Blogs 4 Brownback

June 4, 2007

Death to Iran!

Filed under: Defending America,Democratic Idiocy,Terrorism — Sisyphus @ 5:38 am

I’ve been thinking a lot about the situation with Iran, and my thinking is that things don’t look very good for America.  Iran finances terrorism against our soldiers in Iraq with impunity.  They finance it against our ally, Israel, too.  They do this because they know they can get away with it, and thus far they’ve been right.  Iran has faced no serious consequences for its actions. 

 What I propose is that we change all that.  But how?  Obviously, air strikes and nuclear weapons are not going to happen.  If they were going to happen, they would’ve happened by now.  I think that the President wants to make them happen, but knows that Congress will not go along with him.  Others may have additional evidence pointing to another conclusion, but that’s the one I’ve drawn.  Anyway, we’re not going to use our considerable military superiority to flatten Iran and save the day for our troops in Iraq and our noble allies in Israel. 

 This saddens and angers me.  Clearly, our government is not going to protect us from this ongoing menace in the Middle East.  Well, if our government is unable or unwilling to take action against a rogue nation, and is even reduced to negotiating with these mad mullahs instead of killing them, I think it’s our duty to do our own part to protect our lives and our nation.

 I’m not suggesting we have to do as the enemy does.  Individual Americans should not hijack airplanes and fly them into Iranian buildings.  American life is too precious to squander in such a reckless fashion.  Nor am I saying we should form citizens’ organization to finance groups that terrorize the Iranian people.  That would make us no better than our enemies.  (An argument could be made, however, for financing groups that exclusively attack Irani government and military targets.  I leave the question of raising this funding to those with better connections and wherewithal than my own.)  But the least we, as patriotic Americans, could do is show some support for our flag!

 The Iranian people clearly like nothing better than to burn the American flag, spit on it, and burn the ashes again.  Time after time, we see this behavior on television and in the media.  If one didn’t know better, one might think such activities were taking place on a college campus; but generally speaking, the moonbats who stoop to this sort of behavior do not don traditional Islamist garb.  But college students in America also have other pastimes, such as fornicating and consuming alcohol.  Iranians, on the other hand, apparently have nothing better to do with their time than attend endless, constant anti-American rallies, burning our flags and effigies of our Presidents.

 I ask you, why do we not give them a dose of their own medicine?  Why do we let the Iranian flag flutter above the cowardly den of iniquity and appeasement that is the United Nations, when not a single American flag exists in Iran except such as are consigned to the bonfire?  Why do we not hold our own, anti-Iranian rallies, burning their flags en masse and torching effigies of the Ayatollahs Khomeini, Khameini, and that Ahmedinajabad guy?  Surely Americans can hold rallies far more exciting than those of the ignorant, impoverished, culturally deprived Iranian peasantry!  Why don’t we do so? 

 Consider the positive benefits of such a course.  For one thing, no one would pay attention to anti-American rallies anymore, since anti-Iran ones would also include fireworks, F-16 overflights, and good ole American showmanship!  For another thing, it would give those Iranians a taste of their own medicine.  It might make them question their national hobby more closely, and perhaps adopt a new one, such as organizing pro-democracy demonstrations in which they, too, burned effigies of mullahs.  Best of all, this plan is simple, easily implemented in your own community or township, and cheap to hold or host.  All you really need is an old t-shirt, some markers, a picture of what an Iranian flag looks like, and some matches, and you’re in business!  

 Come on, America!  Don’t let Iran get away with burning our flag any longer!  The next time they burn one of ours, I expect us to burn 50 of theirs!

60 Comments »

  1. If we had an event to burn Iranian flags here in the heartland, would Brownback attend our rally? Could we get our picture taken with him? Please forward this request to his people.

    David Patterson

    Comment by David Patterson — June 4, 2007 @ 6:16 am | Reply

  2. Sisyphus, I think this is an excellent idea. However, I think that in order to capture the attention of the feckless and liberal MSM, the ranks of which are filled with atheistic islamic sympathizers, it should be done strategically. Moreover, I think Sen. Brownback should be involved.

    Thus, for example, Sen. Brownback could sign the “Star-Spangled Banner” at the first game in the World Series this fall and, when he’s done, set an Iranian flag on fire. Or, perhaps on the 4th of July, we could have fireworks that explode in the shape of the Iranian Flag, and Sen Brownback could launch other fireworks at that flag. Or, if we wanted serious media coverage, Sen. Brownback coudl team up with Lee Greenwood to be the centerpiece of the Superbowl half-time show. Who wouldn’t want to see Sen. Brownback burning an Iranian flag to the patriotic tune of “God Bless the U.S.A.?”

    Anyway, thank you again for thinking this up. Truly, you are a great patriot and a rational voice among the vast mewling hordes of treefrog bloggers.

    Comment by Everett Volk — June 4, 2007 @ 8:52 am | Reply

  3. I’d like to see those Iranians complain about us burning the Iranian flag when they themselves can’t go a day without burning an American flag!

    Also, I want to make sure that the Iranian flags we burn are all made in the USA. We don’t need Iranian flagmakers making a fortune off of this.

    I like Everett Volk’s idea about the Super Bowl. I do have one concern however: can Senator Brownback sing?

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 9:00 am | Reply

  4. I like your flag for a flag times 50 approach to justice.
    One other idea is we could flood them with kindness. To show them how strong, committed and unthreatened we are by their little flag burning we could air drop thousands…no, millions…of American flags on their little country. True Americans would donate the funds to by the flags in bulk. I know we can get really good bulk prices from Chinese manufacturers but it may be better if we only buy American made American flags.
    We would need to get around congress for the drop so an independent airline would have to be hired for the flyover. Or cheaper, maybe someone could convince Israel to do the deed. We provide the flags and they just do the drops.
    Can you just imagine the beauty of the satellite photos showing Iran completely covered with American flags? If that doesn’t start democracy blooming all over the Middle East I don’t know what would.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 9:03 am | Reply

  5. typo alert: “…by…” should read “buy” above.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 9:05 am | Reply

  6. “If we had an event to burn Iranian flags here in the heartland, would Brownback attend our rally? Could we get our picture taken with him? Please forward this request to his people.”

    Will do. I think every patriotic candidate should organize, and attend, such a rally.

    “Anyway, thank you again for thinking this up. Truly, you are a great patriot and a rational voice among the vast mewling hordes of treefrog bloggers.”

    Aw, shucks. Thanks!

    “Also, I want to make sure that the Iranian flags we burn are all made in the USA. We don’t need Iranian flagmakers making a fortune off of this.”

    Every flag should be manufactured right here in America. Some, people could make themselves. After all, it doesn’t make much sense to shell out several dollars for a flag you intend on burning an hour or two later. Easier to make your own, using old clothes and things like that.

    “I like Everett Volk’s idea about the Super Bowl. I do have one concern however: can Senator Brownback sing?”

    I’m sure he’s no worse a singer than I am. But really, it’s more about the patriotic spirit of the singer, rather than his or her vocal range. Marvin Gaye was a great singer, but if you ask me, his rendering of the “Star Spangled Banner” was a blasphemous exercise in eroticism.

    “Can you just imagine the beauty of the satellite photos showing Iran completely covered with American flags? If that doesn’t start democracy blooming all over the Middle East I don’t know what would.”

    This is a GREAT idea! The best part is, they couldn’t burn them all without burning their country to the ground! Accept freedom or burn yourselves alive, Iran!

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 9:22 am | Reply

  7. “Can you just imagine the beauty of the satellite photos showing Iran completely covered with American flags? If that doesn’t start democracy blooming all over the Middle East I don’t know what would.”

    That is beautiful. I’m not one to cry, but I’m not ashamed to say I just shed a little tear.

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 9:37 am | Reply

  8. I think we may have freed Iran just by talking about that idea.

    Thank you, carsick. Thank you.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 9:45 am | Reply

  9. I’m gonna cite 2 un-American moonbats:

    “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”

    Comment by Skeptic — June 4, 2007 @ 9:57 am | Reply

  10. Skeptic
    The flags would be a gift from our citizens to theirs. I don’t remember anything in the bible that is anti-giftgiving. And, burning their flags would be an imitation of their actions and we all know imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
    (Plus, I’m more of an Old Testament guy myself.)

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 10:02 am | Reply

  11. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    That’s exactly what we ARE doing. Burning their leaders in effigy to get them to do the same. That will bring freedom to Iran.

    “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”

    My neighbors all hate Iran too. What’s your point?

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 10:03 am | Reply

  12. Also, what carsick said, Skeptic.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 10:04 am | Reply

  13. I’ve always felt burning flags and figures in effigy in general was kinda silly. It sorta has a hint of voodoo in it. That’s just me.

    Comment by ChenZhen — June 4, 2007 @ 10:43 am | Reply

  14. I think this is a wonderful idea, Sisyphus. But I still think we should kill them. If Congress won’t go along with it, put the ringleaders in Guantanamo. It’s the only sure way to deal with traitors.

    Comment by Marcia P. — June 4, 2007 @ 11:12 am | Reply

  15. “I’ve been thinking a lot about the situation with Iran, and my thinking is that things don’t look very good for America. Iran finances terrorism against our soldiers in Iraq with impunity. They finance it against our ally, Israel, too. They do this because they know they can get away with it, and thus far they’ve been right. Iran has faced no serious consequences for its actions. ”

    Evidence?

    ” What I propose is that we change all that. But how? Obviously, air strikes and nuclear weapons are not going to happen. If they were going to happen, they would’ve happened by now. I think that the President wants to make them happen, but knows that Congress will not go along with him. Others may have additional evidence pointing to another conclusion, but that’s the one I’ve drawn. Anyway, we’re not going to use our considerable military superiority to flatten Iran and save the day for our troops in Iraq and our noble allies in Israel. ”

    The first sign of reason on this site. Agreed.

    ” The Iranian people clearly like nothing better than to burn the American flag, spit on it, and burn the ashes again. Time after time, we see this behavior on television and in the media. If one didn’t know better, one might think such activities were taking place on a college campus; but generally speaking, the moonbats who stoop to this sort of behavior do not don traditional Islamist garb. But college students in America also have other pastimes, such as fornicating and consuming alcohol. Iranians, on the other hand, apparently have nothing better to do with their time than attend endless, constant anti-American rallies, burning our flags and effigies of our Presidents.”

    Actually, like most people, they´re doing that only after you have done something that pissed them off.

    ” I ask you, why do we not give them a dose of their own medicine? Why do we let the Iranian flag flutter above the cowardly den of iniquity and appeasement that is the United Nations, when not a single American flag exists in Iran except such as are consigned to the bonfire? Why do we not hold our own, anti-Iranian rallies, burning their flags en masse and torching effigies of the Ayatollahs Khomeini, Khameini, and that Ahmedinajabad guy? Surely Americans can hold rallies far more exciting than those of the ignorant, impoverished, culturally deprived Iranian peasantry! Why don’t we do so? ”

    Because it would set you down to the sam elevel as them. And because you don´t have any jurisdiction regarding the flag on the Iranian embassy or the UN building. Both are not american territory.

    Consider the positive benefits of such a course. For one thing, no one would pay attention to anti-American rallies anymore, since anti-Iran ones would also include fireworks, F-16 overflights, and good ole American showmanship!

    That would seriously rob them of any originality. The Iranian counter-rallies would be much more interesting.

    Come on, America! Don’t let Iran get away with burning our flag any longer! The next time they burn one of ours, I expect us to burn 50 of theirs!

    Wow, that way they could force mighty spengings onto you. Just imagine Iran organising a rally with 10.000 burning US-flags. Alone bringing out that 500.000 Iranian flags would cost a small fortune.

    Having Brownback burn the flag is a bad idea. You see, the Iranians get away with it without flak because they can always say that it were just some enraged citicens, no involvement by the government. WIth Brownback involved, you´d be unable to use that excuse.

    This is a GREAT idea! The best part is, they couldn’t burn them all without burning their country to the ground! Accept freedom or burn yourselves alive, Iran!

    They´d probably collect them onto one or several big stacks and burn those. Not really a great idea.
    And most of the country is desert anyway. Not much to burn to the ground.

    That’s exactly what we ARE doing. Burning their leaders in effigy to get them to do the same. That will bring freedom to Iran.

    It will bring freedom to Iran when they do some revenge and burn Bush?

    And I agree ChenZhen, flag and effigy burning is kinda silly. And useless. And kinda childish.

    Comment by PD — June 4, 2007 @ 11:18 am | Reply

  16. I think we should drop napalm on Iran. The whole country. If they want to burn the flag my husband and my father fought for, I say we burn them. That will make the rest of the world think twice about doing the same.

    Comment by Marcia P. — June 4, 2007 @ 11:28 am | Reply

  17. I think we should drop napalm on Iran. The whole country. If they want to burn the flag my husband and my father fought for, I say we burn them. That will make the rest of the world think twice about doing the same.

    Except for the countries that are not afraid of you. Like the ones that have nukes or allies with nukes. And darling, even the whole US arsenal in napalm couldn´t cover half of Iran.

    Comment by PD — June 4, 2007 @ 11:30 am | Reply

  18. Maybe Brownback should consider the two-birds-with-one-stone idea of designating Iran as the homosexual homeland. Then, the Latvian and American and all of the rest of the world’s homosexuals would flock there. Maybe they would even gentrify the place like they do in rundown urban areas in America. Next thing you know, the Middle East is the new “hip” place to live with art galleries, coffee shops and little boutiques sprouting up everywhere.
    Small businesses once again will lead the way to democratization and the homosexual problems all around the globe will be fixed.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 11:53 am | Reply

  19. “And darling, even the whole US arsenal in napalm couldn´t cover half of Iran.”

    Typical, negative, ‘old Europe’ thinking. I bet the Poles think we could cover Iran in napalm.

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 11:53 am | Reply

  20. Well, we did already bandy about the idea of spiking the Iranian groundwater with soy to turn them to sodomy and therefore military vulnerability. I think that could be compatible with shipping our own sodomites to Iran.

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 11:55 am | Reply

  21. Reminds me of a little joke.
    One blond realtor says to another: “I’m not sure if you want to show them that house Marcy. That area is very family oriented. The neighbors may not be very happy with a couple homeowners moving in next door.”

    Sure, it’s not that funny but it made me laugh the first time I heard it.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 11:59 am | Reply

  22. Typical, negative, ‘old Europe’ thinking. I bet the Poles think we could cover Iran in napalm.

    It´s just realistically speaking. Try finding out how big Iran is. Tr yfinding out how much napalm would be needed to burn the whole country. Compare with the US stockpile and with the number of planes that could perform such an action without giving Iran a chance to retaliate.

    Answer: No chance in hell.

    And even the poles wouldn´t be that delusional.

    Maybe Brownback should consider the two-birds-with-one-stone idea of designating Iran as the homosexual homeland. Then, the Latvian and American and all of the rest of the world’s homosexuals would flock there. Maybe they would even gentrify the place like they do in rundown urban areas in America. Next thing you know, the Middle East is the new “hip” place to live with art galleries, coffee shops and little boutiques sprouting up everywhere.
    Small businesses once again will lead the way to democratization and the homosexual problems all around the globe will be fixed.

    Problem: The Iranian government would say no and thus the whole plan goes to flinders.

    Comment by PD — June 4, 2007 @ 12:07 pm | Reply

  23. America has more nuclear weapons than you, PD. I think we could take your whole continent out before you even knew what hit you. Keep letting the Islamists take over your governments, and we might have to, just to save western civilization.

    Comment by Marcia P. — June 4, 2007 @ 12:08 pm | Reply

  24. Typical German, PD is prejudiced against Polish people.

    Comment by Marcia P. — June 4, 2007 @ 12:17 pm | Reply

  25. Typical German, PD is prejudiced against Polish people.

    Actuaslly I said that they were not delusional. And well, if that´s a prejudice, then it´s a positive one.

    America has more nuclear weapons than you, PD. I think we could take your whole continent out before you even knew what hit you. Keep letting the Islamists take over your governments, and we might have to, just to save western civilization.

    Yeah, and before those nukes touch european soil, the answer is already coming your way. I wonder: Would the russians just get along and launch their arsenal, too? Or do we have to spare the desert regions and just nuke the coastal areas, the middle west and the big cities?

    Marcia, such silly threats are not going anywhere. Especially if you bring nuclear warfare into the equation. A nuclear war means that all participants will be down for the count afterwards. You could “win” a nuclear war. And all you would have done would be to open the world for the islamsists or the Chinese.

    Comment by PG — June 4, 2007 @ 12:26 pm | Reply

  26. …or the cockroaches, since no human will survive a nuclear war between Russia and the US…

    Comment by Skeptic — June 4, 2007 @ 12:32 pm | Reply

  27. PD
    I’m not so sure Iran would have a choice. There are about 65 million people living in Iran. The world population is about 6.6 trillion. If just 2% of the population is homosexual then that equals 132,000,000 people. Most homosexuals don’t have children so their motivation to sacrifice themselves for the cause of a homeland might be higher than others. There are also some very, very rich homosexuals so their cause would not be underfunded. With the backing of the American military and the overwhelming flood of people crossing their borders, I don’t think the Iraqi government would have much of a chance beyond a futile one to defend themselves.
    We already know that every heterosexual marriage is threatened by the prospect of allowing homosexual marriage so just imagine the insidious threat Iraq would be under if just 80% of the world’s homosexuals showed up on their doorstep.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

  28. Well, before you start burning flags, you might want to check this out.

    International House of Flammable Flags LOL

    Comment by ChenZhen — June 4, 2007 @ 12:48 pm | Reply

  29. @carsick: Backing of the US military. If you need that, why don´t just invade them anyway? Well, the Iranians have a choice: Martial law. Anyone illegally crossing the border gets shot. Now that´d be a way for the Iranians. They could also just build a wall.

    And most homosexuals like to stay where they are now, I guess…

    Comment by PG — June 4, 2007 @ 12:50 pm | Reply

  30. 6.6 billion (I know, as a good Christian you’re not used to the Satanic art of mathematics), 13.2 million and, no, I’m not even gonna dignify that with an answer…

    Comment by Skeptic — June 4, 2007 @ 12:50 pm | Reply

  31. Skeptic
    Sure it’s just a thought experiment, thinking aloud sort of exercise but beyond the trillion/billion mix-up the number still works out at 2% to equal 132 million people. As you can figure, 2% of 1 billion equals 20 million.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 1:03 pm | Reply

  32. PG (or is it PD?)
    American military troops on the ground will not be necessary. Air support is all that would be needed.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 1:12 pm | Reply

  33. all of this debate over the use of percentages is moot. everyone who’s ever eaten soy or a product made with soy will eventually turn gay. everyone who’s consumed water from a tap has probably ingested harmful chemicals that will turn you gay from the inside out. look at how gay the romans were. they were sooooo gay. they drank water that made them dirty like that. gay is also contagious.

    when president brownback is in office, he will construct zoos where gay people can live in their natural habitat and nursed off of their soy-laced diet.

    Comment by honkey magoo — June 4, 2007 @ 1:51 pm | Reply

  34. honkey magoo
    I thought drinking tap water kept you straight and that’s why homosexuals drink bottled water. I don’t know about the old Greek tap water because I don’t do Greek (it’s a sin!) and I don’t trust “scientists” who do.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 2:00 pm | Reply

  35. My mistake, you were referring to old Roman tap water. I’m pretty sure the Romans did Greek though so maybe they were all drinking from the same wells.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 2:23 pm | Reply

  36. “My mistake, you were referring to old Roman tap water. I’m pretty sure the Romans did Greek though so maybe they were all drinking from the same wells.”

    Sure, that’s why there was that huge anti-gay-marriage protest in Rome.

    Comment by Skeptic — June 4, 2007 @ 2:26 pm | Reply

  37. Those chemicals create a predisposition toward homosexuality; but ultimately, it’s a choice of lifestyle. A choice of lifestyle can be changed. We need to treat these people. Once America has secured world peace by spreading liberty, free markets, and Christianity around the world, we should definitely try to tackle the problem of overcoming the worldwide homosexuality epidemic. After terrorism has been beaten, the next great threat to Americanism is likely to come from sinful deviancy and moral depravity.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 2:51 pm | Reply

  38. Skeptic
    Aren’t modern day people living in Rome Italians? I may be doubly mistaken, I thought honkey magoo was referring to Romans in the sense of the Roman Empire. Those Romans conquered the Greeks. It wasn’t until much later that those Romans saw the Holy Light and established the Holy See.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 2:52 pm | Reply

  39. But if it was in the Roman water, it probably still is, or do you think the Romans had Greek water imported? (I’m just neglecting the fact that 99% of Romans couldn’t afford to import anything)

    Comment by Skeptic — June 4, 2007 @ 3:16 pm | Reply

  40. Skeptic
    I never made actual claims to know about Roman water. The opposite actually but considering that the Roman Empire spread all the way to the area known today as Greece, I would suspect some of them drank the same water.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 3:29 pm | Reply

  41. Naive = Evian.

    Comment by ec1009 — June 4, 2007 @ 3:39 pm | Reply

  42. “when president brownback is in office, he will construct zoos where gay people can live in their natural habitat and nursed off of their soy-laced diet.”

    1). We already have such a zoo. It is called San Francisco.

    2). There is no such thing as a “natural” habitat for them, since what they do is an abomination against God and therefore nature.

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 3:58 pm | Reply

  43. “1). We already have such a zoo. It is called San Francisco.”

    Good point. If you ask me, that should be turned into a quarantine zone. Only counselors and rehabilitators should be allowed in, until the populace is cleansed and cured of sinfulness.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 4, 2007 @ 4:02 pm | Reply

  44. DPS
    We need to make sure there are bars around that zoo!

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 4:16 pm | Reply

  45. carsick

    I hear there many bars around San Francisco, but I would not gladly patronize any of them.

    Comment by DPS — June 4, 2007 @ 4:20 pm | Reply

  46. Ha ha. I don’t patronize bars of any sort but I get your meaning.
    I am thinking of investing in fence and wall building manufacturers though or, better yet, starting my own to serve my country.

    Comment by carsick — June 4, 2007 @ 4:27 pm | Reply

  47. […] « Kevorkian Made It Flag Burning 101 June 4th, 2007 I happened to stumble upon this post by my pal Sisyphus over at Blogs 4 Brownback, where the notion of buring of the Iranian flag is put […]

    Pingback by Flag Burning 101 « ChenZhen’s Chamber — June 4, 2007 @ 11:34 pm | Reply

  48. That video is actually a pretty good idea, ChenZhen. I wouldn’t sell the American flag for burning, but the rest of them are fair game as far as I’m concerned.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 5, 2007 @ 5:36 am | Reply

  49. “Thus, for example, Sen. Brownback could sign the “Star-Spangled Banner” at the first game in the World Series this fall and, when he’s done, set an Iranian flag on fire. Or, perhaps on the 4th of July, we could have fireworks that explode in the shape of the Iranian Flag…”

    “Kevorkian Made It Flag Burning 101 June 4th, 2007”

    Typical American commercialism, you ruined Christmas and now you’re going to do the same thing to flag-burning…

    Flag-burning used to be a family event, something spontaneous sparked by real human emotions, but now you’re turning it into another plastic/commercial/sell-out!

    Once again plastic commercialism has replaced traditional family values!

    Comment by Skeptic — June 5, 2007 @ 11:10 am | Reply

  50. Sissy, I am very sorry to say this, but, Americans seem to be too FAT and too LAZY to bother with direct action in the streets.

    It saddens me that this once great nation has turned away from the great Republican and NRA sponsored values that won the WAR of Independence and now sits on the couch eating Cheese Doodles ™ and making fun of honest Christians, the American Soldier, and children.

    You must ignite a new revolution to bring FREEDOM back to America, and you must do it for the children.

    Comment by Joe Blow — June 5, 2007 @ 2:52 pm | Reply

  51. True freedom in Iran can only be achieve by reducing every man, woman, and child in Iran to radioactive ashes.

    In the name of our Lord…

    Comment by Mrs Paisley, WoMP TFFC — June 6, 2007 @ 11:23 am | Reply

  52. If that’s what it takes to keep our flag safe, so be it, Mrs. Paisley.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 6, 2007 @ 11:25 am | Reply

  53. True freedom in Iran can only be achieve by reducing every man, woman, and child in Iran to radioactive ashes.

    In the name of our Lord…

    Nuclear genocide is something is something that I doubt our Lord wants His name attached to…

    Comment by ChenZhen — June 6, 2007 @ 3:08 pm | Reply

  54. I think if Jesus himself came down to educate the fundies on the love and peace, they’d say he was an anti-Christian moonbat…

    Comment by Skeptic — June 6, 2007 @ 5:16 pm | Reply

  55. Jesus would never say that, Skeptic.

    Comment by Sisyphus — June 6, 2007 @ 5:40 pm | Reply

  56. No, of course not: Jesus saying anything about love and peace? Nah, that can’t be right!

    Comment by Skeptic — June 6, 2007 @ 5:45 pm | Reply

  57. @carsick: It´s PG. Txpo from my side. And man, you don´t win a war with air attacks only. Without ground troops, you can bomb the hell out of ém, but you can´t take or hold ground.

    And nuclear genocides are never a good thing. Especially as they tend to cause chain reactions. Well, I´d not want to see what our lovely planet is like after 30.000 nuclear detonations.

    Comment by PG — June 7, 2007 @ 5:49 am | Reply

  58. PG
    I know you don’t win a war with air power only. But if the world’s homosexuals will be entering Iran armed to take their new homeland, our ground forces will be unnecessary. see #18 and 27 for a refresher

    Plus, our soldiers shouldn’t do duty with homosexuals on the ground…or in a barracks (it’s a sin).

    Comment by carsick — June 7, 2007 @ 4:28 pm | Reply

  59. Well, for that you´d ffirst have to organise and arm them. Armed and organised homosexuals. Doesn´t that ring your neo-conservative alarm bells?

    Comment by PG — June 8, 2007 @ 11:46 am | Reply

  60. Fuck all u Americans…

    Comment by FuckUSA — July 8, 2007 @ 2:48 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: