Monday, May 5, 2008

More ignoble poppycock from our comrades at jihadwatch......

Seriously, these guys just don't quit!!!!! Check this out...

Their comment: "It's the little pussies that talk crap like jonesy does. The cowardly punk doesn't have the guts to talk to anyone, face to face the way he does online...he'll call ya all kindsa names and hurl insults when there are no real consequences.
As was said...he's just here to bark at us and make noise, like some annoying dog on a chain that raises hell as you pass by. I think I mentioned the word Troll when this punk was present, and he immediately took my words to mean him/it. It knows what it is apparently.
I won't even attempt to converse with a hate filled, potty mouthed little punk like him. His opinion of us/me kinda precludes it...
Any further attempts by hateboy to portray himself as being a reasonable person interested in dialogue will fall on "deaf ears" around here I think. He's just here to be an ass...nothing more. I mean....could his opinion of us get any lower? Certainly my opinion of him couldn't."

My response: pussy, cowardly punk, annoying dog, Troll, It, potty mouthed, hateboy, ass. I love it. I believe this is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. Seriously, it doesn't get any better than this. The true definition of an "internet tough guy." Seriously dude, don't get hurt playing with guns in Mommy's basement you inbred sack of shit. And while I am thinking of it, doesn't your precious Bible tell you to turn the other cheek? I guess you missed that lesson. And speaking of the Bible...

Their comment: "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he imagine himself to be wise." Proverbs 26:5

Posted by: Lex

Not bad, Lex. This would seem to suggest that fools should not go unchallenged, otherwise they might get big heads. But the previous verse reads "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself". Proverbs 26:4. This would suggest you shouldn't wallow with pigs.

Hmmm, these would seem to be contradictory. Someone care to reconcile them?

The 26th chapter of Proverbs seems to be devoted to advice about handling fools (and sluggards). I like the one that says "The sluggard is wiser in his own eyes than seven men who can answer discreetly." Proverbs 26:16. I also like the one that says "For lack of wood the fire goes out; and where there is no whisperer, quarrelling ceases." Proverbs 26:20. This could refer to gossip, but it would seem to have wider applicability."

My response: Hey, as everyone can attest, I am a reasonable guy. I like to stir up trouble sometimes, but I have a good head on my shoulders, and I am ALWAYS up for a good fight. With this in mind, I would like to challenge the one called Lex to a moderated debate. Lex, you seem like a reasonable guy, one whose ideology might differ from mine drastically, but able to argue with cogency and soundness. I propose we meet in a neutral chat room and argue the relevant topics of jihad in the world today. The debate will be moderated by at least two 2 members from each of our "camps," who will not be active participants, but will make sure we stick to the topic at hand. If either side resorts to name calling, they immediately forfeit ( i know it will be hard not to call you a sack of shit, but hey, that is what my blog is for). This way, we can get to the open discourse which we seemingly both crave. We can even place a bet on the event....perhaps along the lines of...If I win, you petition for my provisional reinstatement to (on the premise that I will not in any way ever again post anything derogatory on your site), and if you win I will erase all negative references to your website on my blog and will never be heard from again. Or we can just do it for the fun of the debate. C'mon Lex, you know this is the chance to make me and my side of the argument look foolish. What do you have to lose? The gauntlet is down. I will be patiently waiting your reply.....


  1. Nobody would ever make the mistake of engaging you in a debate, loser.

  2. Again, I'm not Lex, and I said goodbye before, because you had a chance to show how logical and reasoned you could be, with me at least, and you called me several names, but I'm still curious;

    What is your "side" of the debate?

    -That jihadism is good?
    -That Islam is really a religion of peace?
    -That we should tolerate those trying to destroy us?


  3. I will be taking the side of multiculturalism....

  4. Nobody in their right mind would agree to argue with someone with your viewpoint. You have no morality.

  5. Thanks for answering my question.

    Do you intend to defend such practices as polygamy, honor killing, oppression of women, death penalty for apostasy and homosexuality, as simply "cultural" practices we should just tolerate?

    How about the idea that our very culture should be destroyed and replaced with Sharia law? Will you defend that until they take away your rights and force you to convert or kill you?

    Where does "multiculturalism" end, and "universal human rights" begin?

  6. You will just have to attend the debate to find out...sounds like I have my work cut out for me...I look forward to the challenge...

  7. Poeticamente FotografiaMay 8, 2008 at 4:56 AM

    Dear Jonesy, I send the address of the website of Canon, where you can find my image, which participates in the competition "Canon, L’incarico”. Once clicked this link, you can vote, provided that the photo you want. Thank you for your attention, a greeting Stefania

  8. Poeticamente FotografiaMay 8, 2008 at 4:57 AM

  9. Funny, it looks as though you have had nothing to say about anything since Lex has apparently refused to debate you.

    Why don't you post something about how great multi-culturalism is on your blog here, and give us a chance to see your point?

    Or do you not have anything to say that isn't in response to something else?

  10. nice google ads "marxist." if you're a marxist, bush is allende. terrible.

    also cool job following the machismo capitalist exercises and blogging, you're really furthering the revolutionary cause. good god.

    why dont you just admit you're a concession-loving libertarian who knows no one of color and hates women? marx would roll in his grave if he thought his name was attached to people like you. and if you think that in being attacked by "both sides" you're in some doing-something-right compromise land--well, then you've really swallowed american anti-revolutionary ideology whole.

  11. I just finished reading Mark Steyn's "America Alone" and it has a lot of good stuff on multiculturalism you won't like, such as:

    "...the British in India were faced with the practice of 'suttee'—the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. General Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural: 'You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.' India today is better off without suttee....Multiculturalism was conceived by Western elites not to celebrate all cultures but to deny their own; it is, thus the real suicide bomb.

    The rest of us—the ones who think you can make judgements about competing cultures on liberty, religious freedom, the rule of law—need to recover the cultural cool that General Napier demonstrated....

    At the heart of multiculturalism is a lie: that all cultures are equally 'valid'. To accept that proposition means denying reality—the reality of any objective measure of human freedom, societal health, and global population movement....

    The great thing about multiculturalism is that it doesn't involve knowing anything about other cultures...[it] jut involves feeling warm and fuzzy about everyone, making bliss out of ignorance. If the guy's rich, vibrant cultural tradition involves standing over you with a scimitar shouting 'Allahu Akhbar!' well, you can't complain you're not getting your share of cultural diversity.

    Care to respond?

    (p.s. I'm not the guy who posted last, but the one before him, and the guy who asked what your "side" of this debate would be.)


Hey guys, please be polite.