Molly Norris becomes a non-person, thanks to Muslim terrorists and their good friends in US government and media

Molly Norris, a cartoonist who drew fairly harmless and inoffensive cartoons in a local weekly paper, had her life destroyed because of idol-worshiping psychopaths bent on honoring their false God--The Prophet Mohammed (may piss be upon him)--with the blood of innocents.

Molly Norris never drew The Prophet Mohammed (may piss be upon him), nor did she create "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." Yet "Muslim holy men" have called for her head, the murderous idolaters who follow them are willing to follow their order, and the government of the United States of America is unwilling to do anything to protect one of their own citizens who has committed no crime whatsoever. In fact, the United States of America, through our state department, seems to be doing everything it can to validate the twisted and evil beliefs of Mohammadans around the globe. How else can you explain the apologetic stance taken over "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" and the official "great job, guys!" that was sent to Pakistan when they blocked web access to their nation around May 20, 2010?

The sick freaks who claim to be Muslims, and who honor The Prophet Mohammed (may piss be upon him) above even Allah himself, have destroyed Molly Norris. They have silenced her, completely and utterly. They might as well have killed her. And all the magazine that used to print her cartoon has to say about it is "we wish her the best."

You can read what will probably be one of the very few acknowledgement of complete and utter capitulation by the American media to terrorists, as Seattle Weekly editor Mark D. Fefer offers good-byes and so-longs to one of their victims.

I'd be surprised if any other media outlet even has that much to say, because they are too busy making excuses and offering justifications for the terrorists. And because they believe that if they bow to the terrorists, they will make them go away... like Fefer, they suffer under the delusion that appeasement will do anything but spur the madmen on.

If I had enough cartoons, EVERY DAY would be "Draw Mohammed Day" from here on in. This can't be allowed to happen. It shouldn't be allowed to happen to anyone, especially someone who didn't even DRAW the syphilitic pedophile known as The Prophet Mohammed (may piss be upon him).

Yes, the truth hurts. But it's the TRUTH.

I don't usually on celebrity relationship dramas unless one of the parties involved is being extraordinarily obnoxious, such as Madonna with her divorce against Guy Ritchie.

Among the complaints in her "case" for why she's the injured party is the following tidbit from The Daily Mirror.

Madonna is building an extraordinary divorce case against Guy Ritchie, claiming he was a cruel and verbally-abusive husband who would belittle and ridicule her in front of others.

Lawyers for the singer, who was widely believed to be the dominant partner in the marriage, are putting together a dossier of incidents.

They include allegations that he told her she 'looked like a granny' on stage compared with her younger backing dancers. He is also alleged to have declared that she could not act, and was 'past it' after she turned 50.

Telling Madonna the truth is, apparently, cruel and abusive.

It is a TRUTH that Madonna can't act and never has been able to act. She embarrassed herself (and everyone else watching her because it was so awkward) in "Desperately Seeking Susan", "Shanghai Surprise", and "Dick Tracy".

It is a TRUTH that Madonna looks like a granny up there on stage with backup dancers who are less than half her age in some cases. It is TRUTH that one should stop dressing like a fetish hooker well before the age of 50 (at least in public).

Partisan hack speaks of what he knows best

Dan Rather, an editorialist who managed to pass for a journalist for many years and whose shenananigans finally caught up with him when he eagerly based "news" on forged documents back in 2004, made some comments in advance of last night's presidential debate that were on a topic he's an expert in.

Here's what IMDB reported:

Former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather insisted Tuesday that the "so-called" presidential debates are not controlled by the journalists presiding over them but by the two political parties.

He accused his colleagues of showing too much deference to the candidates and operating in general in a "defensive posture" and imposing self-censorship on themselves.

"These so-called debates are not for the people, by the people," Rather said Tuesday at Time Warner's Politics 2008 Summit. "They are for the parties, by the parties. That's what's wrong with them."

Dan Rather is right. The debates we've been seeing haven't been debates at all. They've just been campaign commericals. And, since Rather is an expert in being a partisan media hack, there's no question he knows what he's talking about here.

And it's a shame. If Obama wasn't such a coward and had stood by his pledge to debate McCain "any time, any where"--remember, McCain tried to take him up on that offer with a bunch of townhalll-format debates but Obama turned him down flat--we might actually have gotten some real debates with real questions asked by moderators who weren't concerned with partisan books about to be published or with making sure they look good for the RNC and DNC goons who have bribed them.

I wonder why Rather is speaking out, though. Perhaps he is upset because his colleagues didn't make a greater effort to make the Democrat ticket look better by maybe working in a few more Obama slogans in the questions, or maybe he's still on a pointless crusade to convince everyone he was actually a serious journalist for the past couple of decades?