Why do we jump to conclusions and assume that Islamo-Fascist decapitation of American civilians is bad?  Here are some of the many reasons why Muslim decapitation of non-Muslim civilians is a good and humane practice:

      1)  Decapitation is commanded in the Holy Koran, so it must be good.  It is part of Muslim culture.  Did we not learn in school that it is important to respect all cultures—that none is superior to another—that all cultures are equal and should be respected?  Perhaps if we made an attempt to study Muslim culture, if we viewed it from within, we would appreciate and support the idea of decapitation of infidels.  It is written in the Holy Koran, “cut the neck of the infidel.”  Why is this statement, repeated dozens of times in the Koran?  Perhaps Allah meant a slight NICK, drawing a little blood.  But He probably meant complete removal of the head.  I mean, what would the point of a “nick” be?  Would the infidel convert after a nick?  No way.

Removal of the head in Islam means that one cannot go to heaven and Lord knows, infidels do not belong there.  Muslims certainly would not want to see Jews like Don Rickels or Lenny Bruce in Heaven!   They’d tear up the Muslims.  Now Henny Youngman or Jack Benny, I think, Muslims would like.  Those two could do well doing stand-up, gently poking fun of the Muslims and their virgins.  Henny would say “Now take Osama, please.”  They’d howl.  Or “brothers, let us not lose our heads over decapitation,” barum bum. Maybe Muslims should plan better and not decapitate the best Jewish stand-ups.  Seinfeld, you got a chance, baby.  He’d be telling jokes to the Muslims, with their knives on their belts, and Jerry would be sweating like a dog.  (Do dogs sweat?)

2)      Decapitation by pocket knife, preferably Swiss, is preferable to other practices by non-Muslims (“Gentiles”) in history.  Much has been said about the so-called “barbarism” of Muslim decapitation by a small, rusty pocket knife.  This is SLANDER against our Muslim brothers and sisters.  Regarding the rust on the knife, it would seem that if you are getting your head cut off, tetanus would be the least of your worries!  Can you imagine a missionary about to have his head sawed off, looking at the rusty knife and requesting a rust-free knife?  So rust, dear readers, is fine and please, please leave our Muslim brothers alone to practice their beloved customs.  They don’t criticize our customs, so let’s not criticize theirs!

3)     And what about the horrific executions by non-Muslims like Christians and Buddhists?  In the 1700s the French, with their blood-lust orgy of murder during the revolution, used decapitation.  Their method?  The axe or the Guillotine, named after a French liberal pacifist named Glutton, who died of obesity.  One can argue that the Guillotine or axe was more humane than a rusty Swiss army knife.  But the drooling, retarded French axe executioners often missed the mark, hitting the back or cutting off the top of the head (which often raised the IQ of the victim).  This miss-hit left the empathetic women in the crowd imploring the executioner to get it right.  This miss-hit on the back must have been somewhat uncomfortable.  An athlete, with good eye-hand coordination would have been consistently more accurate.  OJ Simpson, for example, would surely have hit the neck.  There is some past empirical evidence to support his accuracy with a knife. Perhaps he is Muslim. Thus, a rusty knife used “up close and personal” in the Islamic fashion, is 100% accurate and humane.  Also, Muslims’ use the knife is in private, in respect for the victim, whereas Europeans would encourage crowds to come and throw spoiled tomatoes at the poor soul.  (Let he who is without sin cast the first tomato)  Of course, it could be argued, “how bad is a tomato when you will shortly go under the Guillotine”  This European crowd thing is their idea of entertainment.  I say give them a break—they didn’t have cable then.  What else was there to do?

4)      Shall we compare Muslim decapitation with the Christian practices of “drawing and quartering,” burning at the stake or the RACK and pinion?  These are the most barbaric forms of execution devised by men and women.  OK, just men.  Can you see a woman coming up with the idea of drawing and quartering?  But they loved watching!  And they were Christians. Methinks that Jesus might not approve of this organized cruelty.  He’d say “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”  And the cretin throng would yell back “We ain’t throwin’ stones dufass!  We throwin’ termatos.  Duh.”  What were these “Christians” thinking?  Did they put Jesus on hold?  Would they not have executions on Sunday?  Now that would be “special.”

Drawing and quartering makes Muslim decapitations look gentle!  Who would choose drawing and quartering for their own execution?  (Did anyone actually say “I’d prefer to have my arms and legs pulled off”)  Christians are much more creative in their cruelty than Muslims.  But, you say, “the Christian barbarism” was years ago.”  That’s fair. 

But look at other more recent barbarism by “civilized” non-Muslims.  The Japanese are a sweet, polite and gentle people…until they put on a uniform!  In WWII, when Marines were missing, their fellow Marines would go out and look for them.  They found their buddies decapitated with their own genitals in their mouths, courtesy of Buddhist soldiers.  Our Marines decided, from that point on, to “take no prisoners.”  You don’t mess with Marines.  Can you blame them for calling them “Japs”?  Now did the sweet Japanese act out of their religion, Buddhism, whose central tenet is to respect all “sentient beings.”  The Japanese “folks” that did this were not terrorists.  They were soldiers in uniform, in a chain of command.  Muslims never commit such grotesque atrocities, either in uniform or terrorists.  Castration?  Clearly Muslims are morally superior to the Japanese and Islam is more humane than Buddhism and Christianity.  Also, can you name 5 women who were decapitated by Muslims?  No!  OK, you point out Saddam’s two psychopathic sons,  Hoodoo and Voodoo.  They raped and killed women.  Look, they were dyslexic and reversed the principals of Islam.  They had a disability!  They needed accommodations which they didn’t get!

5) Now isn’t the Christian tradition to “rape and pillage” worse than decapitation?  Only men are decapitated.  Now it is true, some Christians were conscientious objectors and raped but refused to pillage.  And other thoughtful men found rape objectionable but relished pillaging.  I concede that point.   And true, the Palestinian terrorists, Hamas and Hezbollah, try to kill Israeli children at every opportunity, but the terrorists make a good point—these babies will one day be soldiers so why not make a pre-emptive strike and kill them when they are young?  Irrefutable logic.

More on the Christian practice of “drawing and quartering.”  Can you imagine how long it takes to die by this method?  The arms go first, then later, the legs.  Then you have to bleed to death—a screaming limbless torso, courtesy of European “culture.”  It might take 10 minutes from the time the horses pull.  (PETA would kill these Christians for forcing horses to do this and traumatizing them.)  Muslim decapitation is much more humane because 30 seconds after the first cut, you are unconscious.  If anesthesia were available, I am sure the Muslims would use it, but anesthesia is not in their budget.  Osama has bucks, but not unlimited bucks.  Money is tight and his cave is drafty.  His sniffles just won’t go away.

   Now “cutting to the chase,” I’d say that our Muslim brothers are taking the high moral ground in decapitating by pocket knife.  Other Christian and Roman practices like (Christian) burning at the stake, the rack (and pinion); and drawing and quartering; (Roman) crucifixion; and Japanese bayoneting or decapitation by sword while the victim kneels, hands tied behind the back, are much more cruel than Muslim beheading.  Finally, one might ask “why is taking the head legal in Islam but “giving head” a sin?  That, dear reader, is the subject of our next lesson.

Copyright 11-08-2007 Stephen A. Harvith

Can be used only with author’s consent