The Enemy Within

(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin) 

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

14 Comments »

1. That is so spot on! I won’t even wrap fish in either of the Times now. Thank God for GayPatriot Blog!

   Comment by Christopher — June 24, 2006 @ 5:00 pm - June 24, 2006

2. #1

   Oh come on! The NYT is good for a laugh now and again. Plus, you have to keep track of the team killing fucktards on the left.

   Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 25, 2006 @ 12:02 am - June 25, 2006

3. It’s interesting.
   I saw a program on the Military Chanel a few weeks ago about the bomb laden balloons that were sent from Japan to the U.S. The Japanese had no idea how successful the plan was because Roosevelt ordered that nobody in the media report on them. The documentary mentioned how Japan was monitoring U.S. radio and newspapers to find out whether or not it was successful.

   Clearly, FDR was a fascist Nazi and would be impeached by today’s douchebag liberals.

   Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 25, 2006 @ 7:23 am - June 25, 2006

4. If the choice we are faced with is that we must either endure terrorism or this vast system of big brother being used to combat it, I choose terrorism.

   For me, It’s give me liberty or give me death. I don’t want to lose, just so we can say we won.

   God bless the New York Times.

   Comment by Erik — June 25, 2006 @ 11:35 pm - June 25, 2006

5. #5

   Furthermore, are you really going to give a damn about those freedoms when you’re dead?

   Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 26, 2006 @ 12:20 am - June 26, 2006

6. THERE’S MORE THAN ONE WAY TO FIGHT TERRORISM YOU PIG FUCKING ASSHOLE. SO DON’T FUCKING SAY I SUPPORT TERRORISM LIKE YOU DID ON THE OTHER COMMENT BOARD. IF YOU WERE IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW, I’D RIP YOUR EYEBALLS OUT.

   Comment by Erik — June 26, 2006 @ 12:22 am - June 26, 2006

7. Erik buddy, you about to go right over that cliff like Stephen did. We can’t always have it both ways. We have far more to fear from a Socialist government than a Republican one when it comes to interference with our lives. I don’t trust Reps either but I have no intention of letting the hateful whores in this country plot my demise through terrorism and we are not going to let apologists for them regain power in our government.

   Why is it Americans you distrust and even hate the most? Why aren’t you tying in all caps about terrorists in this country? Why is only us that makes you want to kill?

   Comment by VinceTN — June 26, 2006 @ 2:21 am - June 26, 2006

8. Of course there is — you do like Democratic Party spokesperson Cindy Sheehan does and give them money.

   Given that you oppose every method used to fight it, Erik, the fact that you support it is obvious; you’ve sabotaged every means possible, and your own party funds them.

   Don’t blame TGC for pointing out the obvious.

   And also, Erik, grow some balls and admit that you don’t care if another three thousand people get burned up when the New York Times wants to bash Bush and sell more papers — because they’re bashing Bush, and that’s worth another three, ten, or twenty thousand lives.

   It should be obvious that you don’t give a damn about anything other than hating Bush.

   Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 2:23 am - June 26, 2006

9. Because Erik is a leftist who thinks Bush is Hitler.

   Right now he’s planning his attack on Bush for breaking up the Miami terror ring that was planning to destroy the Sears Tower — because obviously not allowing them to do so was an attack on liberty.

   What’s another three thousand or so when Erik has liberty? That’s what’s important.

   Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 2:25 am - June 26, 2006

10. #9 North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 2:25 am - June 26, 2006

    Right now he’s planning his attack on Bush for breaking up the Miami terror ring that was planning to destroy the Sears Tower…

    Oh, yeah, right. They were a real dangerous terror ring. One that couldn’t even afford combat boots–and who probably couldn’t afford to go to Chicago much less acquire explosives–and one that had their lair guarded by members in army uniforms and ski masks–in Miami.

    /sarcasm

    Comment by raj — June 26, 2006 @ 2:30 pm - June 26, 2006

11. And when they succeeded, you would have been the first to bash the Feds for not realizing the danger.

    Democrats like you, Raj, are the ones who wrote Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh off as crackpots who didn’t have the resources to hurt anyone and thus weren’t dangerous.

    The only reason you’re trying to downplay this is because you’re the same as Erik — it’s more important to be anti-Bush than it is to be sensible.

    Tell you what — we’ll send them to live with you and set up shop right next door. Since you don’t think they’re dangerous at all, you should have no problem with that, right?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 3:58 pm - June 26, 2006

12. As noted in another thread, the comment software and I had trouble last night and it lost some of my comments.

    Erik’s wonderful #6 freakout was directed at me. I want to restore some context, especially as I stand by the point I had made that set him off. I can’t reconstruct exactly what I said but here is the gist.

    “This vast system of big brother being used to combat [terrorism]” is Erik’s highly inaccurate, offensive way of describing the state of American politics and civil rights since September 11. Erik said, in preference to that, “I choose terrorism”.

    In other words: Erik says in #4 that he prefers the terrorists (or terrorism) over what is happening in America today. I don’t see any other way to read his words. I pointed it out, thanked him for being so clear, and told him why I thought he was wrong. I used basically the tone you are reading now; no shouting (caps) or name calling.

    Rather than say, “Whoa, I said it wrong and I really mean we should fight terrorism by doing things X, Y and Z”, Erik gave me the all-caps screaming and threats you see in #6.

    Draw your own conclusions. My own is that Erik is unready for sane, grownup political discussions.

    Comment by Calarato — June 26, 2006 @ 5:03 pm - June 26, 2006

13. Hey jas, if you’re still reading this blog (which I doubt), check out Erik! Talk about someone so full of hate. Kind of makes me look like Mr. Rogers, huh?

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — June 26, 2006 @ 5:51 pm - June 26, 2006

14. #11 North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 3:58 pm - June 26, 2006

    Democrats like you, Raj, are the ones who wrote Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh off as crackpots who didn’t have the resources to hurt anyone and thus weren’t dangerous.

    Apparently, you are too–um–dumb to recognize that Nichols & McVeigh not only had the resources to hurt someone, but they had also made at least some overt actions that might–and did–allow them to carry out their plans. They obviously bought ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, and rented a van to carry their bomb to OKC. AND there was apparently no federal informant to monitor their actions.

    Now, what resources did the popinjays in Miami have or what overt acts did they do to supposedly carry out their actions? They didn’t even have the resources to buy combat boots. And, aside from a lot of talk–hot air–they apparently didn’t engage in any overt acts. AND there was a federal informant who could monitor their actions. If they had actually engaged in an overt act to carry out some plan, I would say that the arrests were justified. That would have shown that they were something more than a bunch of nuts sitting around talking. Otherwise, no.

    Comment by raj — June 27, 2006 @ 12:08 pm - June 27, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Live preview of comment