User Profile: truthspeare


Member Since: February 20, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • October 1, 2014 at 7:10pm

    Oh, to the point, Glenn is prescient. I base this on his perspicacious predictions in the past, and given the point on accuracy, over and over again, you cannot dismiss his predictions as coincidence.

  • October 1, 2014 at 6:10pm

    Yes, person to person transfer is possible. I have not yet heard anything about the possible transmission by mosquito or other vectors. It is good that we are entering the cold season. Although in Texas, the mosquito season has a longer life.

    Who knows maybe mosquitoes cannot transfer the ebola virus from person to person.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 1, 2014 at 6:02pm

    I have been a fan of Bill O’Reilly for years. I still am. My wording above may seem to indicate otherwise. My strong rhetoric above is designed for emphasis, not a reflection of anger or similar.

    Perhaps I need to change my approach, which is alienating on my part and unfair to him.

    I just have this feeling that too many leaders, and O’Reilly is without doubt a leader, they are failing to adequately appreciate the very real danger that our country is in right now. This feeling is based on patterns of information that I am seeing in the media, as well as my own view that ISIS will be anxious to maintain momentum.

    This idea of a mercenary army is like an acknowledgment that America is not up to the fight. Which I disagree with. I have never doubted the resolve of our military — despite the recent survey that 70% of surveyed military do not want to return to Iraq. Who would? We lost a great deal of good men and women to stabilize Iraq, only for the result of their sacrifice to disappear in a poof. You show the military that we are “in it to win it,” then there will be a buy in.

    While I am grateful that O’Reilly is leading the wheelchair efforts for Vets, the natural question is why isn’t the VA doing it. O’Reilly compliments the President for helping. I am grateful for that. But shouldn’t the President ensure our wounded receive such without charity?

    My apologies to O’Reilly for my boorish, unfair language above. I am worried.

  • September 30, 2014 at 3:45pm

    This is not the time to innovate. The downside of failure will be catastrophic. I agree it is a cute idea, but maybe a road that we do not want to go down right now. Heads are rolling. Thousands and thousands murdered. Talk about the collateral damage of a bomb. How about the collateral damage of the President’s fairy tale exit from Iraq? What a nightmare. Month after month after month, and on and on and on by the President not engaging ISIS emboldened them by a second, and now they are on a roll. Good God, this is transparent.

  • September 30, 2014 at 3:37pm

    I apologize for the profanity. But goodness, our country is in grave danger right now and it is not the time to appear weak by hiring a mercenary army. All, or a majority of the collateral damage will be laid at our feet, whether it should be or not. A proxy is a proxy and the bad guys understand what that is.

    I know we used Blackwater contractors (mercenary like) in Iraq, and needless to say that did not go well. Now in Federal criminal court we have four of them on trial for collateral damage, Baghdad Iraqi civilians. Can you imagine just how out of hand that a mercenary army could get?

    I understand that a mercenary army fighting would mean less U.S. casualties. But what are the rules for the mercenaries? The Uniform Code of Military Justice? How is that possible? So what will govern them, contract law? Oh please. And if a law of war crime is committed, how will that affect the U.S.?

    What about the intel? Who will get the intel? SGT Snowden? Contractor Snowden? Oh please.

    Where will the contractors with traumatic brain injury, lost limbs, faces burned off, PTSD receive care? Who will pay for it? Will there be disability pay for them? Who will pay for that?

    Who will command such mercenary army? Only one can truly be in charge. Will the position of commander rotate? What if a non-American commander assigns the most dangerous duties to American contractors? What happens if contractors get trained and then say, “See ya”?

  • September 30, 2014 at 9:12am

    Hey, O’Reilly, what is it, 70% of the active duty do not want to go to war in Iraq? Do you know why? Think of it. Would you want to risk your sole life for this President? Is he the guy upon whom which are women and children will be safe? If we go to war? No. He had no father figure and so he does not understand his duties. Every man who volunteers to fight does so for his kin and country. This man will make them die for other reasons. You want men to fight, then you give them the reason. And then they will fight. They will fight for grandpa and grandma, they will fight wife, they will fight for son and daughter, they will fight for grandson and granddaughter, they will fight for the man to their left and to their right, but they sure the f..u..c..,k do not want to waste this chance on a freichen pu..ss.y. They want to win. And they sure the f..u..c.k do not want to waste this chance on some freichen mercenary army. What kind of man are you? As for me, and those like me, we will fight for our women and children and kin. F..u..ck you. You write books, read teleprompters, and buy wheelchairs for those who lose our legs. Yeah, you and that guy that you have your tongue up his……. We do not need guys like you. We need guys who will fight.

    Responses (3) +
  • September 30, 2014 at 8:03am

    O’Reilly, when you go to war, you had better kick ass. And others fighting for you won’t cut it. Dude. I know that others fighting for my wife and kids, and grandkids and won’t cut. Dumbass. Do you want a Guiness or something O’Reilly, for f..ck sake. Full bloomed fire bush dumbass.

  • September 30, 2014 at 7:57am

    O’Reilly, to pay for others to kill radical Muslims, is not to say that our women and children are in less risk. Dude, for crying out loud. The principle is that he who among men pays for what he wants, is he who gets what he wants. The U.S. will be held responsible you stupid Irishman. Perhaps you need a little Scottish blood in you, fire bush.

  • September 30, 2014 at 7:48am

    What do you mean?

  • September 30, 2014 at 7:43am

    And if the mercenary army creates unacceptable collateral damage? If the world pays for 99% of the mercenary army and the U.S. 1%, the U.S. will be held responsible for 100%

    Why? Because that the way it is. O’Reilly is a full bloomed dumbass.

  • September 30, 2014 at 5:21am

    O’Reilly prefers it that is better to be paid to kill. Thus ushering in the clone wars. What does he care, he has never fought for this wife and kids, and he never will. Why? Ask him for his excuse. Dunce.

    Responses (3) +
  • [1] September 30, 2014 at 5:18am

    Bill O’Reilly’s mercenary army? What is it? Is it better to kill because you are paid to kill, or is it better to kill to protect your wife, kids, and your countrymen. Bill O’Reilly prefers the “it is better to kill because you are better to kill”

    Now the way to deal with dumb people? Ignore them.

    Responses (3) +
  • September 30, 2014 at 4:37am

    Somebody may bring it up. And I want them to bring it up. And I will deal with it when they do.

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:34am

    You kill women and children, then you get what you deserve.

    Responses (1) +
  • September 30, 2014 at 4:33am

    What was it that Santa Anna did at the Alamo. Take no quarter, give no quarter…eh, meaning genocide all of them. Good God, is there some kind of freichen theme emerging in all this disjointed crap? Or is all that is emerging a bunch of crap? Hmmm? I want to know.

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:30am

    You know, the American Indians did not have open borders. Nope. They tried to kill every man, woman, and child.

    Say, what do the Aztecs and Mayans have to say about all this?

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:26am

    Is it all really primitive? I’m sure of it. Seems, eh, savage.

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:25am

    Is it really a non-sequitur? I’m not sure anymore.

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:17am

    Who is the offense on? I’m not sure anymore.

  • September 30, 2014 at 4:15am

    Who is the war on? I’m not sure anymore.

123 To page: Go