Wikipedia Deletes Article on Minnesota Jihad Arsonist, Claims “No source indicating that Hassan is a Muslim”

Wikipedia has some limited value if you want to get some facts about Tiberius Caesar or Henry Agard Wallace or Leon Spinks, but on contemporary issues it has — like virtually everything else — a pronounced hard-Left, pro-jihad bias. The biographies of Islamic apologists (John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, Reza Aslan, etc.) are fawning press releases, while those of foes of jihad terror such as Pamela Geller have lengthy “Criticism” sections that are filled with every negative statement about them and their work that can be found. And so it comes as no surprise that Wikipedia’s editors would deep-six an article about Tnuza Jamal Hassan, who recently set a series of fires on the campus of St. Catherine University in Minnesota, saying she wanted to “hurt people,” after exhorting Muslim students to join jihad terror groups such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or al-Shabaab. Hassan said she set the fires in revenge for supposed American atrocities on “Muslim land.” She wrote a letter to her roommates that police said contained “radical ideas about supporting Muslims and bringing back the caliphate.”

Nothing could be clearer from all this than the fact that Tnuza Jamal Hassan is a jihad terrorist, but Wikipedia’s hard-Left, agenda-driven editors were unconvinced — or more likely, determined to conceal this information from the public. And so they ignored this mountain of evidence. One Wikipedia editor claimed that Hassan “has not been charged with terrorism.” In reality, she faces a terror charge. And “Ms Hassan may or may not be having a mental health incident.” Of course! More of the global outbreak of mental illness. Wikipedia says “There is no source indicating that Hassan is a Muslim,” when there is an abundance of sources indicating that she is a Muslim.

Note also the Wikipedia editor saying “I removed the categories ‘Muslim terrorists’ (which is does [sic] not exist).” 30,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11, and Wikipedia doesn’t even have a category for “Muslim terrorists.” This is the most vivid indication of all that when it comes to facts about the world today, Wikipedia is Leftist, agenda-driven, and worthless.

Of course, Wikipedia is not alone. The denial is near-universal, outside of the Geller Report, Jihad Watch, and a few other places. At St. Catherine University itself, students have not learned any lesson in the nature and magnitude of jihad terrorism from Tnuza Jamal Hassan. Instead, they are scratching their heads and wondering how poor Tnuza could have been driven to this on such a wonderful campus as theirs. In the wake of an attempted jihad arson that could have killed hundreds of people, students at St. Catherine University are saying: “St. Kate’s is one of the most inclusive, diverse welcoming schools you can think of.” And: “This was very surprising and we have a very diverse school that welcomes everyone.”

These students seem to assume that jihad terror attacks happen because Muslims find themselves in environments that are not “welcoming” and “diverse.” Thus the onus is all on the Infidels, and it is their responsibility to stop jihad terror attacks from occurring. If they happen anyway, it is because they were not “welcoming” and “diverse” enough. The idea that Muslims might stage jihad massacres for reasons of their own, stemming from Islamic texts and teachings — why, even to entertain that as a possibility would be “Islamophobic.” On campuses today, everything is the fault of the West. Those who think otherwise are racist, bigoted “Islamophobes.”

Meanwhile, the most important questions remain not only unanswered, but unasked. These include: Where did Tnuza Hassan learn Islam? Where does she attend mosque? What does that mosque teach about violence against unbelievers? Is that mosque being investigated? Why not? Is it being assumed that Tnuza J. Hassan was “radicalized on the Internet”? If so, why was the supposedly twisted, hijacked, violent version of Islam she supposedly learned on the Internet so easily able to overcome the supposedly peaceful, benign, tolerant version that everyone assumes that she learned at home and at her local mosque?

In light of the prevailing denial and willful ignorance regarding the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, Wikipedia’s behavior is just par for the course. It would have been more surprising if it had been honest about what happened at St. Catherine University.

Here is Wikipedia’s editorial discussion on Tnuza Jamal Hassan’s jihad arson attack:

Article on previously non-notable person who at this point is accused but not convicted of a crime. Per WP:BLPCRIME, this sort of material should generally not go into BLPs, and under WP:BLP1E, its not certain she would get an article even if convicted. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME. Per WP:PERP the article should be renamed to St. Catherine’s University Arson Attack. National on-going coverage of this crime/terror-attack. Coverage sufficient for notability, save WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE which can not be evaluated due to this being a new event (though it has been covered since occurring) – requiring crystal balling on our part, hence this should be kept per WP:RAPID.Icewhiz (talk) 07:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 07:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• Keep per Icewhiz .It should be renamed to St. Catherine’s University Arson Attack. It has national and even International coverage and this has happened in a University.Passes WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME.The only question is whether it passes WP:LASTING that question can be revisited after a few months.Hate crime ,Terrorist or religion motivated attacks and Honour killing generally do have lasting impact.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• If it is going to be renamed, let me suggest St. Catherine University arson instead, because

1. The name of the university doesn’t actually have the apostrophe-s in it.
2. “Arson Attack” is descriptive, not part of a proper name, and should thus not be capitalized
3. “Arson Attack” seems redundant. We wouldn’t say “murder attack” or “robbery attack”. —Nat Gertler (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• Keep — disclaimer, I started this article. Nominator NatGertler initially placed a {{prod}} on the article. When I left some questions, on their talk page, about their policy interpretations, they called my questions “badgering”. I can’t help noticing that this nomination is essentially the same as that used in the prod, even though I thought I had raised good questions over their interpretations of BLP1E and BLPCRIME. I find that disappointing. Geo Swan (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Would you care to restate your !vote rationale in terms of policy, rather than in terms of attacking me? —Nat Gertler (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
    • Some people conflate civil and collegial substantive discussion over issues with personal attacks. I encourage you to make sure you don’t make this conflation. It is not good for the project.
    • On your talk page I responded to the BLP1E claim you placed in your prod, yesterday. I reminded you that ALL three of the numbered subsections of BLP1E are supposed to be satisfied, before an individual is considered an instance of BLP1E. I drew your attention to the phrase “…is likely to remain, a low-profile individual.”I explained that domestic terrorists, in the USA, are very rare. I compared US domestic terrorist to plain ordinary garden variety murderers. We never cover plain ordinary murderers. We cover a small number of murderers who are in some way exceptional. Ordinary murdeers are adequately covererd in our articles on murder, domestic violence, firearms, etc., because they are so similar.Domestic US terrorists are so rare that claim removed for BLP reasons Geo Swan (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
      • Domestic US terrorists are not all that rare, alas. The list you will find at Terrorism in the United States will show you many such incidents, and that is certainly not all of them. I have edited out your claims here about the subject of this article, who has not been convicted of anything and discussion about her is limited by WP:BLP guidelines. —Nat Gertler (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete or Rename The event is potentially notable not the person. TheGreatWikiGeorge (talk) 16:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete This is an article about a 19 year-old woman who appears to me to be having some form of breakdown. The incident has had no lasting impact on either the building or the institution. In the very unlikely event that this becomes something more than an unfortunate episode in a young woman’s life, we can always recreate the article. World’s Lamest Critic (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Ms Hassan may or may not be having a mental health incident.Yes, the incident caused no actual casualties, and caused little physical damage. But, she appears to have waived her right to protect herself from self-incrimination, and willing made some damaging confessions. Anyone who actually read the article, or did their own google search and took even a minute looking at the articles covering her, will have seen she told investigators that she had hoped to burn the University to the ground, and cause extensive casualties.I suggest it is not her actual result that matters, but rather her intent. Many mass killers could also be described as young people who appeared to be having some kind of breakdown. Their youth or possible mental health issues do not keep them from being notable.You suggest this will likely be nothing “more than an unfortunate episode in a young woman’s life”. Geo Swan (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
    • I have read both our article and the sources used for it. I am aware of what she is alleged to have told investigators. She set eight small fires. “All but one of the fires were in trash cans,” according to this report. Her actions and words do not align. At this point it is not known where Hassan was born or if she is a US citizen, yet she is being described here as “a domestic terrorist”. This is irresponsible at best. World’s Lamest Critic (talk) 03:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
      • There has been a bunch of problematic content involved. I just had to go strip out article claims that there was a list of charges of which arson was the worst (source only said one charge of arson); that she was still in custody (source, a Monday article, only said that she was in custody on Friday night); and that she would have her next hearing next year (reality: next month.) The net effect of demonizing her with false information is of real concern. That the same editor asserted today the suspect’s guilt on another Wikipedia page keeps this a matter of severe BLP concern. —Nat Gertler (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOTNEWS / WP:TOOSOON / WP:BLP. The subject has not yet been convicted, and the article reads like a news story. No apparent lasting significance just yet. If the incident is still remembered in six months, then sure, an article would be appropriate. But Wikipedia is not a newspaper. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete Seems like routine news-of-the-day, a minor campus crime incident. Nothing particularly notable about arson, no significant impact beyond the local region. ValarianB(talk) 16:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E are relevant here. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC).
• Delete. Fails WP:BLPCRIME, WP:BLP1E. We are not a police blotter for the reporting of minor crimes. Calling this an “arson attack” like it’s some kind of coordinated terrorist plot is a hell of a stretch. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:42, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete. Local, minor-crime story that wouldn’t even rate a mention in a Minnesotapedia, if one existed. Whoever wrote this inflated nonsense should know better. —Calton | Talk 05:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete Local 1E crime. EEng 07:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Keep – and rename. This passes WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME. LASTING can not be evaluated at this time.–BabbaQ (talk) 15:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
• Note – I was recently criticized by the article creator for having edited the article while it was under AFD. As this is a BLP of a subject who is likely receiving more attention (and thus having this page referenced) than they ever have or will again, I thought it best to remove or correct statements that did not match sources, particularly those that painted her in a negative light. This included falsehoods and unsourced damaging claims that were added by the complaining poster after the start of the AFD (such as the claim that her next court date was more than a year away, that she had “charges” of which one was the “most serious” when the source listed just a single charge, and that she was “currently” being held in custody.) If anyone wishes to see the article’s state before the AFD, it’s here. —Nat Gertler (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
  • I also edited the article after it was nominated for deletion. I removed the categories “Muslim terrorists” (which is does not exist) and “arsonists”. There is no source indicating that Hassan is a Muslim. She has not been charged with terrorism. She has not been convicted of arson. Geo Swan should probably be banned from BLPs. World’s Lamest Critic (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article’s talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is Confessions of an Islamophobe. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

• $25.00 here
• $50.00 here
• $75.00 here
• $100.00 here
• $250.00 here

0 0 votes

Article Rating

52 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Suresh

6 years ago

Left/Liberal Pro-jihadis are actively engaged with media to cover up jihadi crimes.

And Muslims are united in their goal of occupation , domination , terrorising and subjugation and practice Islamic Art Of Occupation & Ethnic Cleansing Without Killing http://bit.ly/2y1iju8

while infidels are clueless and disunited. Unite,fund, support conservative , patriotic bloggers, youtube channels etc and share the info to inform, Organise and resist . Or you’ll end up in a Islamic hellhole

0

Kat Mandu

6 years ago

Reply to  Suresh

You sound like someone who speaks out of their ass.

0

Suresh

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

LOL ! Once the jihadis place a bomb near you , you won’t even have an ass to talk about !

0

MAS

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

And you sound like someone who has a fixation with that part of the human anatomy…

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

Typical muslim spokesperson.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

Hi, kitty. Speaking of “asses”, when moslems get all buns up ‘n kneelin’ and shakin’ it for all that it’s worth .. some of ’em five times a day .. They’re showing off that particular portion of their anatomy, not to speak from it, but rather to have the imam, and his cronies, ram something up it .. ALL moslem males are homosexuals … and they have homosexual orgies, at the mosque .. and even in the streets, five times per day.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

You are right in yur first sentence. the rest is a bit over the top and takes away your credibility.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

I’m always willing to engage with moslem loving islamophiliacs. What was “over the top”, jimmi?

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

You are glib, so I guess you think that you are smart. Being smart, you should be able to figure it out there, bright boy.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

Such an erudite little thing, aren’t you, jimmi? TOO funny. Simply hilarious! You moslem loving islamophiliacs are ALMOST (special emphasis added) to laugh AT, as outright moslems.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

Soooooo, little camel jockey, or if you prefer female sheep, you failed to follow my suggestion. Go to amazon and look for the book MOSLEM MEN FEAR WOMEN. It’s all about you if yo have the cojones to read it.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

Jimmi, jimmi, jimmi. You poor little thing. First, “achmed” is a bastardization of your moslem friend’s, “ahmed”. They hate the name “achmed”, as it makes fun of your buddies’ “ahmed”. Secondly, call any moslem a “mohammedan” and they will shake shiver, foam at the mouth … and squeal. You, being a moslem loving islamophiliac simply cannot understand that. Your type fears women, unless they’re YOUR type, with their clitorises chopped out by those moslems that you LOVE (special emphasis added). It is OBVIOUS that you have NO cajones, as they have been removed by your moslem masters. Soooooo, little moslem loving islamophiliac, did you bend over and have an imam ram your backside, today?

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

Call yourself whatever you want. Call me whatever you want. The fact remains that you are contemptible.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

And, you are either a moslem loving islamophiliac or worse, FAR worse … you exhibit the tendencies of an outright moslem. That IS a fact and yes, it does remain.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

I won’t bite your contemptible BS bait, chump.

I do indeed love some Moslems, I have fabulous Moslem friends.

I do indeed hate Islam, and hard core Islamists like you.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

I KNEW IT, punk, you ARE a forkin’ moslem .. wipin’ with that BARE left hand .. and gettin’ all buns up ‘n kneelin’ five times a day .. to get the imam to pick you for your daily “ramming”. So, you admit to NOT being a human being .. as NO moslem is a human being. Vile, filthy, foul smelling, disgusting creature .. a moslem. A moslem punk.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

In looking over the thread of our communications, I note: Do you realize that you went from acting like a muzloid defending the witch to acting like a puss filled pimple attacking and calling me names. That indicates that you are insane, i.e. a Moslem.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

In reviewing every comment that I made, within this thread, I note absolutely nothing, typed by me, that wasn’t derogatory about moslems. Commencing with the first comment of their (moslem’s) practice of getting into a position to excite their imam. It is obvious, to even the most casual reader, that you have exceptional difficulty with reading comprehension. You are nothing but a punk that LOVES moslems (self-admitted by your very own words). Call me insane, as to be “insane” one must be a human being, which is something that NO moslem is. My first comment was:

“Hi, kitty. Speaking of “asses”, when moslems get all buns up ‘n kneelin’ and shakin’ it for all that it’s worth .. some of ’em five times a day .. They’re showing off that particular portion of their anatomy, not to speak from it, but rather to have the imam, and his cronies, ram something up it .. ALL moslem males are homosexuals … and they have homosexual orgies, at the mosque .. and even in the streets, five times per day.”

Even to a moslem, such as yourself, how in the world was that, “acting like a muzloid defending the witch”?
Even for a moslem, you are incredibly stupid.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

Yeah sure,. Just take a look at my Moslem books at amazon, titled: MOSLEM MEN FEAR WOMEN, ISLAM IN THE WORKPLACE, AND EXPERIENCING ISLAM

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

Since you’re so reading comprehension “challenged”, why would I even think about something that you put out … You moslem punk?

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Achmed Mohammedan

Ahhhh! Willful ignorance is so blissful, isn’t it?

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Jim Horn

You, the moslem punk that you are, have to be speaking from experience. So, is it?

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

You are talking to yourself, of course.

0

Kat Mandu

6 years ago

Israeli soldier, Avner Gvaryahu, Breaking the Silence’s executive director https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI4k7sbuk2k&ab_channel=BreakingtheSilence%2F%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D%D7%A9%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%94

0

Suresh

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

BBC is a pro-jihadi propaganda tool. They will always find a nutjob traitor to speak against Israel and support palestinian jihadi killers

They would not even cover the more than 60,000 British girls gang raped, beaten, drugged for over 12 years . why ? because the criminals were muslims.

0

ladywarrior

6 years ago

Reply to  Suresh

It’s exactly what Hitler did as he prepped the Germans to let him take over….FAKE NEWS 24/7 put him in power…..and it’s happening again.

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  Kat Mandu

Bulllshitt.

0

ladywarrior

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

Hi, Mahou, I blocked Mandu a long time ago….

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  ladywarrior

All it is good for is to ridicule, the more it posts the stupider islam looks.

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  ladywarrior

Nuts or muslim? Not possible to tell them apart, is it?

0

AR154U☑ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ DEPLORABLE 2020

6 years ago

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

wikipedia is another good idea that has become so open minded, that its brains have fallen out. If it wishes to become more irrelevant, all it has to do is continue to pander to islam.

0

R. Arandas

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

As someone who first edited Wikipedia since middle school, I have to say, it does have a subtle liberal bias.

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  R. Arandas

That is almost tolerable, what is intolerable is the sell out to islam.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  R. Arandas

Wikypee has never been an acceptable “source” in any US court of law. I was shocked, when someone from the neddurlands informed me that it is accepted as such in the dootch courts. It is, and HAS ALWAYS been an absolute joke.

0

ladywarrior

6 years ago

Reply to  R. Arandas

I don’t even go there anymore as a source……

0

felix1999

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

Total LIBERAL bias.

0

marlene

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

True. That’s one of the many differences between wikipedia and Wikileaks, which researches its material for facts, evidence and documentation. And between the owner of wikileaks and Julian Assange is that Assange would, if demanded, provide the information on hand and advise that he cannot substantiate it and that the reader should do further research, Unfortunately, wikipedia has become way too laid back in letting the chips fall and worse, it relies totally on “sources,” which encourage fake news to insert and remove all evidence of what they don’t want us to know.

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  marlene

Everything seen on wikipedia must be cross referenced to at least one more source, as it is far to easy for those, especially muslims, who are mandated by islam to lie, to cook the information, or remove it completely.

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

Very well stated.

0

smaragdus

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

You may have a look at Everipedia:
https://everipedia.org/
an alternative which hasn’t been yet destroyed by the hordes of the leftist trolls who run Wikipedia and censor any article contradictory to their globalist agenda..

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  smaragdus

Will take a look, thanks.

0

R. Arandas

6 years ago

Don’t forget, there are plenty of active Muslim editors on Wikipedia as well…I remember when the article “rape jihad” was deleted, apparently because of their outcry.

0

D

AlgorithmicAnalyst

6 years ago

Every Wiki article I’ve seen recently dealing with contemporary issues appeared to have been scrubbed by leftists.

0

Alleged-Comment

6 years ago

Why I don’t support Wickedpedia when they BEG for money.

0

Drew the Infidel

6 years ago

Reply to  Alleged-Comment

Agreed. A common trait of leftists is to engage in some enterprise that cannot support itslf on its merits and earnings and, therefore, requires a bailout mechanism. Usually a government subsidy or public solicitation scheme is used. Case in point.

0

Drew the Infidel

6 years ago

Oh, yes! Hassan, a common Methodist name. I know many. And a pig’s right eye.

0

Achmed Mohammedan

6 years ago

Reply to  Drew the Infidel

I wasn’t aware that the Wesleyans were fond of “Hassan”. I was under the mistaken belief that it was favored by looterans.

0

ladywarrior

6 years ago

We should demand that universities who receive tax dollars have to have equal political party professors….they lose their funding if they don’t hire conservative professors…..Actually, I’d like all funding jerked now….which in turn would bring down the costs of Universities….the more money Obama gave them the higher the costs…..some “professors” making as much as $350,000 a year.

Then the conservative professors need to teach the kids the history of Hitler in Germany….Hitler’s first -and number one thing that got him power – was FAKE NEWS…..and controlling the populace with that FAKE NEWS….he created false crisis that caused the populace to clammer for him to save them….he downplayed actual crisis that he was creating in the background…..

As the millennials and their parents have the mindset of lemmings following each other off the cliff…it wouldn’t take much to turn them around the other way if the Universities and Colleges were actually TEACHING entities instead of Hitler style indoctrination camps….

0

Jim Horn

6 years ago

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

The woman is a diehard Moslem terrorist!

0

stacey

6 years ago

i don’t know if the picture i am looking at is female or male but it’s certainly fugly for sure!

0

Mahou Shoujo

5 years ago

It appears the wikipedia has grovelled in the dirt to islam. Looks like I will not be supporting it in its annual fund raising campaign.

0