Fanatics
Email This Post
Print This Post
What is the difference between the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and Al Qaeda?
This is a serious inquiry as I am beginning to see little daylight between the attitudes of either organization – merely a different set of priorities. One group is a fanatical tribe of overzealous control freaks who insist on subjugating everyone in their corner of the globe to their pious belief systems through any torturous means necessary.
The other group is hiding in Pakistan.
In this past week we saw the San Francisco Sups basically ban Happy Meals, the food you have likely fed your own child a hundred times and whose only side effect is that it encourages your crumb crushers to beg for return visits. An Al Qaeda branch has banned all Christians and declared them “legitimate targets.” Aside from the relative degree of bloodshed and saturated fats, the difference between the leadership of these two squads is insignificant.
Much of this is reflected in Sharia law and San Francisco city ordinances, both of which are writs of self-professed divine directives. San Francisco mandates that citizens separate compostable scraps from their garbage or go to jail while Al Qaeda types mandate that everyone tithe 10% or lose a body part. San Francisco’s mullahs define which foods are banned and so does the Qur’an. Indeed, the principle difference between Supervisor Chris Daly and Ayman al-Zawahiri is that one of those men is completely nuts.
The chief unifying factor between these two terrorist groups is that their leaders believe they speak for God or some higher authority, and that by their own self-delusion they have the right to inflict capricious interpretation of doctrine on everyone else. In San Francisco a woman cannot smoke a cigarette at an outdoor bus stop, and in Afghanistan the same woman cannot stand at the bus stop unescorted by a male family member. Both Al Queda and Baghdad by the Bay’s bosses exert absolute control over whatever they consider sinful.
Including Happy Meals.
For a brief moment I wondered which of these two camps would win a battle with the other, and quickly concluded Al Queda would. First, San Francisco supervisors tend to like gun control and thus might not be as well armed as Al Queda who sees no problem with AK-47 law enforcement for littering. But even if they possessed matching hardware Al Queda would win. Modern Sodom’s sups would be compelled to show Al Queda cultural sensitivity … even as the scimitar’s blade landed on their individual necks.
Comments