The car was definitely not a babe magnet, but at the age of six I wasn’t interested and didn’t care.
I remember cruising around a lot in this rockin’ mobile (in my mind, in the basement, in my underwear) with the (imaginary) wind blowing through my flattop, and every station on the (pretend) radio playing either “WipeOut,” “Beechwood4-5789,” or “Witch Doctor,” with NO commercials.
What’dya say? Let’s dust off the old Roadmaster and take it for a spin on
The Overnight Open Thread.
The Smurfs are a beloved and innocent cartoon from the 1980’s. They originally were of Belgian, specifically of Walloon-French origins. So that rules out any connections with Charles Johnson’s dreaded Flemish menace! The Smurfs however could be part of another sinister menace. There are theories that they are Communists.
Could this theory be true?
219 Kenyan Shillings will buy a lot of Cheetos, I think.
Now they’re coming for the…smileys?
The Evil EmoticonsThe Fatwa: Multaqa Ahl al Hadeeth: Emoticon fatwa
I can almost get behind this one. Sure, they’re annoying, but evil? Really? Well, to a Muslim forum looking to make a name for itself—yes.
According to Muslim Internet Forum Multaqa Ahl al Hadeeth, “Emoticons are forbidden because of its imitation to Allah’s creatures whether it is original or mixture or even deformed one and since the picture is the face and the face is what makes the real picture then emoticons which represent faces that express emotions then all that add up to make them Haram.” Um…so should I hide away all of my child hood drawings while I’m at it? I sucked at art.
Additionally, “A woman should not use these images when speaking to a man who is not her mahram, because these faces are used to express how she is feeling, so it is as if she is smiling, laughing, acting shy and so on, and a woman should not do that with a non-mahram man. It is only permissible for a woman to speak to men in cases of necessity, so long as that is in a public chat room and not in private……Define ‘necessity’….hormones count? or a really big smiley face…
Verdict: How do they find the time to think about this crap? 🙂 XOXOX 😉 XOXOX 😛 XOXOX 😀
I don’t know whether this involved a formal fatwa, but still…
(h/t: Blazing Cat Fur)
July 26, 2011
PESHAWAR, Pakistan: A Taliban group in Pakistan on Tuesday burned a huge quantity of cloth taken from shopkeepers, saying it was too thin to be made into suitably modest garments, officials said.
The Islamist extremists stormed shops in Wana, the main town of the lawless South Waziristan tribal region, which borders Afghanistan, and made a bonfire of the cloth in a public area near the bazaar.
Shopkeeper Rahimullah Khan told AFP that at least eight armed men burst into his premises and took away bundles of raw cloth that they said was too thin to make respectable clothing.
“They said it was un-Islamic to wear clothes that don’t properly cover the human body,” Khan said.
By that logic, Pakistani Muslims of both sexes aren’t allowed to have cloth to make underclothes or sleepwear. They have to wear the same oppressively hot, heavy outerwear day and night, with no undergarments to absorb their sweat. Glad I don’t live there!
The Diary of DaedalusYou are currently browsing the 2.0: The Blogmocracy blog archives for July, 2011.
website design was Built By All of Us
