Comments on: Wait a minute: Bush just said “jihadist”

By: caligulajones

caligulajones — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:48:22 +0000

There is a difference between being p.c. and using accurate language. A Jihad is usually used in Muslim circles as a personal spiritual war. The Hymn “Onward Christian Solder” is not a war cry. To use the word incorrectly would only provoke rational people like you if the tables were turned. It is like calling a Christian a cannibal because of transfiguration. Some will hate us for no reason. Most just want to live their lives in peace like anyone else. Hate and ignorance have blinded people on both sides.

By: Politicalguano

Politicalguano — Thu, 08 May 2008 03:49:49 +0000

I feel so sorry for these extremist Muslims young children, who are brought into this world seeking only to be loved and are taught only to hate. Their families have sown the winds of destruction for these children reject reason and compromise and kill anyone, including their own families, who disagrees with them. No Muslim is safe with such monsters amongst their midst. They have created a society filled with mass murderers.

By: Schaschlik 0502 « abseits vom mainstream - heplev

Schaschlik 0502 « abseits vom mainstream - heplev — Fri, 02 May 2008 21:23:02 +0000

[...] Wie es aussieht, hat Bush das Memo aus dem State Department nicht bekommen. [...]

By: Purging “Jihadism” from Bushisms | Security Debrief - a blog of homeland security news and analysis

Thu, 01 May 2008 12:50:41 +0000

[...] the word and its derivative forms in the latest State Department Country Reports on Terrorism, and Michele Malkin calls for an urgent intervention from the “State Department Language Police” following [...]

By: Bhishma

Bhishma — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:05:29 +0000

On April 29th, 2008 at 9:00 pm, NHMagenta said:
GW Bush will likely fade into obscurity once he leaves office 1.20.2009 .

So, US President/Commander-in-chief is busy re-paying his wahhabBi masters in Riyadh for making him rich. Ofcourse, nothing less than Islamization of US is acceptable to the wahhabbis. and given time, Bush will sell US out to his masters. Right now, he is busy protecting his masters from those rogue terrorists, with US blood and money.
And Americans watch instead of impeaching a traitor. Good for Bush and his wahhabbi family in Riyadh.

By: A NEWT ONE

A NEWT ONE — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:47:54 +0000

War News: President Bush FINALLY Tells It Like It…

Quite a bit was discussed in the Press Conference but a particular point was near and dear. I have that segment isolated here. This is the segment where “Martha” was trounced and then her “associate” tried to take up Martha’s cause and GWB FINALLY…

By: Alphonse

Alphonse — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:10:32 +0000

It’s Zio-Nazis and Crusaders versus Jihadists and Islamo-fascists.

By: Drama Queen

Drama Queen — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:00:36 +0000

No worries! I always ignore "little goofy men" - aka lgm

By: Straight_Talk_Luigi

Straight_Talk_Luigi — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:00:08 +0000

He shouldn’t say it because it isn’t true. The people shooting at us in Iraq are not making holy war against infidels, they are trying to get a foreign occupying army the heck out of their country — patriots.

Naturally, LGM would call terrorists patriots. Because if you didn’t, you might be an Islamophobe.

Have you joined al-quedia yet? Because they are in Iraq and they are making this a holy war. That’s their motto. It’s NEVER been Iraqi freedom.

If it is, please explain to why they are willing to kill innocent Iraqis in the HOPE (usually they fail) of trying to kill USA forces?

The number of foreign fighters in Iraq is estimated to be in the hundreds, and almost all in Sunni areas. Those are not the most violent places at the moment.

Ever heard of al Sadr?

Well everyone, I guess LGM has been brainwashed by 7th-Century men who stand against everything he/she fights for everyday here on Mrs. Malkin’s blog.

We will defeat the JIHADISTS no matter how many liberals join the ranks of osama!

So let’s keep on evangelizing Muslims in Africa and the Middle East, let’s keep the noose tight around the Taliban, and let’s show liberals how to take care of an enemy!

allah akkbar, LGM

And to the rest of you: God Bless!

By: MNUSMCDavid

MNUSMCDavid — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:47:30 +0000

Soap, I know you’re right…. but I do love to fight…….. I really need therapy! Where’s my Bushmills?

By: On-my-soap-box

On-my-soap-box — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:43:11 +0000

On April 29th, 2008 at 6:55 pm, vickisoup said:
Just for one day, let’s nobody even bother replying to lgm.

It will NOT work. I was the leader of the:

I G N O R E
H I M

pack. He would post something stupid and I would go right behind him with:

I G N O R E
H I M

to no avail. The next post would be someone who would confront him. It is best to poke fun at him, slap him down, insult him and tell him to scat.

Chances are, after every vile he said on this thead, you will not get banned.

By: MNUSMCDavid

MNUSMCDavid — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:28:04 +0000

#61

Don’t hold your breath.

By: NHMagenta

NHMagenta — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:00:35 +0000

#50:
While currently a President of the US who has served 2 terms cannot be re-elected, he certainly can be appointed to the US Supreme Court (Howard Taft).

GW Bush will likely fade into obscurity once he leaves office 1.20.2009 .

This of course assumes he isn’t indicted for war crimes.

By: skysoljr82

skysoljr82 — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:38:00 +0000

I’m with you vickisoup. I will TRY to ignore him, but he’s like a hummingbird on crack, jumping from thread to thread, lobbing his mindlessly tedious vomitbombs. My patience with people like that is at an all-time low.

By: DBNinKY

DBNinKY — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:30:51 +0000

On April 29th, 2008 at 5:10 pm, lgm said:

I think Bush started the Iraq war to be re-elected in 2004.

I disagree.

The reasons for the war in Iraq are many fold, and I agree with all of them, but chief among them is the fact that had there not been a military response against a known enemy of the U.S. for the attacks of 9/11, the outcry from the American people would have been deafening.

Furthermore, the Republican Party would have been excoriated for their inaction, and rightly so, dooming us to political defeat for the next century and garnering us the label of the “party of cowards,” a.k.a., the Democrat Party (cheap shot but I couldn’t resist).