Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Fox News Gets It Right For Once, "Note to jihadists, in America, we shoot back"

Fuckin' A right we do.

Before I go one step farther with this I want to emphasize the same thing the article points out towards the bottom and that nobody has heard one word about this from the Whitehouse,even after Bobby Freakin' Jindal of all people, pointedly asked Obama to denounce Radical Islam.

Nada fucking word comrade.

Sometimes silence speaks volumes.

Now, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story....


Todd's American Dispatch

Muhammad cartoon contest: Note to jihadists, in America, we shoot back


 Todd Starnes

 



Oh there is more and some puke from the New York Times opened his yap only to get bitch slapped hard and then some other puke over in Britain opened his and got some too.
The retort to that NYT fluffer is priceless, you have to go read that shit.

It was a thing of beauty.

Fucking apologists and professional political cock holsters jump in shaking their fingers and find that there are those of us who have had enough of their shit, just like those two wannabe Jihadi's made a fatal mistake thinking that there are nothing but defenseless sheep in this country like some other parts of the world.

I have another thing these people might want to keep in mind the next time they plan on doing something retarded like this.

There are some places in this country where there are more guns than people and the people who own those guns know how to use them .

You might get lucky and you might get dead.

Those two got dead and rightly so in my opinion.





3 comments:

deb harvey said...

I want to point out that the Mohammed who founded Islam was never a prophet.
Where are his prophecies?
They don't exist because he was not a prophet.
A prophet foretells the future with 100% accuracy because he speaks from the inspiration of God.
Thanks.

Ro said...

Or use Jihawg ammo.....
Ok first admission, I'm British.
But never never ever thing that that scum sucking POS Anjem Choudery represents any of us.
Those two shitbags got exactly what they deserved and my only regret is that the poor security guard got hit. Nor is Geller wrong. Free speech protects the bits others don't like not the bits that no one gives a toss about.
Choudery and his child molesting fellow travellers by the way are what we call BINOs, British In Name Only.
Our ever incompetent government continues to allow huge amounts of these festering turds in ensuring that sometime in the future we will have scenes from the film Children of Men played out on our streets, undoubtedly with surplus firearms smuggled in from our bailout cousins(you guys) across the pond. That is of course if you are not sick to the back teeth of sending us guns only for us to dump them in the sea when things get better.
Anyway rant over and please feel free to kill as many of the bastards as you like, you'll not hear anything from most of us other than applause.

BadTux said...

I want to point out that both of the "jihadis" in Garland were Americans. Born in America. Raised in America. Raised as Christian and converted to Islam in America, for the black dude born in Chicago anyhow, I don't know enough about the brown dude born in Garland to know what religion he was raised in.They were violent nutcases but you can't blame that on people half a world away, violent nutcases adopt whatever philosophy they need to justify their violence, not the other way around. Timothy McVeigh after all was a Christian Reconstructionist whose philosophy was that we needed to impose God's law on America via violent revolution in order to save America. And he blew up dozens of babies in the process.

So yeah, Americans shoot back. But that works both ways, when the people on the other side are Americans too. It just turned out that a hero cop with a .45 Glock who'd actually practiced shooting his sidearm under pressure was better at aiming than a couple of idiots whose idea of marksmanship was derived from watching old A-Team episodes. This time, anyhow.

Fair Use Notice

Fair Use Statement: This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not have been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml” If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.