Comments (21) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   scottfreitas said, 12 days ago

   Wearing corny ribbons won’t do a bleeep thing to prevent the same thing from happening again.

   It angered me beyond all measure to learn that in today’s military, soldiers are routinely forced to walk around their own bases unarmed. That whacko Islamist had a free reign to gun down OUR SOLDIERS because the Girl Government lefties who run the military are trying to make our bases into “gun free” zones!!!!!

   This is so ridiculous it deserves to be spit upon. These are MILITARY bases we are talking about. Filled with SOLDIERS. If you don’t trust them to carry around weapons, WHAT’S THE POINT OF MAKING THEM SOLDIERS?

   If all those troops at Fort Hood had been packing their military-issue handguns, Major Mohammed would have been “lucky” to have killed 1-2 people AT MOST.

   Get these gd girly leftwing “PC” wimps our of US military policy-making before it’s too late–this was a true WAKE-UP CALL…

2. 

   omQ R said, 12 days ago

   I think Scott should join the military and possibly enter at the rank of colonel or even general, his ideas and suggestions show his leadership skills are wasted as a civilian.
   Hypothetically, would anyone feel safer if someone like Scott packed a gun, walking in our midst?

3. 

   HUMPHRIES said, 12 days ago

   omQ R - Amen

   PS Note the stupider they are the more they like to demonstrate it.

4. 

   Norman said, 12 days ago

   Maybe we should NOT have any muslims in the military while we are fighting some of their sects.

5. 

   landshark67 said, 12 days ago

   Does this mean that during WWII we should have just sent Hindus and Muslims to fight the Germans?

6. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 12 days ago

   I don’t get the tag placed to this drawing.

7. 

   comYics said, 12 days ago

   That is kinda tragic. That koran should be examined by the government to find whether it encourages peace or murdurous tendencies.

8. 

   tpenna said, 12 days ago

   Yeah, I’m pretty sure government examination of a religious document is about as unconstitutional as you can get. Seriously, start your own private study if you want to. But I don’t want my government making decisions about what religious text is good or bad for me. And neither should you.

9. 

   dtroutma said, 12 days ago

   If you have an Army armor post, should every soldier be in a tank 24/7? The most highly decorated unit in Europe in WW II was the Nisei battalion which included Daniel Inoyue a Democrat, who lost an arm in combat.

   The Constitution says there will never be a religious test for any position of trust- that includes the military.

   I remind scooter again it was a FEMALE CIVILIAN cop who stopped the guy.

   It is scooter and his ilk who shame Americans of good faith, irregardless of where they come from to join as true patriots to a nation of diversity, not bigotry and hate.

10. 

    DrCanuck said, 12 days ago

    I am getting seriously worried about the Puppy.

11. 

    motivemagus said, 12 days ago

    Why, DrCanuck? He’s not here.

12. 

    benbrilling said, 12 days ago

    Howgozit: Obviously scottfreitas added the tag. Take a look at his profile if you want to see the hundreds of tags he has been spreading all over the place.

13. 

    oldlegodad said, 12 days ago

    Every service man being armed on a stateside base would lead to even more mayhem. Right Hump ?.

14. 

    oldlegodad said, 12 days ago

    This from postings about Ft Hood on Dailymail.co.uk :
    Have I found scottfretias’ real ID or just a alter ego doopelganger

    Per its agenda, obamaland is treating this act as one committed by a troubled, yet very kind, man who feared deployment to iraq and who suffered ptsd himself as a result of counseling others. And the administration, with its media minions, wants me to suspend judgment until “all the facts are in”. What a crock. The incident at Ft Hood was a terrorist attack – plain and simple – made by a crazy who screamed muslim praises and fired over 100 rounds. The incident does not have to be sanctioned and directed by osama bin laden to qualify as a terrorist act. This nutcase major was under investigation by the FBI, and it is only due to the utter incompetence, political correctness, and timidity of the FBI, DHS, and the US Army bureaucracy that this event was allowed to proceed.

    
    
    • MJ, Naples, FL, USA, 07/11/2009 14:48
    
    

15. 

    DrCanuck said, 12 days ago

    motive’, that’s my point. When has he ever left for so long; he LIVES on these pages. He has no other life.

16. 

    eaglesofwar said, 12 days ago

    Om QR,

    In response to you statement on entering the military as a general or a colonel.

    In America they have enlisted and officer ranks.

    The enlisted start from E-1 to E-3.

    Most line officer’s start at 01.

    The only officers that start at 0-3 or above are in the medical field.
    They have rank but cannot take command of any military operation.

    Back to the Muslim mental health doctor that was at the rank of a major with problems.
    If he was on the line officer side he would have never made it to that rank.
    Officers have to make a certain amount of advancements or they get kicked out.
    Incompetent ones may not make it past 03. When I was in I witnessed one 02 and one 03 get the axe.

    I recently meet a 06 out in uniform. I stated to speak with him and he stated he was in the medical field. His rank just meant the pay scale he was at.

    The chance of making the rank of general or admiral on the line office side is usually reserved to the best.

17. 

    omQ R said, 11 days ago

    Eaglesofwar says: The chance of making the rank of general or admiral on the line office side is usually reserved to the best.

    Then I say an exception should be made for Scott as he meets this criteria just based on merit as exibited on these pages. An immediate shoe-in for the rank.
    I also admire your posts, they’re equally informative, devoid of any prejudice whatsoever and compelling. :-|

18. 

    a.c.d said, 11 days ago

    I think the fact that he brings up the no-gun policy on military bases is interesting. I personally dont know what the best idea is, I was under the impression that military personnel, and more specifically soldiers could carry weapons around, considering, its a military base. Although the reason I would understand they dont is because of the large numbers of civilians on the bases. Arent most jobs contracted out these days? Maybe this gun policy has a lot to do with the systematic removal of army personnel from duties and replaced with civilans. Does anyone know more about this?

19. 

    scottfreitas said, 11 days ago

    Any thinking person would have to admit that if just 4 automatic-weapons-wielding terrorists in an SUV had forced their way into Fort Hood that day, they could have captured the entire BASE. What the HELL are these liberal loons running the military these days thinking? DO they think? Or do they just “feel”?

    US military bases are OBVIOUSLY prime targets for terrorism. Yet the soldiers inside are all walking around UNARMED?

    How brilliant. I mean, just BRILLIANT. Having militaryt bases loaded to the gills with warehouses full of weapons and munitions staffed by a bunch of UNARMED people.

    President Osama is a traitor guilty of treason for the way he is reacting to this scandal. And the American people are BEGGING for a mass disaster by not rioting in the streets over the fact their military bases are totally unprotected, ripe for capture by even a small commando team armed with automatic weapons…

20. 

    tpenna said, 11 days ago

    So he’s a traitor guilty of… what’s that now?… treason? I suppose that’s the only kind of traitor, eh?

    Okay, so now I’ve decided to just openly mock scottfreitas and his sophomoric self-righteousness.

21. 

    oldlegodad said, 11 days ago

    Mocking scottfreitas is his sincerest form of justification and pud pounding gratification.