TheBlaze Books Give You More!

CommentsDisplaying bpitas's 10 most recent comments.

• WSJ editors: Boston bombings should moderate Rand Paul

  April 22, 2013 at 4:36pm

  In reply to jujubeebee.

  Same here. These kinds of attacks don’t happen when you mind your own business and leave other countries alone.

  I actually don’t know the history of the Chechnyan (sp?) rebels, and how that whole rebellion went down, but knowing how the interventionalist war-mongers usually work, I wouldn’t be surprised if we gave money to one side or the other, and that put us on some terrorist organization’s “list of people I want to blow up”. Lather, rinse, repeat – this won’t be the last time we get attacked as we’re still over in the middle east.

  As for Boston appearing like a “war zone”, I completely agree that it looked like a warzone… and it’s 100% unacceptable!!! Because you’re talking about wasting $333,000,000 (what WHDH 7 said this whole ordeal cost) to catch one 19 year old teenager with no military training!

  Jesus, really? Bringing out the National Guard, Homeland Security, FBI, BATFE, DEA(wtf?), State Police and local PD and SWAT units from 10 surrounding communities for one kid? This whole thing could have been handled by Watertown and Cambridge police with one bomb disposal unit from nearby Boston. Or even better, tell everyone in the neighborhood with an AR15 if you see someone you don’t recognize, hold them for us and stay out of pipe-bomb range. Problem solved with $332,999,000 dollars to spare. There was absolutely no excuse for that massive over-reaction and as a taxpayer, I want that money BACK.

• AP: Explosives Used in Bombings Contained in ‘Pressure Cookers’ and Placed in Duffel Bags — Same Type Described in How-To Section of Al-Qaeda Mag

  April 16, 2013 at 3:46pm

  In reply to GoodBerean.

  Goodberean, you are absolutely right, but the fake conservative war-mongers on this board won’t take your point of view seriously.

  It’s hard to believe some people are so dumb that they can’t understand that our killing of civilians in the middle east has created the entire “terrorist” situation, but what are you going to do? Until we get some real leaders into Washington, the sheep will continue calling our enemies “terrorists” so the don’t appear as full humans so it’s not immoral to kill them even though we started the fight. Even though the less cowardly of the sheep would use the same guerrilla tactics if someone invaded the US the way we’ve invaded other countries, they can’t see that it’s our beligerence that’s causing this bloodshed. If only we’d listen to George Washington (“no entangling alliances”) or Ron Paul (“Mind our own business!”) we wouldn’t have so many enemies, and we also wouldn’t have such a ridiculous deficit, and the world would be a safer place overall, since much of the conflict in the middle east was literally started by the United States. (warmongers – look up “Operation Ajax”, which is credited for destabilizing Iran into the mess it is today – all our fault)

• Did You Know About the Surprising Views on Israel of Obama’s Likely Pick for Secretary of Defense?

  December 17, 2012 at 9:07am

  “While in the Senate, Hagel voted against designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, refused to call on the E.U. to designate Hezbollah a terrorist group, and consistently voted against sanctions on Iran for their illicit pursuit of nuclear weapons capability. It is a matter of fact that his record on these issues puts him well outside the mainstream Democratic and Republican consensus.”

  Wow, a Congressman who’s actually Patriotic and realizes that our countries decisions shouldn’t revolve around Israel. I agree with everything Hagel stands for above, and I wish more people in Congress felt the same! We need more non-interventionalists in Congress – we can’t afford to be the policemen of the world, and those who attempt to do so represent our nation’s biggest threat to national security!

• The Republican Presidential Field of 2016 (Updated)

  November 9, 2012 at 9:49am

  In reply to DeVain.

  The only candidate on that list that I would vote for is Rand Paul. The rest (including Ryan) aren’t true conservatives, and I don’t like their voting records. Rand is the only one who has taken a public stand against the evils of government like the TSA – the rest of them are go-along to get-along and we can’t afford to nominate another lame candidate in 2016. The last two Republican nominees have been hand-picked loser moderates – will we learn our lesson?

• Romney Was ‘Shell-Shocked’ After Learning of Election Loss, Aides Say: ‘It Was Like a Sucker Punch’

  November 9, 2012 at 9:37am

  In reply to Silversmith.

  OK, not to split hairs, but to say that Romney had alot of people at his rallys and Obama didn’t is just ludicrous. Even in the primaries Romney couldn’t pull in any crowds. When Ron Paul had people climbing trees outside of stadiums to see him speak – over 8,000 people – Romney was literally talking to 800 people tops. Romney was NEVER actually “liked” by anyone – he was just the alternative to Obama. You can’t win an election by being “the other guy” – you have to have some principles and a history of sticking to them. Romney didn’t have either of those.

• Romney Was ‘Shell-Shocked’ After Learning of Election Loss, Aides Say: ‘It Was Like a Sucker Punch’

  November 9, 2012 at 9:29am

  In reply to toiletclogga.

  I certainly trust paper ballots, counted with members from each candidate’s campaign, over electronic voting machines! During the primaries, Romney won every district where electronic voting machines were used, while he often came in 2nd or 3rd where ballots were counted by hand and the counting was video taped. Take the Adelson Caucus in Nevada for instance – Romney supposedly won Nevada, but when the Adelson caucus ballots were counted live on TV, Ron Paul won by a factor of 3:1. (183 to 61) There were hundreds of other locations where exit polling had Romney coming in 2nd or 3rd, but the electronic voting machines had him winning.

• Romney Was ‘Shell-Shocked’ After Learning of Election Loss, Aides Say: ‘It Was Like a Sucker Punch’

  November 9, 2012 at 9:26am

  Everyone was saying it was going to be a close race, so for Romney to say he thought it was going to be a decisive victory implies that he had some inside information. Based on how his campaign cheated during the nomination process, he probably tampered with some electronic voting machines to insure victory, but it was found and corrected before the voting began. :-) If only that correction had been done before the primaries, we could have had a better candidate who could have won against Obama!

• Pentagon Confirms: Iran Fired on U.S. Drone Last Week

  November 8, 2012 at 2:43pm

  In reply to midwesthippie.

  They conveniently said the Predator was “over international waters”, doing “routine maintenance”, but you’re right – if we were flying a drone over their air space, then we were caught in an act of war and they were completely justifying in shooting at it.

• Pentagon Confirms: Iran Fired on U.S. Drone Last Week

  November 8, 2012 at 2:39pm

  In reply to johnpaulkuchtajr.

  Hellfire is a laser-designated air-to-ground missile (that’s why it’s named AGM-114)- not very useful against a drone…
  I think the real question is: where was the drone REALLY flying. Of course they are going to say it was in international waters. Our government is evil enough to fly them over their own country – I’m sure they have no problem spying on Iran illegally…

• Cops ‘Disgusted’ After NYU Asks Students to Plot a ‘Hypothetical’ Terrorist Attack

  October 29, 2012 at 12:17pm

  What’s the big deal? Our CIA and military plot “terrorist” attacks all the time! And isn’t this a graduate level class for counter-terrorism? What else would you expect them to study?!?

  The definition of “terrorism”, in Websters, is: “the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.” That’s exactly what we do to other countries. The only difference between a “terrorist” attack and an attack by “freedom fighters” is whether our elite rulers like those people or not. Try to put yourself in the shoes of someone in Iraq or Afghanistan, where unwanted American’s come and occupy your land and try to push their values on you. You’d fight back too, and if you couldn’t possibly win a head-to-head battle, you’d have to resort to guerrilla tactics. It’s a proven fact that we’re only getting attacked because we’re meddling in the middle east – as soon as we get out, there will be no more attacks. But as long as we’re going to keep bullying people in the middle east, they’re going to keep attacking us with guerrilla tactics, just get used to it and hope we pull our troops out before something major happens! BTW – “Terrorism” is a tactic not a group of people – there are no “terrorists”. Or at least whomever is using those tactics is the “terrorist”, so when we assassinate people with drones, WE are the terrorists.