Friday, December 23, 2005
Poor Girl
Wafah Dufour--aka or rather formerly Wafah bin Ladin. She had nothing to do with Osama's evil deeds, yet is tainted by her relation to him... (We know why you're realling posting this, because she's hot.-ed) Well, that clearly makes it more interesting (and is probalby the only reason this story ever came before me--why else would GQ--GQ!--have interviewed her?), but I have sympathy for any innocent person related to an evil maniac (key word, innocent person--if she did anything to help Osama or the attack, to hell let her fall). And anyway, if Daniel Drezner can go gaga over Salma Hayek, I don't see why this post is offensive at all.
UPDATE: From the Corner's Clifford May--a heading for a post on Ms. Dufour: "PUTTING THE “INFIDEL” BACK IN INFIDELITY?"
That's totally not fair, although very clever and funny.
Another UPDATE: One of my commentors has called me a hypocrite for sympathizing "with the family member of a terrorist that killed thousands of Americans in one shot." Well, I am, but I don't see why this is a problem if she had no involvement with Osama or the attacks, and reviles him herself.
Hating innocent people because of their birth is completely unfair, but that's why my commentor evidently things is right and just. Such a view is the real hypocritical one, and bigoted at that.
If 9/11 made blind hatred justified and acceptable, than the terrorists really did achieve more than just a sucker punch against us...
Another UPDATE: There are some amusing comments in this open thread at LGF. I like the meme about how those pictures would make Osama squirm because it's a woman not being modest and subjugated. I hope he sees them and hates them. I certainly don't hate them. Anyone that objects to me liking beautiful women can shove it, really. And she's certainly attractive, and not just on the conventional model sort of way, which makes it even better.
UPDATE: From the Corner's Clifford May--a heading for a post on Ms. Dufour: "PUTTING THE “INFIDEL” BACK IN INFIDELITY?"
That's totally not fair, although very clever and funny.
Another UPDATE: One of my commentors has called me a hypocrite for sympathizing "with the family member of a terrorist that killed thousands of Americans in one shot." Well, I am, but I don't see why this is a problem if she had no involvement with Osama or the attacks, and reviles him herself.
Hating innocent people because of their birth is completely unfair, but that's why my commentor evidently things is right and just. Such a view is the real hypocritical one, and bigoted at that.
If 9/11 made blind hatred justified and acceptable, than the terrorists really did achieve more than just a sucker punch against us...
Another UPDATE: There are some amusing comments in this open thread at LGF. I like the meme about how those pictures would make Osama squirm because it's a woman not being modest and subjugated. I hope he sees them and hates them. I certainly don't hate them. Anyone that objects to me liking beautiful women can shove it, really. And she's certainly attractive, and not just on the conventional model sort of way, which makes it even better.
Comments:
Funny that you sympathize with the family member of a terrorist that killed thousands of Americans in one shot.
What if she didn't have tits and had buck teeth? Then what would you say?
You're a fucking hypocrite.
What if she didn't have tits and had buck teeth? Then what would you say?
You're a fucking hypocrite.
# posted by 
: 10:26 PM
: 10:26 PM
If she's guilty just because she's related to him, you're a hypocrite. What did she do to be guilty other than be born?
Oh, and just to be a bit funny, although this is true--I would still find her attractive if she had small breasts and buck teeth (I dated a girl with bucked teeth once, not really really bucked, but a bit, and it didn't bother me). Really, I'm a leg man, so those issues wouldn't bother me so much. Heh.
I have personally fought the war on terrorism agents her uncle, now it time for me to plant my seed of freedom in her.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 5:20 AM
: 5:20 AM
