find that someone else did so too, does that cancel your own criminality?)!
😉
More specifically: Do you consider the following things (lying/fraud, extortion, torture, robbery, arson, kidnapping & ransoming, slavery, rape – including pedophilia – and murder) to be:
a) Holy religious rights and duties;
b) Crimes;
or
c) Not sure/unwilling to answer the question (?)
…
If you answered: (a) to the last question, you are a moslem; if: (b) you are sane – and probably a Conservative; and if: (c) you are a willing accessory liberal apologist enabler for the crimes of others (and so, a criminal negligent yourself)!
😉
Uncle Vladdi's Blog 
Q: Is it an absolute fact that there are absolutely no absolute facts? All facts are opinions?
1. I’d say there probably are absolute facts, but whether we can know these facts is doubtful due to the very essence of being human (the most obvious example being that we could be in the matrix and none of this could be real!). The best we can do is to try to create approximate models of the facts based on the best evidence we can gather.
2. Not all facts are opinions. Rather they are interpretations of events and of evidence. The best we can do is to present the most accurate interpretation of these events and what caused them, based on the best evidence available. If new evidence comes to light then opinions need to be reconsidered to account for this evidence.
Q: If you attack an innocent person, who has never harmed you or others, are you a criminal – or not?
YES – or NO?!
Yes.
(AND – If you can find that someone else did so too, does that cancel your own criminality?)!
😉
No, althouggh that was one of the cornerstones of the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi war criminals. If you could demonstrate the Allies had done the same thing you had. Hence, German Admiral Doenitz was not punished for sinking merchant vessels without warning.
More specifically: Do you consider the following things (lying/fraud, extortion, torture, robbery, arson, kidnapping & ransoming, slavery, rape – including pedophilia – and murder) to be:
a) Holy religious rights and duties;
b) Crimes;
or
c) Not sure/unwilling to answer the question (?)
Crimes.
If you answered: (a) to the last question, you are a criminal; if: (b) you are sane, but probably guilty of at least one of them to one degree or another; and if: (c) you are probably being hounded by a right-wing shock jock looking to use rage as a subsitiute for reasoned debate.