Posts
I was really shocked today to hear media reports that Osama Bin Laden had released another tape threatening to attack the United States. I could have sworn that we had killed him a long time ago. I'm sure I remember hearing reports on Fox News that he was dead. Didn't we have him surrounded at one point in Tora Bora? Does this mean that he got away? I remember President Bush saying that we were going to get him "dead or alive" and then he never mentioned him again so naturally I assumed that we got him. I thought that the whole point of invading Iraq was to get the last remaining terrorist connected to 9/11, Saddam Hussein, and that after that, all we would have left to deal with would be the terrorists that fled there to take advantage of the post-war anarchy, as well as the new ones that were recruited in response to our invading Iraq. So now I'm a little confused. Why have we let Osama Bin Laden walk around scot-free for the last four years? I can only assume that President Bush has been trying to lull him into a false sense of security and that this is part of some secret, overarching plan to win the War on Terror.
Jon Swift, Iraq, al Qaeda, Terrorism, Bush, Politics, Bin Laden, Foreign Policy
9 comments:
Mr "Swift",
I came across a review you wrote on Amazon that made me laugh. Then I read your blog and laughed even louder. I thought, "can this guy really be this idiotic?". So then I went and read all of your Amazon reviews and realized that you are even more idiotic than I originally thought.
And before you jump to conclusions (since that's clearly what you always do), please know that I am a proud, card-carrying Republican. In fact, it was your "review" of 100 People Who Are Ruining America that made me realize what a moron you really are. You aren't even smart enough to judge a book by it's cover -- you judge it by it's title. You helped the left by giving the book 1 star when if you would have just looked at the cover or read even one sentence from the book description or had even a clue as to who Bernard Goldberg is, you would have realized that he is a conservative Republican commentator blaming left leaning Hollywood types for America's cultural problems.
Your other book reviews are also just based on the title and you clearly don't even take 2 minutes to research anything you say (which is clear in your belief that Osama bin Laden was already dead -- even Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Jay Leno all talk about the fact that he is still very much alive). For example, in Maureen Dowd's Are Men Necessary, if you had just listened to a single interview she gave on the book you would realize that she ultimately concludes that men ARE necessary.
Even better is your retarded review of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. If you knew what politically incorrect meant (which you clearly don't) you would realize that the book isn't giving incorrect facts but a "politically incorrect" view of history. In fact, your one star review was another boon for the left as this book is actually written by a conservative Republican trying to point out the historic flaws of liberals in America and how they hide those facts.
I could go on and on about how stupid you really are, but I doubt that you'd understand the majority of the words since you can't understand irony, metaphor and you judge things literally by their title. Do you even have a junior high school education?!?!?
And for the record, to say that the media is biased and that you get your news from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Jay Leno just shows how incomprehensible your stupidity really is -- don't you realize that all three of those that you mentioned ARE THE MEDIA??? And, with the exception of Jay Leno who skewers both right and left because he's after the laugh, that they are just as biased to the right as other organizations are to the left???
And to not read or listen to an opinion because it differs from yours just shows closed-mindedness and an ignorance of history.
Will you even have the courage to go back and change your Amazon reviews of the fine conservative works that you skewered because you weren't smart enough to read beyond the titles?
I hope not -- the less exposure you have to the rest of the world, the better. Moron.
Obviously the pervious commentor is not well versed in literature, because the name Jon Swift wasn't enough to tip him off. The whole point to these blogs is satire. It isn't all that complicated but if you can grasp the concept of irony you would see the simplicity of the posts.
P.S. Please look up Jonathan Swift for your own sake.
Um, Conservatives do not believe in using "irony". Only left-wing relativists do that.
Oh, thank god, so this is satire, it is a joke, few... It turns out Jonathan Swift was a satirical political author, and is famous for writing the novel 'Gullivers Travels'. I was going mad thinking this site was serious, as can be seen in my comment on the amazon review of PIG of American History. There was a disclaimer, as i was hoping for, just not where it would normally be, but in the blogs title...
I'm not sure who this Jonathan Swift is you're referring to. Actually my moniker is a tribute to the brave Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
What!? the Irak invasion was for grasping terrorists? Nonono, that cannot be true. I heard it was for grasping oil reserves.
anon#1
I did not know any of that!
I must say that was some diatribe in your efforts to redefine the term mo-ron... but I think you've got it!
I've got to give it up to reviewer #1 :
"I could go on and on about how stupid you really are, but I doubt that you'd understand the majority of the words since you can't understand irony, metaphor and you judge things literally by their title."
Wow. Jon, you must have gotten a good laugh out of that... I know I did!
"I'm not sure who this Jonathan Swift is you're referring to. Actually my moniker is a tribute to the brave Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."
Why would a conservative blogger name himself after some oscure liberal writer who wasn't even American?
Even though Swift's moniker was clearly a reference to swift boats, any reasonably educated reader would realise that Jonathon is a relatively common first name, and odds are that there would have been many Jonathons with a given surname and statistically, it is likely that one of them would have been an obscure writer.
That a given Jonathon 'x' was or is a liberal writer is regrettable, but we can't paint all Jonathons with the same brush. That's what sets us aside from Europeans.
Jeff from Canada
Post a Comment