Emboldening the enemy
My treacherous results speak for themselves.
Are you a filthy traitor as well?
Now, being an American test, you’ll need to use the following substitutions for it to be viewed in an Australian context.
George W Bush = Rodent
Republican Party = Liberal
Sean Hannity = Tim Blair
Rush Limbaugh = Andrew Bolt
Bill O’Reilly = Greg Sheridan
Anne Coulter = Janet Albrechtsen
Your ‘Do You Want the Terrorists to Win’ Score: 98%
terrorist-loving, Bush-bashing, “blame America first”-crowd traitor. You are in league with evil-doers who hate our freedoms. By all counts you are a liberal, and as such cleary desire the terrorists to succeed and impose their harsh theocratic restrictions on us all. You are fit to be hung for treason! Luckily George Bush is tapping your internet connection and is now aware of your thought-crime. Have a nice day…. in Guantanamo!
Stories the server thinks are related:
Posted: by Alex February 18th, 2007 under Uncategorized.
Comments: 20
Comments
Comment from ForNow
Time: February 19, 2007, 11:26 am
How barbaric. That’s “hanged,” not “hung.”
Comment from 1.618
Time: February 19, 2007, 12:17 pm
I love Tim Blair..
Comment from Dusty
Time: February 19, 2007, 4:01 pm
A Yank, here. I don’t much like taking these quizzes, but I took this one, just for you. Piece of cake, I scored a 0%.
How in the hell did you get a 98%? What did you do, spell your name wrong?
Comment from Toby
Time: February 19, 2007, 4:25 pm
ForNow - you actually probably mean “barbarous”.
This test is rather immature…but then the “sophisticated” appeasing left has always had a penchant for rearranging deckchairs while the work of saving the women and children is left to the vulgar rubes who (the horror!) believe in good and evil. Tout comprendre, c’est tout pardonner.
Comment from Arthur
Time: February 19, 2007, 6:01 pm
AMATEURS! 100% babeeee!
Comment from Observer
Time: February 19, 2007, 6:51 pm
51% Straight down the middle!
Comment from David Bath
Time: February 19, 2007, 6:54 pm
ForNow: “Hung”, “hanged”. Both are valid depending on whether you are using the past perfect or past imperfect.
Toby: “Tout comprendre, c’est tout pardonner” doesn’t mean you don’t believe in the Good, or the reality of evil actions, or try to prevent harm or remedy things. Mind you, if I was omniscient, all-caring and omnipotent, I’d certainly ensure there was less evil. Strangely, it seems that those who believe in an all-loving, omnipotent and omniscient being think “God’s doin’ all the lovin’ and forgivin’ so I don’t have to do my bit”.
Hmmmm. What was that book by Thomas a Kempis called (sarcasm)? Would I expect typical redneck Christians to know the answer? Would they change their behaviours if they read it?
Comment from Jack Lacton
Time: February 19, 2007, 8:48 pm
Woo Woo! I scored 0%!
You can check my http://ker-plunk.blogspot.com/2007/02/10-signs-that-youre-moral-idiot.html
No doubt you’ll disagree with with most of my postings.
Comment from Chris
Time: February 19, 2007, 10:41 pm
No, David, I would expect typical redneck Christians like myself to change their behavior based on reading the Bible. You know, the book that concerns itself with God’s revelation of himself as Creator, and then Redeemer, of humanity. The same humanity created in His image. Thomas a Kempis read it. You don’t suppose that’s where he got his inspiration, do you?
Somehow I doubt that if you were omniscient, all-caring, and omnipotent, there would be less evil in the world. Unless, of course, you think you’re better than God. Even redneck Christians (not to mention the high-falutin’ kind) know that bad things happen to good people, and that this is a paradox that has been known for thousands of years. Consult the book of Job for further study.
Comment from Kieran
Time: February 19, 2007, 11:46 pm
Somehow I doubt that if you were omniscient, all-caring, and omnipotent, there would be less evil in the world.
I think David was being sarcastic.
The concept of an all seeing, all caring, all powerful being in a world that is less than perfect is an obvious contradiction in concept.
ergo, there is no god.
As for the book of Job, I think South Park said all there needs to be said on the subject 
Comment from Kieran
Time: February 19, 2007, 11:53 pm
This test is rather immature…
When faced with the unbridled stupidity of “the right”, we have little to retreat to other than a bit of immature sarcasm.
Comment from Dave S.
Time: February 20, 2007, 2:16 am
“When faced with the unbridled stupidity of “the right”, we have little to retreat to other than a bit of immature sarcasm.”
Oh, come now - when has your side ever needed an excuse for immaturity?
I especially like when you throw food at people you disagree with.
Comment from Dave S.
Time: February 20, 2007, 2:37 am
1. What is your age?
31 to 40 Years Old
2. What is your gender?
Male
3. Why did the US invade Iraq?
[No correct choice provided]
Violation of ‘91 cease-fire with attendant actions indicating pursuit of WMD.
4. How do you feel about the PATRIOT Act restricting civil liberties?
Only liberal wimps worry about that
[Name one innocent person affected in any way. Just one. Go ahead. I’ll wait.]
5. What should happen to people who question Bush’s decisions in war time?
We should consider whether they have valid points
6. Did you vote for John Kerry in 2004?
No, voted for Bush [not in 2000, though.]
7. What are your thoughts on torturing detainees?
[No correct choice provided]
Only as necessary to save innocent lives, and only if certain of subject’s knowledge.
8. How did Bush handle Hurricane Katrina?
(what does this have to do with terrorism?)
9. What motivates the terrorists to attack the US?
[No correct choice provided]
Wahabbist Islamic fundamentalism. They make no secret of it. Why do liberals keep putting their hands over their ears and going “la-la-la!”
10. Did you start calling french fries “freedom fries”?
No, that’s retarded
11. How do you feel about the UN?
The UN is run by Euro-wimps and third world dictators
12. A liberal is someone who hates America and is rooting for the terrorists, true or false?
[No correct choice provided]
Hates America. Rooting against America doesn’t necessarily mean rooting for terrorists. Liberals don’t want our enemies to win, they just want us to lose.
13. Is it better to kill on behalf of Jesus or on behalf of Mohammad?
[No correct choice provided]
Neither is better. But the first doesn’t happen, while the second happens worldwide with alarming frequency.
14. The best way to support our troops is..
..to consume less oil, so we don’t have to be so involved with the middle east
15. Who wants the terrorists to win more?
[Unanswerable as written with choices provided.]
16. Are you familiar with the names Hannity, O’Reilly, Limbaugh, and Coulter?
[No correct choice provided]
Right-wing equivalents of Colmes, Franken, Rhodes, and Dowd.
17. Did 9/11 “change everything”?
Yes
18. How would you feel about having your phone line tapped by federal agents without a warrant?
If that’s what is needed in the war against terror then by God, tap away!
[add - “because it’s impossible to tap every phone, so the Feds won’t waste resources on obviously harmless people like you and me.]
19. What do you think of the Geneva Conventions?
[No correct choice provided]
Under Geneva Conventions protocol, the detainees should have been summarily executed. Look it up.
Comment from David Bath
Time: February 20, 2007, 1:03 pm
(1) On Job: Yes, I’m fully aware of Job, and that it’s inclusion in the Bible presented to Constantine gives many Jews a giggle, as they say it’s too sophisticated compared to everything else that was included. Unfortunately, many redneck fundamentalists seem to take more inspiration from Exodus and Joshua (e.g. genocide of Canaanites is good). Read, redacted, rejected.
(2) On Necessary/Unecessary evil: Read Candide by Voltaire and the tortuous arguments of Pangloss (e.g. he saids it’s a good thing he has syphilis). You only need ONE bit of unnecessary evil in the uiverse to blow away Pangloss. C.S. Lewis has some interesting comments, but (to me at least) unconvincing.
(3) Without omniscience and omnipotence, a being is not a deity. Without being all loving, it is not worth worshipping but fighting.
Comment from CraigC
Time: February 20, 2007, 4:40 pm
ForNow: “Hung”, “hanged”. Both are valid depending on whether you are using the past perfect or past imperfect.
Wrong. When speaking of humans, “hanged” is always correct.
Comment from CraigC
Time: February 20, 2007, 4:42 pm
Unless you’re talking about me, of course, in which case it’s “hung.”
Comment from David Bath
Time: February 22, 2007, 7:37 pm
Actually, when speaking of humans, I think it’s wrong to have them either hung or hanged (or shot, electrocuted, poisoned, … although hemlock in Athens - discussing philosophy with friends - was about as cilivized as executions can get)
Comment from Kieran
Time: February 22, 2007, 8:10 pm
It was a case of “victim, execute thyself” if I recall correctly?
On the subject of light hearted quiz’s, I was considering putting one together to “test” how UnAustralian we all were.
I’d need ten or twenty statement’s of “Australianness” or “UnAustralianness”.
Ideas?
Comment from David Bath
Time: February 22, 2007, 10:54 pm
Kieran: “victim, execute thyself”. Yes, a “warder” mixed the hemlock (and prepared a spare if necessary), then gave the cup to the prisoner to be drunk at leisure, in the company of friends. Numbness crept from the toes up. Read The Last Days of Socrates (Plato) for details.
Oh! Just realized! Socrates was an enemy of the state too! I’ll continue this though over on Jesus was a terrorist.
Write a comment