Gay Patriot Header Image

More Evidence of Islamist Aims for Gays

**UPDATE** – After I wrote this post, I found out that the Gay Pride parade was cancelled due to the War On Terror conflict spreading to Israel/Lebanon** 

If you had any doubt as to who to back in the Isreali Theatre in the War on Terror/WWII, perhaps this will remind you of something:  Islamic Fundamentalists want gays eradicated from their society. (Hat tip: Efrat from Israel…. cool, or what?)

A ripple of laughter went through the meeting when MK Ibrahim Sarsur (United Arab List-Ta’al) said, “I have never had to participate in such a discussion, because in Muslim society we don’t have this problem.”

“As Muslims, we are obligated to religious law and it (homosexuality) is an unacceptable and condemned phenomenon, which should not be given any opportunities.”

This is truly World War III — Islamic Fascism versus Western Democracies.  The American Gay Left has made it pretty clear by their silence about Islamism and their anti-war promotion who they are against — The United States and our allies.

Whose side are you on?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

62 Comments

  1. I’m on the side of the West. The fact that they actually let gays live at all gives them that advantage over the Muslim world.

    Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:37 am - July 24, 2006

  2. Yeah, but do secular democracies have the stomach for a long twilight struggle against Islamo-Fascism? You look at Andrianna Sullington, who ditched his support for the War Against Islamo-Fascism as soon as the president hurt his feelings on his Pet Domestic Issue, and you have to wonder. You look at the media, like the NYT actively undermining efforts to collect intelligence on terrorists, and you have to wonder. You look at all the appeasers saying, “Let them have Israel, so they’ll leave us alone” (sounds like, “Let them have the Sudetenland, then they’ll leave us alone”) and you have to wonder. You look at all the Democrats ready to surrender, cut and run, and you have to wonder.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 10:05 am - July 24, 2006

  3. And it isn’t only the left that is the problem. With the Bush administration’s sudden willingness to treat terrorist butchers as honorable combatants by extending Geneva convention privileges to them, and their willingness to treat terrorist entities like Hamas and Hezbullah like sovereign states and negotiate ceasefires with them, and their tepid efforts to appease the mad Mullahs in Teheran and the terrorist kingpins in Damascus diplomatically… there is plenty of evidence that there is no stomach anywhere to truly deal with the threat of Global Jihad.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 10:39 am - July 24, 2006

  4. The problem for you Bushco apologists is that Commander Codpiece is losing the war with the Islamists due to sheer incompetence. Iraq has disintegrated into civil war and when the dust clears, Iran is set to pick up a good part of the valuable pieces. Afghanistan is struggling as the Taliban stages a comeback. Thank God the French and other old allies whom you disparage actually have our backs in that fight.

    Israel is foolishly bombing the fledgling Lebanese democracy – so recently hailed by you Bushies – back into the type of sullen failed state that has proven so useful for the spread of Islamo-fascism. Not to mention the high expectations you and other breathless armchair warriors have generated for what the Israelis can achieve in Lebanon. The Israelis don’t really have the ability to destroy Hezbollah so when it survives, you will have handed a great propaganda victory to the very terrorists you claim to oppose. You can deny that as much as you like but the Islamists will have another victory they can point to as a recruiting tool in the Islamic world.

    Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 11:02 am - July 24, 2006

  5. Why do you think that Israel has the ability to destroy Lebanese democracy, but not to destroy Hizbullah, Raj?

    And why do you think destroying Hizbullah wouldn’t actually STRENGTHEN Lebanese democracy, Raj?

    Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 11:15 am - July 24, 2006

  6. #4 – raj, even worse than your usual offerings.

    As I said, I normally skip 90% of your posts (lowered the number to reflect my reading of your “Ian” identity, before your scam was exposed), but I may occasionally check one from time to time to see if they’ve gotten remotely better. Once again, they haven’t.

    I got as far as the opening garbage, “Bushco!… Codpiece wearing!…” before my forehead instantly crashed on the keyboard again. Later!

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 11:16 am - July 24, 2006

  7. Leftism is irrelevant. We may have our differences with aspects of the GOP, but we don’t have to worry about being hanged in public if they are in power. Unlike Iran.

    Sweetie, if you think FOR ONE MOMENT, that you would have it better under Islamofacism, I encourage you to move to a country “governed” by such miscreants, and then you can decide for yourself. Just be sure to keep your US passport current so you can return to a rational state when you grow tired of the blather.

    I, for one, am sick to death of gays who tell us that everything will be all right if we just support Chavez, Castro, the EU, “Palestine”, and all the other fetishes of the Left.

    NO. NO. and NO.

    Comment by Scott in CA — July 24, 2006 @ 11:30 am - July 24, 2006

  8. I, for one, am sick to death of gays who tell us that everything will be all right if we just support Chavez, Castro, the EU, “Palestine”, and all the other fetishes of the Left.

    It occurred to me this morning that if Israel wanted to gain the support of the left, all they’d have to do is replace their democracy with a leftist dictatorship and have their subjects turn out twice a day to chant “Death to America.” The left would love them, then.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 11:38 am - July 24, 2006

  9. What is this mysterious corporation called “Bushco”? Are they publicly traded? I don’t see it listed on the NASDAQ or the NYSE.

    Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 11:49 am - July 24, 2006

  10. I met an openly gay Israeli soldier and he found our “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” policy to be quite ridiculous. Not only do they have no such policy, but he described homosexuality as a complete non-issue in the Israeli military.

    Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 24, 2006 @ 12:18 pm - July 24, 2006

  11. #6 – Very slight correction; sorry for boring y’all, I’m just compulsive about leaving a correct record – I should have typed “80%” as the figure for how many rajIan posts I typically skip. (In the past, before realizing they were the same, I skipped about 95% of “raj” and 65% of “Ian”.)

    #0 and #7 – Great posts. I would love to add something – but I can’t, because you nailed it. Gays who want to live (or who really aren’t self-hating) must recognize our true enemy. I fear that, at this rate, it will take several worse-than-911 disasters before they do. :-(

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 12:18 pm - July 24, 2006

  12. #10 – Yet another reason (there are several) why Israel really is morally superior to their Islamo-fascist enemy.

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 12:19 pm - July 24, 2006

  13. Its always amusing to note how the leftwing libreals in this GREAT nation of ours seem to conveniently forget or change the subject when we remind them that they are injoying freedoms and UNRESTRICTED liberties that people such as those in castros Cuba do not. Cubans gays have been persecuted and victimzed for decades. Cuban black gays suffer even more torment. The aparthied system does not offer them any latitude what so ever. They live in an aparthied system within the already depravation of the general aparthied bondage that the Cuban population suffers. And What is the response of the leftist liberals to these facts?……………”Oh well” they will response………At least they have free (?) education and health(?) services” yeaaaaaaa , free health until anyone needs an aspirin. And of cause Cuba has the best educated prostitutes in the World. Women, who were trained to be Doctors, lawers, professions in every field find themselfs selling there bodies to tourist so they can buy food on the black market to feel children and family members. These men and women who need to prostitued themselfs are working for castro. Thats why he is known as the greatest PIMP in Cuba. Cuba, castros very own cathouse.

    Comment by Henry Agüeros — July 24, 2006 @ 1:01 pm - July 24, 2006

  14. #13 — Yes, Henry, but Cubans have 90% literacy and state-provided universal health care! To the left, it’s perfectly wonderful to butcher and oppress your people, as long as you provide state health care and hate the United States.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 1:11 pm - July 24, 2006

  15. Henry: the point isn’t that America is better than Cuba, because that was, is, and will always be the case, Castro or no Castro.

    The point is that America isn’t as good as it could be. Just because the U.S. is the greatest country in the world doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement.

    Comment by vaara — July 24, 2006 @ 1:22 pm - July 24, 2006

  16. #15 — And that point is entirely possible to make without slamming America or cheering on Castro. Right-wingers do it all the time. Lefty actions and rhetoric are overwhelmingly anti-American and pro-Castro (and other America-hating dictators).

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 1:29 pm - July 24, 2006

  17. Funny, I’ve been an American lefty all my life, and have never cheered on Castro. Nor have I noticed any overwhelming tendency among my fellow lefties to do so.

    Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go oil my dreadlocks and douse myself in patchouli.

    Comment by vaara — July 24, 2006 @ 1:32 pm - July 24, 2006

  18. Ah, you must not get out much. Otherwise you would have seen the Che Guevara shirts that are de rigeur wherever lefties get together.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 1:38 pm - July 24, 2006

  19. Henry Agüeros (#13) It’s also amazing how many Modern Conservatives seem to think that this is the best of all possible worlds and couldn’t possibly get any better.

    The true patriots that I see [left, right or center] honestly want to make this a better country for everyone. They want to see liberty and prosperity for everyone. Not just the rich or the poor; black, white, latino, asian, etc; men, women; gay, straight;

    Further, true patriots understand that we stand or fall together.

    Comment by Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion — July 24, 2006 @ 1:59 pm - July 24, 2006

  20. #19 – “It’s also amazing how many Modern Conservatives seem to think that this is the best of all possible worlds…”

    Really? Like whom?

    Name a single one, so we can (a) consider whether they’re actually conservative and (b) know what you’re talking about.

    Since nobody on this blog ever thinks “this is the best of all possible worlds”, you can make it a public figure that you name.

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 2:15 pm - July 24, 2006

  21. “Further, true patriots understand that we stand or fall together.”

    Amen to that!

    If only the corrupt Left were true patriots!

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 2:16 pm - July 24, 2006

  22. Vera’s Top Ten Reasons Why She Can’t be a Muslim

    1) Turbans make me look like Norma Desmond…in drag
    2) Suicide belts make my hips look too big
    3) Black burquas are so 1990’s
    4) Crush on Celeste Holm wouldn’t square with the local Imam
    5) Can’t get a decent Martini in Mecca
    6) Three words: Fried Pork Chops
    7) 5 X daily prayers cuts into my afternoon cocktails
    8) Call to prayer sounds like cats being strangled
    9) Big ‘Mo’ isn’t exactly my kind of ‘mo’: if you know what I mean…
    10) They’re actually a cult…

    Comment by Vera Charles — July 24, 2006 @ 3:12 pm - July 24, 2006

  23. You cannot sway the gay Left. They still believe Utah is more a threat to the world than Iran or Palestine.

    Comment by Mario — July 24, 2006 @ 3:54 pm - July 24, 2006

  24. Br K, no offense, but that point about how “modern” conservatives think this world is just hunky-dorie and needs no further improvement is bunk. Flat out, silly Liberal nonsense trying to paint patriotism with “our side can do wrong” sloganeering –they are two different things.

    Unless you’re taking about modern conservative as the guy who has an “America- Love It or Leave It” sticker on his aging Ford truck… or the guy you see at Waylon Jennings concerts with a beer gut and an NRA tshirt… the modern conservatives I know think we’ve got a hell of long way to go yet in America –mostly to correct a generation of culture abuse on our institutions by the Left… work to do on the MSM, govt, religion, sports, family values, etc.

    I don’t know of a leading conservative of any repute who thinks things are perfect, finished, complete. Hell, even RR –the conservative movement’s 20th C cheerleader– didn’t think the experiment in democracy was finished as long a one activist liberal judge remained on the bench with her skinny, jabbing fingers at the throats of all Americans. I’d include a whole lot more to that list.

    Perfect? No. Lots of room for improvement? Yes. Would I trade my citizenship for Sweden, Italy or France? No. Get with the program Br K and quit trying to smear conservatives with the neanderthal paint-by-numbers brush, ok?

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — July 24, 2006 @ 3:55 pm - July 24, 2006

  25. If you’re picking sides in the current Middle East strife based on who’s the gay-friendliest of the two, why not do the same when it comes to Republicans and Democrats? Republican leadership and the folks pulling the strings in the Republican Party — the Christian Right — want us gays eradicated from our society. So, whose side are you on?

    Comment by Tony — July 24, 2006 @ 3:59 pm - July 24, 2006

  26. Calarato: I was talking more about sentiments than statements.

    I’ve been watching this site for maybe a month (I like the main posts…) I don’t recall any posts / comments that express a sentiment of improving the world…except for the elimination of the opposition. It’s possible I missed something.

    Comment by Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion — July 24, 2006 @ 4:32 pm - July 24, 2006

  27. #25: Apples and oranges, mate. In the ME, the choice is between the Israelis, who respect the right of gay people to exist and participate in society, and the terrorists who want to hang, crush, drown, burn and/or defenestrate all gay people. That’s a much more profound difference than whether or not the state issues you a piece of paper that says “our bureaucracy acknowledges your living arrangement.” The bit about the ‘Christian Right’ wanting to exterminate gays is just a boogeyman trotted out by the left, since no one on the right endorses or advocates anything like that position.

    And since survival and the right to participate in society is not an issue here and the marriage issue has a marginal impact on people’s lives, other issues become more important, like taxes, 2nd amendment rights, regulation, school choice, and national defense. This last is also important, because the left has shown a certain willingness to appease the Islamo-fascists rather than fight them. Which means letting the left take power would be a threat to survival in the long term.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 4:51 pm - July 24, 2006

  28. The same attitude that belives only in the old line of: America: Love it or leave it. That dissent or disagreement cannot be patriotic.

    Comment by Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion — July 24, 2006 @ 4:51 pm - July 24, 2006

  29. Dissent or agreement expressed as: “We disagree with Policy X, and believe Policy Y would be better for the following reasons”is patriotic.

    Dissent or disagreement expressed as: “We want the US to lose in Iraq because that will teach BushCo a lesson and help our side win back power, and we’re not going to suggest alternatives, we’re just going to whine, bitch, and cast blame” is not patriotic.

    Dissent or disagreement expressed as: “BushCo stole the election by collaborating with Diebold, and Karl Rove and the Oil Cabal secretly destroyed the WTC with controlled demolition and shot a missile into the Pentagon” is looniness.

    And the current democrat leadership is somewhere between 2 and 3.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 5:00 pm - July 24, 2006

  30. Oh, and, Dissent and Disagreement expressed as, “We don’t like Bush, so we’re going to undermine his efforts to stop terrorists by publishing classified data, mischaracterizing terrorist surveillance as ‘domestic spying,’ and tearing down the troops by comparing them to Nazis” is most definitely not patriotic.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 5:04 pm - July 24, 2006

  31. #25 by Tony
    It’s just one more of MANY reasons why we’re picking sides. One side believes in targeting civilians and converting, enslaving, or killing ANYONE who doesn’t strictly share their religious beliefs. In nearly every respect, Israel is morally superior to the terrorists they’re defending themselves from. A muslim can (and many do) live in Israel and feel safe. Would you feel save living openly as a jew in just about any of the Muslim states? You wouldn’t feel safe because you wouldn’t be safe. It’s as simple and as blatantly obvious as that, and yet there is controversy between liberals and conservatives about who’s in the right. It absolutely blows my freakin’ mind.

    Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 24, 2006 @ 5:18 pm - July 24, 2006

  32. #22 — Screw Madonna. Vera is MY diva!

    Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 24, 2006 @ 5:19 pm - July 24, 2006

  33. Please allow me the honor of starting the first Official Vera Charles Fan Club!!!!

    I swear before G-d & Sonny Jesus, if I were str8, I’d happily be that broad’s footstool.

    Eric in Hollywood
    ever mindful that “broad” is a compliment he reserves for only the most deserving of women…

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — July 24, 2006 @ 5:27 pm - July 24, 2006

  34. MM: “correct a generation of culture abuse on our institutions by the Left… work to do on the MSM, govt, religion, sports, family values, etc.”

    And where do gays fit into all this? Are we culture-abusers who need to be “corrected” in the name of religion and family values?

    Comment by vaara — July 24, 2006 @ 5:47 pm - July 24, 2006

  35. Back to the point: For all the love we seem to have about Democracy, you pointed ignore what’s happened initially to gays in societies that have been freed after removal of dictatorial regimes:

    WWII – When the concentration camps were liberated, the gays in the camps remained incarcerated because jailing of gays seems to be one thing that Hitler was doing right in the minds of the allies (predominantly americans). Forget of course the fact that german gays had gained many strides in equal rights before the rise of the Nazis

    Poland: When Poland became a democracy, treatment against gays due to conservative and religious (catholic) doctrine increased dramatically.

    Iraq: Inidications are that treatment of gays are not much different my the new government is not much different than what gays in Iran experience; its just done more quietly.

    and before some of you jump on the bandwagon, I’m not saying things were any better under the totalitarian regimes that these governments replaced. The problem is with the so-called “freedom lovers” who think freedom should be applied equally, just that some (straights) are more equal than others.

    Comment by Kevin — July 24, 2006 @ 5:56 pm - July 24, 2006

  36. and before some of you jump on the bandwagon, I’m not saying things were any better under the totalitarian regimes that these governments replaced.

    Then why are you making these comments in the first place?

    Because it’s the only possible way you can bitch about how getting rid of any of these regimes was in any way wrong.

    If you look at the lives of the vast majority of Germans, Poles, and Iraqis in question, they are immeasurably better off than they were under the Nazis, Communists, and Ba’athists respectively. They are enjoying freedoms that were hitherto unknown or completely nonexistent under their previous regimes.

    But because they aren’t perfect in regards to gay rights and because Republicans and conservatives supported the overthrow, you have to whine and snipe.

    You, Kevin, are a prime example of why most people perceive gays as being selfish, self-absorbed, puppet partisans of Democrats — because in your case, they’re right.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 24, 2006 @ 6:14 pm - July 24, 2006

  37. #25 – Tony – How can I help you understand? Islamo-fascists want to kill you. (Unlike conservatives, whether Christian or libertarian in nature.) Republicans, and Israelis for that matter, manage to oppose the Islamo-fascists effectively. Democrats don’t manage to. Lieberman, just about their only leading Senator who still would, is about to be kicked out of their Party.

    #26 – Br K – “I was talking more about sentiments than statements” – In other words, in #19, you were out-gassing some stereotyped thoughts you hold, and can’t back up by naming even one conservative name.

    You tried to imply that the people here (whether conservative like Bruce, conservative-libertarian like Dan, radical-libertarian like some of the commentors, etc.) don’t want liberty and prosperity for everyone. I think that shows your ideological blinders, because the desire for truly universal liberty and prosperity is unquestionably (unless one is a nutty leftist) at the root of everything Bruce and Dan write. And Bush’s foreign policy (of fighting terrorists and pushing democracy in the Middle East).

    #36 – LOL – NDT once again showing he majored in kicking ass and taking names :-)

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 8:14 pm - July 24, 2006

  38. (i.e., “And *at the root of* Bush’s foreign policy…”)

    Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 8:16 pm - July 24, 2006

  39. #37 — I am reminded of the aphorism that a socialist, upon passing a magnificent house, says ‘No man should have so much.’ A capitalist, passing the same house, would say ‘Every man should have so much.’

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 8:33 pm - July 24, 2006

  40. “After I wrote this post, I found out that the Gay Pride parade was cancelled due to the War On Terror conflict spreading to Israel/Lebanon”

    How about: It was cancelled because a bunch of nutbag terrorists are bombing the shit out of israel and people could die/get their limbs ripped off if they walk outside and get hit by missiles. And conservatives think liberals are filled with wussy, politically correct talk.

    Comment by Kevin — July 24, 2006 @ 9:20 pm - July 24, 2006

  41. Bruce (GP), I totally disagree with your final point. World War III isn’t between Islam facists and Western democracies.

    It’s a war between Islam and Western culture. Find me more than a handful of “moderate” Muslim clerics trying to rein in Islam’s followers and I might change my opinion. Right now, however, the entire Islamic faith scares the hell out of me.

    Comment by Trace Phelps — July 24, 2006 @ 10:35 pm - July 24, 2006

  42. Vera Charles is the only one of you who should be taken seriously (Vera’s Top Ten Reasons Why She Can’t be a Muslim). I doubt that one of you knows even 10% of the issues regarding Israel and the Muslim world. Yet you vehemently advocate or don’t advocate violence or peace. Is this what you would do at work? Base your decision on knowing less than 10% of the facts? Educate yourself before making grand statements.

    Comment by Bullshit factor — July 25, 2006 @ 3:08 am - July 25, 2006

  43. America has nothing to boast about. Who was it recently siding with Iran and other fundamentalist states to block International Gay and Lesbian groups from having a status at the UN – none other than the US of A.

    Comment by mario — July 25, 2006 @ 4:13 am - July 25, 2006

  44. #13 Henry Agüeros — July 24, 2006 @ 1:01 pm – July 24, 2006

    Its always amusing to note how the leftwing libreals in this GREAT nation of ours seem to conveniently forget or change the subject when we remind them that they are injoying freedoms and UNRESTRICTED liberties that people such as those in castros Cuba do not.

    This post–only part of which I have copied here–is moderately interesting (actually, it’s not–its point is relatively obscure), but it appears to be little more than another example of the fallacy of relative deprivation: things aren’t as bad here as they are someplace else, with the obvious conclusion that the commenter would like us to draw is that we shouldn’t complain about how things are here. That we should be grateful that we aren’t there.

    I’m sorry, but it doesn’t quite work like that. Why shouldn’t we complain about how things are here–just because things might be worse elsewhere?

    Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 6:56 am - July 25, 2006

  45. #24 Michigan-Matt — July 24, 2006 @ 3:55 pm – July 24, 2006

    …the modern conservatives I know think we’ve got a hell of long way to go yet in America…

    True. Like current-day Oldsmobiles, modern “conservatives” aren’t your grandaddy’s conservatives. Modern conservatives in the US want to borrow-and-spend the US into penury. Given the bloviations of your grandaddy’s conservatives at the time, they might want you to believe that they wouldn’t agree to that, but I suspect that, in their heart-of-hearts, they really would.

    As far as I can tell, modern conservatism is a bait-and-switch operation. Borrowing isn’t taxing, you know–at least it isn’t taxing us. Your kids and grandkids, maybe, but not us.

    Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 6:57 am - July 25, 2006

  46. #35 Kevin — July 24, 2006 @ 5:56 pm – July 24, 2006

    The problem is with the so-called “freedom lovers” who think freedom should be applied equally, just that some (straights) are more equal than others.

    Kinda. Recognize that the Bush syncophants here tend to believe Bush’s “democracy and freedom” clap trap, while not recognizing that democracy for all may very well result in contraints on freedom for the few. Or even the many, providing enough people can be cowed into voting the “right way.”

    Example: in Iraq, we see the nascent buddings of an Islamic republic, through democracy, of course. Which places very significant limitations on the freedom of everyone there.

    What’s the answer? I don’t know. Turkey is currently wrestling with the same problem. Actually, Germany is, too, given the fact that some of their turkish population engages in so-called “honor killings” and apparently nobody is willing to testify against the perpetrators. Well, so did some of the Irish-Americans in Charlestown, MA–I don’t know what the Irish-Americans called it, the Italo-Americans called it “omerta,” but it’s largely the same thing.

    Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 8:29 am - July 25, 2006

  47. Gosh, I am sure glad I found this blog… the United States of America is sure the greatest country on earth and we need to keep it that way through strength, justice and the American Way!

    Comment by Ed in Tampa — July 25, 2006 @ 8:34 am - July 25, 2006

  48. #40: “And conservatives think liberals are filled with wussy, politically correct talk.”

    So it’s “wussy, [and] politically correct” to cancel an event out of fear for the participats’ lives?

    Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 9:11 am - July 25, 2006

  49. #48 Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 9:11 am – July 25, 2006

    So it’s “wussy, [and] politically correct” to cancel an event out of fear for the participats’ lives?

    What is “wussy” is the fact that the government (of both Jerusalem and Israel) were apparently unwilling to provide the resources that would reasonably be necessary to protect the participants in the event.

    So much for them being a “liberal democracy.” Unless, of course, what is meant by “democracy” is “he who has the greatest number of (threatened) thugs” rules.

    The irony in all of this is that hatred of fags and queers has united otherwise warring entities–Jews, Muslims and “Christians.” Whatever. The enemy is clear.

    Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 10:13 am - July 25, 2006

  50. I have NRA shirts (not to mention a Life Member plate on my Explorer), and I’ve seen Waylon Jennings in concert (strike out on the beer gut, though).

    Comment by rightwingprof — July 25, 2006 @ 10:25 am - July 25, 2006

  51. Recognize that the Bush syncophants here tend to believe Bush’s “democracy and freedom” clap trap, while not recognizing that democracy for all may very well result in contraints on freedom for the few.

    And there you have the root of leftist Raj’s political theory; voters should be disenfranchised or held in oppression out of some fear for gay rights.

    Poor leftists. Rather than evaluate their hatemongering and condescending behavior as a reason for why voters dislike them, they try to strip voters of rights.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 25, 2006 @ 12:08 pm - July 25, 2006

  52. NDXXX, raj/ian just can’t help itself… those lessons learned at momma’s knee in childhood that brown-shirted thugs as political ushers can help the right people rule –until those vulgar Americans destroyed it by invading Germany and defeating our hero, Adolph… all those lessons raj/ian learned at momma’s knee are hard to put in perspective. Voters, democracy, majority rule –that spells “yikes” for raj/ian.

    The truth is, the raj/ian thing is simple anger parading as informed opinion… our trouble is, raj/ian thinks we care. Tiny mind and an empty soul on that man.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — July 25, 2006 @ 1:27 pm - July 25, 2006

  53. raj (with a small ‘r’)-Ian,
    You present a straw man argument again– that we don’t think you should complain. We’re complaing with you on the true issues where we are not yet equal. We just have our priorities in order. For instance, I want to be alive, i.e. the islamo-fascists are a bigger threat to my freedoms than whether I can get married. So, since both Democrats and Republicans are against gay marriage and since they are separated by little more than rhetoric on most gay issues, I will withhold my support from those who think Bush is a greater threat to the world than islamo-fascists.

    It bears repeating: You can’t be married if you’re buried.

    Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 25, 2006 @ 2:26 pm - July 25, 2006

  54. Actually, Anonymous, I think your own admittance is the problem here.

    Really? How about asking those in Iraq who are subjected to arrest, imprisonment and execution for being gay if they think they are getting the same freedoms everyone else is.

    So, first off, you admit that Iraqis are getting more freedoms than they had previously.

    Second consideration: gays who lived under Saddam were subjected to arrest, imprisonment, torture, and execution not only for being gay, but also for speaking out against the regime for its actions against gays, political statements, religious affiliations, refusing to serve in the army, etc.

    Again, gay leftists like yourself are whining and sniping about how conditions for gays are “no better”, but ignoring the fact that a) they are immeasurably better for the vast majority of Iraqis and b) far more likely to GET better without the autocratic and homophobic hand of Saddam running everything.

    The reason you do this, though, is because leftist gays like yourself refuse to admit what conditions were like under Saddam — because doing so makes it obvious that what you would have left the Iraqis in are far worse than the conditions you are decrying now.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 25, 2006 @ 6:38 pm - July 25, 2006

  55. No, my comment was that whitewashed language was used to describe the situation. I think most people, no matter who they are, would be dis-inclined to march in celebratory parade in the middle of a battle.

    Comment by Kevin — July 25, 2006 @ 6:43 pm - July 25, 2006

  56. I don’t think that the issue here is so much religion (Islam, Christianity, Judaism), as it is fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is really nothing more but a person walking up to another and saying, “Hey! If you want to be a REAL (insert member of nationality, religion, race, etc. here), then you are going to have be EXACTLY like ME!” Being a “fundie” is really the ultimate ego-trip: you tell others what to think, say or do, or they WILL PAY FOR IT!…either by being denied basic human rights, jobs or an eternity in heaven, or even all of the above.
    Let’s get this perfectly clear…the problem here isn’t so much a matter of religion, as it is what religion is all too often used for: as a giant baseball bat to clobber those different from you so you can take their money, possessions and/or land.

    Comment by Jeffrey Williams — July 26, 2006 @ 1:20 am - July 26, 2006

  57. #53 Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 25, 2006 @ 2:26 pm – July 25, 2006

    I don’t have the slightest idea what you are referring to, and I’m not going to bother rooting around in the comment thread to try to figure out what you are referring to. There are comment numbers that you could use in your responses to indicate what comment you are referring to. See, for example, the upper left-hand corner of this response.

    Comment by raj — July 26, 2006 @ 10:00 am - July 26, 2006

  58. raj (with a small ‘r’), in responsed to #57 *ahem*, I did a search on the word “complain” and the very first one is your post in #44. Took me about 3 seconds and I was chewing gum at the same time. Now you have a number to look at, but I don’t expect you to have any idea what I’m talking about.

    Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 26, 2006 @ 11:53 am - July 26, 2006

  59. just like raj/ian… condescending, arrogant, pedantic without purpose and now we can add LAZY.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — July 26, 2006 @ 3:58 pm - July 26, 2006

  60. Br K at #28 writes: “That dissent or disagreement cannot be patriotic.”

    Others have tried to define when dissent in time of war is patriotic, Br K.

    I take a different approach…. I think when dissent’s goal is to further partisan gain it is NOT patriotism and simply hiding behind the 1st A or the Founding Fathers –as many of those partisan hacks seeking short term political advantage try to do– is further proof of their insincerity on the notion of dissent.

    Dissent is good when debating policy. Debate is good when we are in the midst of deciding whether or not to go to war. But once the decision is made, we’re in it. Get behind the program or take a hike.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — July 26, 2006 @ 4:08 pm - July 26, 2006

  61. Okay, I came here from the Malcontent’s site. I was interested in some of the comments that you (Bruce) made there, and I wanted to learn more about how you think.
    What I’ve learned is: you mock and hate those you call “liberals” and “lefties,” especially for their mockery/hatred of the current president and/or government, with about as much justification. You champion the positions of a president and administration that is blatantly anti-gay and pro-fundamentalist. You say some pretty bad things about Islam, but ignore the exact same aspects of Christianity.
    I guess if I’m not rigorously endorsing your viewpoint, then I’m a “moonbat,” or a “lefty” or a “liberal.”
    Well, the fact is that I am none of those things. I’m pretty much against all forms of hatred and hypocrisy, regardless of what side of the fence they’re on.
    But don’t worry about me becoming a regular dissenter here. I won’t be.

    Comment by Bigg — July 27, 2006 @ 3:24 pm - July 27, 2006

  62. #58 Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 26, 2006 @ 11:53 am – July 26, 2006

    raj (with a small ‘r’), in responsed to #57 *ahem*, I did a search on the word “complain” and the very first one is your post in #44. Took me about 3 seconds…

    That’s nice. I didn’t count the number of words in your post #53, but it is somewhat presumptuous of you to assume that I was supposed to know which of the words in your post #53 that I was supposed to perform a search on to figure out what you were responding to. You apparently did–although it is highly questionable–since you wrote the post #53.

    It seriously should not be a major imposition to ask you as a commenter responding to something to at least provide some indication of what you are responding to. Comment number. A bit of text. Things like that. (An example would be at the top of this comment. You do know how to do copy-and-paste, I’m sure.)

    Regarding the subject matter of your comment, #53

    We just have our priorities in order. For instance, I want to be alive, i.e. the islamo-fascists are a bigger threat to my freedoms than whether I can get married. So, since both Democrats and Republicans are against gay marriage and since they are separated by little more than rhetoric on most gay issues, I will withhold my support from those who think Bush is a greater threat to the world than islamo-fascists.

    Actually, you and I–which is what I presume that you mean by “we”–have our priorities in a different order.

    You believe that “Islamo-fascists” are a bigger threat to your freedom in the United States than is your equal rights under law in the United States. Maybe, but I doubt it. Unless, of course, you are planning on going to one of the 8000+ terrorist targets in Indiana or the Sweetwater (TN) Flea Market somewhere in Tennessee.

    BTW, regarding your “right to get married,” you may very well want to contemplate what might happen to you and/or your Bo–if you have one–if you don’t have the “right to get married.” I can understand full well that you really aren’t particularly interested in such matters, since you apparently are more interested in setting up and maintaining your bomb shelter if the dreaded IslamoFascists may, like the Duchy of Grand Fenwick, sometime invade and conquer the Sweetwater (TN) Flea Market, but, when you get slapped in the face when your Bo’s family contests his will after he dies (presuming that he has one, and if he doesn’t then you’re screwed), you might want to think otherwise.

    Comment by raj — July 28, 2006 @ 11:03 am - July 28, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.