Tribute to the Military

Monday, January 30, 2006


Reposted with permission from Rick Roberts, 760 KFMB AM radio, San Diego, California. For further information about Rick or his points of view, please visit Rick's Blog at 760 KFMB.

DISCLAIMER: The different points of views on the Rick Roberts Blog are not supported nor do they reflect the views and beliefs of the Bosun Locker or any entity affiliated with the Bosun Locker.

Phone: 1-800-760-KFMB (1-800-760-5362)
Mon-Fri, 6am to 10am, PST.
Newsletter: Sign up for Rick's Newsletter NOW!

Posted By Rick January 30th, 2006

President Bush will deliver the State of the Union tomorrow night, and I pretty much know what he’s going to say. But what I’m really interested in is what the Libs rebuttal is going to be.

President Bush will say we need to keep America safe. He will talk about the war efforts in Iraq and the successes we are having. He will talk about the threats against this country by Osama Bin Laden. He will do and say a lot of common sense things that we’ve heard a thousand times before from him.

But how can the liberals rebut it?

Wait…let me clarify. How can the liberals rebut it with intellect and not emotional rantings about the end of the world?

So here is my question to you this morning. Seriously…give it some thought. What do you want to here from the liberals?

What would you like to here them say?

Do they even have a message?

Or , do you just expect a lot of Bush Bashing without any policies or ideas of their own?

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Entertaining Communism
(from Beyond the News)
—Michael Medved
January 30, 2006

In a startling development on the American left, prominent activists suddenly associate themselves with the long-disgraced ideology of communism. Novelist Kurt Vonnegut told NPR that "Karl Marx gets a bad rap" because "he wanted to take care of a lot of people."

Meanwhile, the Revolutionary Communist Party in America proudly organizes a full-page ad demanding "Bush Step Down!" and secures signatures of Oscar-winners Sean Penn, Jessica Lange, Susan Sarandon and Jane Fonda--plus two members of Congress!

Stylish New Yorkers buy expensive fashion gear with images of Che Guevara, and Steven Spielberg says his time with Fidel Castro amounted to the "most important six hours of my life." It's hard to imagine such unapologetic association with Nazism--yet communism killed far more people. More than 100 million civilians died at the hands of Marxist butchers like Mao, Stalin, Ho Che Minh and Pol Pot--yet ignorant entertainers now want to rehabilitate history's most evil ideology.

Through high school and much of college, I came to accept this kind of garbage that is washed into you: "Communism isn't evil...capitalism is evil". I thought I was being educated by being enlightened from a commonly perceived "myth" in the world.....a lie from the pro-capitalist society in which I lived. My liberal educators were telling me some great misperception, I thought at the time; and now I knew better....I, in my smug arrogance, thought I now knew a higher reality than those who badmouthed communism and the Soviets.

But then I grew up. I deprogrammed myself. What's Steven Speilberg and Sean Penn's excuse for continuing to live in denial? For perpetuating their own ignorance?j

Follow the
Gateway Pundit link.

Illegal Immigration: Erosion of the rule of law unacceptable

Reposted with permission from Sonoran News, Cave Creek, Arizona. Illegal immigration: Erosion of the rule of law unacceptable. This is the forth in a series of articles on the Southwest Conference on Illegal Immigration, Border Security and Crime hosted by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office Nov. 4 and 5.

By LINDA BENTLEY, Reporter for Sonoran News

SCOTTSDALE – Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., flaked out on participating in Friday’s afternoon panel discussion: “Federal Immigration Reform – Real Solutions or ‘Amnesty?’” as did Steven Moore from the Wall Street Journal.

That left Tamar Jacoby from the Manhattan Institute, a think tank whose mission is “to develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility” and John Leo from U.S. News and World Report to discuss the issue.

Jacoby began by saying, “The status quo is unacceptable.

Erosion of the rule of law is unacceptable. We all agree on that.

“We pass laws to make one side happy then we don’t enforce them to make the other side happy,” which she referred to as a “nudge, nudge, wink, wink policy.” Jacoby expressed being troubled by a fence being the main line of defense and an interior enforcement policy, which she claimed would “have law enforcement stopping people all across the country without probable cause.” Although Jacoby believes we need to enforce our laws, she firmly believes there is a large demand for unskilled labor.

Jacoby said a friend of hers, who owns a resort in Sedona, told her increased border security could force her to shut down, citing, “We’d be asking employers to slit their own throats.” Jacoby commented, “In 1960, one half of all American men dropped out of school and went into the unskilled labor force. Now it’s 10 percent.

“This is not about a bunch of greedy employers getting rich on cheap labor.

We can pretend this isn’t true, or we can increase the number of unskilled workers.” Her statement brought to mind an earlier comment made by Wall Street Journal’s John Fund about needing to vastly improve education in our public schools.

Although Fund didn’t elaborate on the direction reform needed to go, Jacoby’s comment would indicate Americans may be placing too much emphasis on higher education, as public schools emphasize academics and college preparatory classes, while virtually eliminating shop and trade-oriented classes for those not inclined to go on to college.

Leo said, “We disagree on several things, without smoke coming out of my ears,” joking about how secondhand ear smoke was probably illegal in Scottsdale.

He said, under our current “nudge, nudge, wink, wink” policy, the Mexican government doesn’t have to take responsibility and uses its consular offices to lobby and distribute Spanish-language textbooks.

Leo went on to say, “Voting rights for illegals and reforms in Catholic churches all came from the bottom,” adding, environmental groups such as the Sierra Club no longer address things such as environmental damage at the border.

“This morning’s discussion was quite illuminating,” he said, “We can’t have another amnesty, even without the word. There’s no trust.

We need to show enforcement, and we have to put some pressure on Mexico to stop dumping its poor on us.

“They’ve created an industry on not taking care of its own people.” Citing tolerance for illegal immigration needs to stop, Leo concluded his opening statements by saying, “We need to have enforcement.” Moderator Steve Twist from VIAD Corporation said there was a lot of “pent-up demand” in the audience to ask questions, the first of which was directed at Jacoby wanting to know what kind of country this would be without a fence, while taking exception to Jacoby’s statement about jobs Americans won’t do, citing they would if American corporations would pay decent wages, and her statement that illegal immigrants don’t collect benefits.

Jacoby responded, “Sure, supply and demand and let the lack of supply force an increase in wages. Agriculture would move to the third world.’ She said “paying busboys and carpenters $20 per hour” was not an answer, adding, “Meanwhile we have an economy we need to run.” “Illegal immigrants are not eligible for welfare,” continued Jacoby, “Most immigrants come here to work, not to collect welfare,” adding, “Of course we don’t want to have a porous border.” Twist asked Leo if the current policy regarding employers was fair to U.S. citizens.

“All of these costs shouldn’t be dumped on us,” Leo answered, stating, “Businesses claimed they couldn’t function without sweatshop wages,” as he talked about how industries have responded with automation, citing the sugar cane industry in Florida, which was able to eliminate the need for large numbers of unskilled laborers.

Leo said, “The economy would adjust, and I don’t think that’s a reason to complicity accept illegal immigration.” Jacoby said, “Maybe if we can figure out ways,” suggesting insurance pools as a possible answer.

Even though $7 billion in Social Security is paid by illegals she also noted hospitals in Arizona were closing.

However, she said, “Cracking down harder and building a fence is not realistic.” Jacoby cited Prohibition, which she also dubbed “unrealistic,” and said, “We do not have enough resources.” Leo commented how reform was coming from below, as the Minuteman movement has proven. “They’re making a symbolic protest,” he said, adding, “Bush’s plan gives me a headache. A $2,000 fine, probably over 20 years …” “There are 11 million illegals here,” said Jacoby, insisting, “The best way to do something is to have them come forward and register with the government.” Leo said, “I’m more interested in stopping the flow of illegals. The U.S. government has been so untrustworthy on this issue seriousness has to be displayed for a few years before amnesty is discussed.” When Twist asked Jacoby if she thought the United States should be expanding its guest-worker program without border and interior enforcement, she said, “Give employers tools like swipe cards to verify worker eligibility.

I think it’s more realistic to do at the same time.” Leo repeated how “stronger enforcement” was necessary and said, “I would lean on the universities to not be part of the problem by pushing separatism. It needs to be taken seriously,” referring to MEChA organizations on campuses throughout the country that promote a Hispanic separatist agenda.

“Politically correct plays right into the problem. Culturally, we have to take seriously assimilation.” Jacoby said she didn’t believe people didn’t want to assimilate, although she agreed, “We should have expectations.

After 15 years we should expect people to learn English. We need to put some incentive into assimilation.” Leo stated, “I agree with Tom Tancredo. We have to show enforcement first.” Jacoby disagreed, citing, “We need a realistic law and enforcement at the same time.” “One more plea about the Mexican government,” Leo mentioned the Mexican government’s booklet on how to come to the United States illegally, and said, “Both sides are too scared of losing the Hispanic vote to lean on the Mexican government.” Twist said, “Several people have said it’s a myth there are jobs Americans won’t take.” “As a non-economist,” said Leo, “I don’t believe we need to bring in low-skilled workers to keep our economy moving. Japan has a functioning economy without any immigration.” “I think I share the views of everyone in this room,” Jacoby concluded, “It’s just a matter of how,” after which Leo concluded, “I want enforcement first.”

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, January 29, 2006

Breaking News: Two Newsmen Injured in Iraq

Associated Press Writer

ABC News co-anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt were seriously injured in an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) explosion. At the time of the firefight, both men were wearing their body armor and helmets. They are in surgery right now, and their condition is unknown.

This occured 15 miles north of Baghdad near Taji. They were embedded with the 4th ID (Infantry Division) and the Iraqi Army. More news is sure to come.

A prayer never hurt, and it may even help.

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Anyone Up For A Hilibuster? Cross posted from BIG DOG's WEBLOG

Received a timely and well written advance post email from BIG DOG. Please visit BIG DOG's Weblog site for more of the same:

It looks like the moonbat parade has another clown in it and that clown is none other than Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton has joined with fellow moonbats Ted Kennedy and John Kerry in support of a filibuster of Judge Samuel Alito. Harry Reid has stated that their are not enough votes to sustain one but will vote for it anyway. Republicans are happy with these events because it will make the Democrats look very bad.

Judge Samuel Alito is a very intelligent man who knows the law. He has shown that he is qualified to be on the Supreme Court. These same moonbats who think Justice Ginsberg is mainstream despite her radical left views and years of work for the ACLU, a communist organization that is hell bent on making America a socialist country believe that Alito would radically alter the make-up of the court. I just can’t find the make-up of the court as a requirement in the Constitution. I am no lawyer but I am sure that a judge should be evaluated on his ability and legal knowledge.

The donks are going to try a filibuster. If by some miracle they get enough votes to sustain one, the Republicans will exercise the nuclear option and the donks will look just as bad. The best thing for them to do is to act with dignity and allow an up or down vote. If they are opposed to Alito they can demonstrate their opposition with a no vote though a no vote shows their inability to get past their hatred for the President. To do anything else is childish, partisan, and quite foolish.

Voters should remember the way these Senators are acting and reward them appropriately when they come up for reelection. As for my state, both liberal moonbats in Maryland are voting against Alito demonstrating they do not have the intelligence or integrity to be in the Senate. One is retiring, thank God. We will have to wait for a while to get rid of the other.

It will be fun to watch this because it shows Hillary Clinton is pandering to the liberals even though she is trying to appear moderate. No matter how much camouflage you wear, a liberal moonbat is still a liberal moonbat. And that folks, is what you have in Mrs. Clinton. Source: New York Daily News

Read BIG DOG's entire post here: Anyone up for a Hilibuster

Warmest regards and thanks for visiting the site,
Big Dog

Freedom of Religion Watch

Note on the graphic on the left that was obtained from Wikipedia:
"The two-dimensional work of art depicted is in the public domain worldwide due to the date of death of its author, or due to its date of publication. Thus, this reproduction of the work is also in the public domain. (This applies to reproductions created in the United States, Germany, and many other countries, see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.)."
After just going through another Christmas with attacks from the Liberal Tolerance crowd (neither liberal nor tolerant) of the world, the new year is heating up again rather quickly.

  • Is this a stunt by a grandstanding atheist?
  • Is this a calculated attack on religious freedom?
  • Is this silly story that has been blown out of proportion by the media?
Whatever this is, most of the mainstram media (MSM) is not reporting the story. Perhaps the MSM is taking a wait and see attitude. Or, perhaps they are waiting to jump on the bandwagon, one side or another. I'll let you be the judge on the merits of this case. Your comments and impressions on this court case will be appreciated.

World Net Daily: Jesus Christ trial begins Priest sued by atheist must prove Nazarene historically real figure

Viterbo, Italy, north of Rome, is the venue where Rev. Enrico Righi is being sued by his childhood friend, atheist Luigi Cascioli, for allegedly deceiving people into thinking Jesus was an actual historical figure. Previous story: Jesus Christ's existence going on trial this week
Yahoo News: Judge to Rule on Merit of Christ Case

VITERBO, Italy - An Italian judge heard arguments Friday on whether a small-town parish priest should stand trial for asserting that Jesus Christ existed. The priest's atheist accuser, Luigi Cascioli, says the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people for 2,000 years with a fable that Christ existed, and that the Rev. Enrico Righi violated two Italian laws by reasserting the claim. Slideshow: Italian Court May Decide Existence of Jesus. Previous Story: Italian Court Told to Prove Jesus Existed
Fox News: Italian Lawyers Asked to Prove Jesus Existed
ROME — Lawyers for a small-town parish priest have been ordered to appear in court next week after the Roman Catholic cleric was accused of unlawfully asserting what many people take for granted: that Jesus Christ existed. CNN: Italy court asks: Did Jesus exist?
CNN: Italy court asks: Did Jesus exist?

ROME, Italy (AP) -- Lawyers for a small-town parish priest have been ordered to appear in court next week after the Roman Catholic cleric was accused of unlawfully asserting what many people take for granted: that Jesus Christ existed.

Freedom of religion as discussed by Wikipedia: Freedom of religion and belief is a guarantee by a government for freedom of belief for individuals and freedom of worship for individuals and groups. It is considered by many to be a fundamental human right.

Currently it is a controversial topic in current American issues, due to recent events such as religous display on government owned land. Also, many believe Intelligent Design infringes upon religous freedom.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the 58 Member States of the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, at the Palais de Chaillot in Paris, France defines freedom of religion and belief as follows: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance."

Freedom of religion as a legal concept is related to but not identical with religious toleration, separation of church and state or laïcité.

One has to wonder if the case now being heard in Italy is legitimate with the lawyer hype and legal “hocus pocus” that appears in court briefs and articles.

Technorati tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, January 27, 2006


Reposted with permission from Rick Roberts, 760 KFMB AM radio, San Diego, California. For further information about Rick or his points of view, please visit Rick's Blog at 760 KFMB.

DISCLAIMER: The different points of views on the Rick Roberts Blog are not supported nor do they reflect the views and beliefs of the Bosun Locker or any entity affiliated with the Bosun Locker.

Phone: 1-800-760-KFMB (1-800-760-5362) Mon-Fri, 6am to 10am, PST.
Newsletter: Sign up for Rick's Newsletter NOW!

SPYGATE OR PROTECTING AMERICA? Posted By Rick January 26th, 2006


I haven’t talked about this issue for a while which is why I want to take your pulse on President Bush’s terrorist surveillance program…or as the liberal media likes to call it : BUSH’S Super Secret Domestic Spying/ Eavesdropping. How scary sounding!

I’ve actually heard liberals say you should be afraid of Bush because he is listening to every single phone call you make, and if your name sounds like “Al Qaeda” or “Jihad” you will be picked up by the secret Bush imperialist police!!!

Can you imagine living your life in that much fear? Lord.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called President Bush’s explanations for eavesdropping on domestic conversations without warrants “strange” and “far-fetched” Wednesday in blistering criticism ahead of the president’s State of the Union address.

“Obviously, I support tracking down terrorists. I think that’s our obligation. But I think it can be done in a lawful way,” Hillary spewed.


But Hillary went on to say…”Their argument that it’s rooted in the authority to go after al-Qaeda is far-fetched,” she said in an apparent reference to a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. The Bush administration has argued that the resolution gave the president authority to order such electronic surveillance as part of efforts to protect the nation from terrorists.

President Bush, defending the surveillance program, said Americans should take Osama bin Laden seriously when he says he’s going to attack again.

“When he says he’s going to hurt the American people again, or try to, he means it,” Bush told reporters at National Security Agency where the surveillance program is based. “I take it seriously, and the people of NSA take it seriously.”

So here is my question… How could any red blooded Al Qaeda fearing American be against this?
I mean seriously, do you think that our government is so effective and efficient that they are capable of spying on each and every one of us? Get real.

Has enough time gone by that the liberal media and scaredy types had an effect on you?By the way…coming up next month…there will be HEARINGS ON THE LEGALITY OF THIS? Sort of like the 911 commission.


Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

RNC Response to John Kerry's call for a filibuster of Judge Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court

"To even suggest a filibuster against a nominee as qualified as Judge Alito reflects a philosophy so out of touch that it's bordering on reckless. The judicial confirmation process, particularly one for the nation's highest court, should be insulated from such thoughtless bomb throwing in an effort to remain relevant. One can't help but wonder if the consummate candidate was for Judge Alito, before he was against him."

-Tracey Schmitt, RNC Press Secretary


"Sen. John Kerry Has Decided To Support A Filibuster To Block The Nomination Of Judge Samuel Alito To The Supreme Court, CNN's Congressional Correspondent Ed Henry Reported Thursday. Kerry, In Davos, Switzerland, To Attend The World Economic Forum, Was Marshaling Support In Phone Calls During The Day, Henry Said." ("Sen. Kerry Calls For Filibuster Of Alito,", 1/26/06)

Recent GQ Article Highlighted Dems' Frustration With Sen. John Kerry (D-MA):

"[A]s Another Frustrated Senior Democratic Strategist Puts It, 'Congressional Democrats Are Spending An Awful Lot Of Time Trying To Figure Out How To Maneuver Around [Kerry]. They Want Some New Ground. They Want The Basis For A New Conversation. And Kerry's Very Much Stuck Reverse. It Causes A Lot Of Resentment.'" (Michael Crowley, "John Kerry Has Fallen...And Keeps Getting Up," GQ Website, Http://Men.Style.Com/Gq/Features/Landing?Id=Content_4129, Accessed 1/18/06)

"Normally, He Would Be The Titular Head Of The Opposition, But He's Not, So We Have This Kind Of Ten-Headed Monster That's Out There," Says Mike McCurry, A Former Clinton Press Secretary And Senior Adviser To Kerry In The Late Days Of His Campaign. McCurry, Who Remains Fond Of Kerry, Says Of Him (And Of The Various Other Democrats Who Seem To Be Already Running For President): "People Have To Stop Freelancing. The Reason People Think Democrats Have Nothing To Say Is That We Have Fifty People Saying Fifty Different Things." (Michael Crowley, "John Kerry Has Fallen...And Keeps Getting Up," GQ Website,, Accessed 1/18/06)

Democrat Senators Who Have Ruled Out A Filibuster After Judge Samuel A. Alito's Confirmation Hearing:

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV): "He Struck Me As A Man Of His Word, And I Intend To Vote For Him." (Sen. Robert Byrd, Congressional Record, 1/26/06)

  • Byrd: "There Is Not Going To Be Any Filibuster Against Alito." (Sen. Robert Byrd, Congressional Record, 12/12/05, p. S13430)

Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD): "Said ... That He Will Vote For Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito, Making Him The Second Democrat To Support The Judge." (Mary Clare Jalonick, "Democratic Senator Tim Johnson Will Vote For Alito," The Associated Press, 1/26/05)

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA): "Because We Have Such A Full Plate Of Pressing Issues Before Congress, A Filibuster At This Time Would Be, In My View, Very Counterproductive. It Is Imperative That We Remain Focused On Creating The Tools New Orleans, Louisiana And The Gulf Coast Will Need To Rebuild. ... We Simply Cannot Afford To Bring The Senate To A Halt At A Time When We Need Its Action The Most." (Sen. Mary Landrieu, Press Release, 1/25/06)

  • Landrieu: "If Called To Vote For Cloture On Judge Alito's Nomination, I Will Vote Yes. I Will Continue To Consult With Constituents, Groups, Organizations And Colleagues To Decide On My Final Vote. I Do Think It Is Important That We Have An Up Or Down Vote." (Sen. Mary Landrieu, Press Release, 1/25/06)

Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR): "Another Of The [Gang Of 14], Democrat Sen. Mark Pryor Of Arkansas, Said He Does Not See Extraordinary Circumstances. 'He Hasn't Heard That There's Going To Be [A Filibuster],' Pryor Spokeswoman Lisa Ackerman Said. 'I Don't Think There's Interest In One.'" (Anne C. Mulkern, "Alito Sails Toward OK," The Denver Post, 1/13/06)

Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO): "I Do Not Intend To Join In Any Filibuster Against A Vote On Judge Alito." (Anne Imse, "Salazar: Thomas An 'Abomination,'" Rocky Mountain News [Denver, CO], 1/26/06)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): "I Do Not See The Likelihood Of A Filibuster To Be Very Candid With You. I Don't See Those Kinds Of Egregious Things Emerging That Would Justify A Filibuster. I Think When It Comes To Filibustering Supreme Court Appointment, You Really Have To Have Something Out There, Whether It's Gross Moral Turptitude Or Something That Comes To The Surface. Now This Is A Man That I Might Disagree With. That Doesn't Mean He Shouldn't Be On The Court." (CBS's "Face The Nation," 1/15/06)

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE): "In Addition To Mrs. Feinstein, Sen. Ben Nelson, Nebraska Democrat, Has Said He Sees No Justification For A Filibuster." (Charles Hurt, "Key Democrat Disavows Block Of Alito Vote," The Washington Times, 1/16/06)

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Bosun Op-Ed: The French Looking John Kerry and the Wacky left

Our French looking President wanna be, John Kerry while in Switzerland, using perhaps taxpayers dollars, called back the United States to drum up support for a filibuster? Is there something wrong with this picture? Leave it the Matt Drudge to shine a light on this former Swift Boat Officer in Charge making a fool out of himself, again.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist had to file a motion to cut of the debate ou Judge Alito's nomination as came as Flip Flop Kerry lobbied his Democratic colleagues to filibuster the Alito nomination. Well Flip Flop, you find yourself on the wrong side of history again. According to our anti war activist Kerry, "Judge Alito's confirmation would be an ideological coup on the Supreme Court..." And, you apparently put it in writing. Way to go, Johnnie. And his buddy, Chappaquiddick Teddy Kennedy apparently had this to say that he would support a filibuster, though he described it as "an uphill climb." Read the normally slanted CNN report on some very sad wacky left shenanigans. Kerry Calls For Le Filibuster' From Swiss
It gets even better, apparently Al Gore has taken his left leaning rant to Canada.

Former U.S. vice-president Al Gore has accused the oil industry of financially backing the Tories and their "ultra-conservative leader" to protect its stake in Alberta's lucrative oilsands. Canadians, Gore said, should vigilantly keep watch over prime minister-designate Stephen Harper because he has a pro-oil agenda and wants to pull out of the Kyoto accord -- an international agreement to combat climate change. Gore accuses big oil of bankrolling Tories Election laws only allow $1,000 corporate donations
And. "Give Peace a Chance," Jimmie Carter is calling for funding Palestinian government. Apparently Jimmie lead an 85-member international observer team organized by the 'National Democratic Institute' to monitor another election.

Carter "urged the international community to directly or indirectly fund the new Palestinian Government even though it will be led by an internationally-declared foreign terror organization. 'Elections were completely honest, completely fair ... without violence'
Way to go Jimmie, did Amy tell you to do this? I would suggest that you find a way to get Hamas into the international community and not call for the destruction of Israel. Try to get a round turn on international problems, Jimmie. Don't be an apologizer or appeaser. Another Dem trying to saddle up the wrong side of history, again. More on the Palestinian Election: Suicide Bombers' Mother Elected to Palestinian Parliament..., and Bush Says U.S. Won't Deal With Hamas...

Bosun's note on the distress flag. Out of respect for Old Glory, I have decided to illustrate the official Coast Guard approved distress flag rather than an upside down American flag. "The distress flag is a day signal only. It must be at least 3 x 3 feet with a black square and ball on an orange background. It is most distinctive when attached and waved on a paddle, boathook or flown from a mast."

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Computer Down-Time has informed us that between 4-4:15pm PCT on Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006, will not be accessable due to some technical glitch that they have to fix. Please come visit either before or after this time. I apologize for this inconvienence, and thank you for your patience.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Finally! Some Honesty on the Left!

They feel they must say this because the majority of Americans would find any other position unacceptable. Indeed, for most liberals, the thought that they really do not support the troops is unacceptable even to them.

Lest this argument be dismissed as an attack on leftist Americans' patriotism, let it be clear that leftists' patriotism is not the issue here. Their honesty is.

-Dennis Prager

There's been some heated exchanges since the war began, on what exactly it means to "support the troops". I'm still conflicted on it. I think some who opposed the war, do behave in a manner that is still supportive of the troops; but that the majority do more to harm and are contrary when they say "I support the troops, but not the mission." I think "supporting the troops" equates to supporting whatever means necessary to insure their victory as well as hoping for their safe return.

Certainly, dissent is a big part of what it means to be an American with the freedom to express your views. But what I find troublesome is in how people sometimes express their dissent. Is it really appropriate for Congressmen to call our President a liar? To compare a military detention center to Soviet Gulags, Nazi camps, and Pol Pot's regime? How is that "supporting the troops" for our Congressional leadership to bloviate irresponsible accusations out onto the Senate floor, in front of the whole world, where Dick Durbin's statements get top of the news billing on al Jazeera news for a couple of weeks, straight? And those on the Left take offense to be labeled "Defeatocrats" and defeatists? Do they honestly believe that what someone like Durbin said will insure victory in Iraq? That it helps the job of our troops by inflaming the Middle East with falsehoods against our own military? Protests before the war....fine. Public anti-war protests during wartime...that bothers me. Why? Because, like it or not, whether you admit honestly to it or continue deceiving your conscience to it, mass demonstrations and making a spectacle of your views in such a way as to gain worldwide attention, does aid and comfort the enemy. Let's be honest about it. How can it not? How can anyone honestly deny that Osama bin Laden's recent audio release does not sound a lot like Democratic talking points? I hear those on the Left warn, "Those who do not learn the lessons of history are bound to repeat them...". Apparently, those of Jane Fonda's generation and ilk came away from the Vietnam experience, learning all the wrong lessons. We know today, from the North Vietnamese leadership themselves, that they were defeated militarily; but they hung in there, because they saw that they were winning the propaganda war, thanks to OUR media, and the coverage of the anti-war movement. And what was the result of our pulling out of Vietnam and abandoning our allies in the South? Peace? Yeah, right. Peace activists really know the meaning of it, don't they? They never think about the actual consequences and domino effects of their actions: hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese incarcerated in camps, millions driven into exile; at least a couple of million Cambodians slaughtered by the Khmer Rouge.

Pacifism creates violence and wars as much as anything else ever has. The pacifists like to hold up images of babies killed from U.S. bombs. Where were they when Saddam for the past few decades caused the deaths of many times more in innocent men, women, and children lives? And if they had their way, how many more decades of the cruelty, the torture, and the murders would they have put up with? And after Saddam's reign...another generation of it, under his sons' rule? And there is no question that Saddam's regime sought possession of those weapons we failed to find. In a nuclear age, we cannot afford to wait until the threat becomes imminent. By then, it is too late to act.

Those against this war need to take a long hard stare at their conscience, and ask themselves how their actions are helping our soldiers, morale-wise and victory-wise.

What brought on this little rant was an article in today's Los Angeles Times, by Joel Stein, a man of the Left. his whole piece is chock full of things I disagree with; least he is honest with himself:

Warriors and wusses

I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.

I'm sure I'd like the troops. They seem gutsy, young and up for anything. If you're wandering into a recruiter's office and signing up for eight years of unknown danger, I want to hang with you in Vegas.

And I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away. Load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of.

But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.

Hat tip to Dennis Prager for talking about this article.

For opposing views on Prager's own article back in July of 2005, see:
Prager Lies Again
Why We All Hate the Troops at One Point or Other

Monday, January 23, 2006

Sunday, January 22, 2006

From the LA Times

January 18, 2006
by Max Boot:

The wiretaps shouldn't bug us

I CAN CERTAINLY understand the uproar over President Bush's flagrant abuses of civil liberties. This is America. What right does that fascist in the White House have to imprison Michael Moore, wiretap Nancy Pelosi and blackmail Howard Dean?

Wait. You mean he hasn't done those things? All he's done is intercept communications between terrorists abroad and their contacts in the U.S. without a court order? Talk about defining impeachable offenses downward.

If you want to see real abuses of civil liberties, read Geoffrey R. Stone's 2004 book "Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime from the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism." It tells how John Adams jailed a congressman for criticizing his "continual grasp for power." How Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and had the army arrest up to 38,000 civilians suspected of undermining the Union cause. How Woodrow Wilson imprisoned Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs for opposing U.S. entry into World War I. And how Franklin D. Roosevelt consigned 120,000 Japanese Americans to detention camps.

You can also read about how presidents from FDR to Richard Nixon used the FBI to spy on, and occasionally blackmail and harass, their political opponents. The Senate's Church Committee in 1976 blew the whistle on decades of misconduct, including FBI investigations of such nefarious characters as Eleanor Roosevelt, William O. Douglas, Barry Goldwater and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

All you have to do is recite this litany of excess to realize the absurdity of the cries of impeachment coming from the loonier precincts of the left. Muttering about "slippery slopes" isn't enough to convince most people that fascism is descending. If the president's critics want that part of the nation that doesn't read the Nation to believe that he's a threat to our freedom, they'd better do more than turn up the level of vituperation. They'd better find some real victims — the Eugene Debses and Martin Luther Kings of the war on terror.

Civil libertarians thought they were in luck when a college student in Massachusetts claimed that two FBI agents had shown up to interview him after he had requested a copy of Mao Tse-tung's Little Red Book. Ted Kennedy cited this incident to warn of the Patriot Act's "chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom." Relax, Senator. Free speech is safe. The student lied.

The anti-Bush brigade hasn't had any luck in turning up actual instances of abuse, despite no end of effort. The ACLU compiled a list of supposed victims of the Patriot Act. After examining each case, however, Sen. Dianne Feinstein — no friend of the administration — said "it does not appear that these charges rose to the level of 'abuse.' "

Which isn't to say there haven't been some mistakes in the war on terror. Khaled Masri, a naturalized German citizen born in Lebanon, was snatched by U.S. agents in Macedonia and interrogated about his suspected terrorist links. When no such connection was uncovered, he was released five months later, complaining of mistreatment. Or there's Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield, a Muslim convert who was arrested and held for a couple of weeks because his fingerprints seemed to match those found at the Madrid bombing.

Doubtless other innocent people have been detained or had their communications intercepted. No system is perfect. But there isn't a scintilla of evidence that these were anything but well-intentioned mistakes committed by conscientious public servants intent on stopping the next terrorist atrocity.

And although the government has occasionally blundered, it has also used its enhanced post-9/11 powers to keep us safe. The National Security Agency's warrantless wiretaps, which have generated so much controversy, helped catch, among others, a naturalized American citizen named Iyman Faris who pleaded guilty to being part of an Al Qaeda plot to bring down the Brooklyn Bridge.

No wonder polls show that most people continue to support Bush's handling of the war on terrorism. As long as federal surveillance remains targeted on the country's enemies, not on the president's, the public will continue to yawn at hyperbolic criticisms of the commander in chief.

Saturday, January 21, 2006

I'm So Excited About Sunday Night!

I just received an e-mail from Kevin over at the Pundit Review. Wow! They have been extended to 2 hours. This is wonderful. I love their radio program, Pundit Review Radio, Sunday night at 9pm EST on Boston’s Talk Station WRKO. As always, you can stream the show live and participate by calling 877-469-4322.

There are so many topics to cover Sunday night. Of course there will be Hillary's "plantation" performance, both pro and con, and NO Mayor's "chocolate city" remarks.

There will be some discussion about illegal aliens, because the second person has been murdered by an one who was "caught and released." Our ICE program need not exists if this what we are to look forward to as justice.

Kevin and Gregg are excellent on the topic of media bias. This weekend, we have some ammunition from none other than Peggy Noonan! Do not miss this one.

Last, but not least, in the second hour there will a discussion of the new state legislation that declares if you are a success, we do not want your jobs, your tax revenue, or your business. Of what do I speak? Tune in and find out.

To read more about the program, please go to Pundit Review here. Thank you, and I hope to hear you on the air!

Friday, January 20, 2006

Who Said That - Liberal or Terrorist

Reposted with permission from Rick Roberts, 760 KFMB AM radio, San Diego, California. For further information about Rick or his points of view, please visit Rick's Blog at 760 KFMB.

DISCLAIMER: The different points of views on the Rick Roberts Blog are not supported nor do they reflect the views and beliefs of the Bosun Locker or any entity affiliated with the Bosun Locker.

Phone: 1-800-760-KFMB (1-800-760-5362) Mon-Fri, 6am to 10am, PST.
Newsletter: Sign up for Rick's Newsletter NOW!

Posted By Rick January 20th, 2006

The leadership in the Democrat Party must have sent their anti-America, anti-Bush, anti-war on terror talking points to Usama bin Laden, or he’s just listening to and agreeing with their rhetoric.

Regardless, it’s scary.

So let’s play…Who Said That…a Liberal, or a Terrorist. See if you can tell the difference.

1… “The war against America and its allies will not be confined to Iraq. Iraq has become a magnet for attracting and training talented fighters.”

2… “The truth is, the administration’s mishandling of the war in Iraq has made us less safe, and Iraq risks becoming what it was not before the war: a training ground for terrorists.”

3…”Iraq is raging with no let-up, and operations in Afghanistan are escalating in our favor, and Pentagon figures show the number of dead and wounded is increasing not to mention the massive material loss.”

4…”I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for… The idea that we are going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong.”

5…”There is no problem in this solution, but it will prevent hundreds of billions from going to influential people and warlords in America — those who supported Bush’s electoral campaign. And from this, we can understand Bush and his gang’s insistence on continuing the war,”

6“This war is a war for oil and the power and prestige of US capitalism. It will be paid for with the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqis and potentially thousands of US troops, and by slashing funding for vital social services in the US such as education and health care.”

7 “George W. Bush is preventing entire nations from bidding on contracts in Iraq so his campaign contributors can continue to overcharge the American taxpayers.”

8 ________says he would end the “war-profiteering.”

9 “The policy in Iraq of putting the corporate special interests first is unacceptable.”

10. __________said the president is “more concerned about the success of Halliburton than having a success strategy in Iraq.”

11…“And there is no reason young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not…”

Here are the answers. How did you do in distinguishing between the liberal and the terrorist? It’s hard to tell the difference isn’t it.

1. Usama bin Laden

2. Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader

3. Bin Laden


5. Usama bin Laden

6. The Socialist Party in America

7-10 ALL THE LIBERALS AGREEING WITH THE SOCIALISTS AND TERRORIST BIN LADEN - Howard Dean, John Edwards, Dick Gephardt, and Wesley Clark



“We know that the majority of your people want this war to end and opinion polls show the Americans do not want to fight the Muslims on Muslim land, nor do they want Muslims to fight them on their land,” -BIN LADEN

“You know Iraq was no threat to the United States of America until we invaded. I mean they’re not even a threat to the United States of America. Iraq was not involved in 9-11, Iraq was not a terrorist state. But now that we have decimated the country, the borders are open, freedom fighters from other countries are going in, and they [American troops] have created more terrorism by going to an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country” - Cindy Sheehan

“Bush tried to ignore the polls that demanded that he end the war in Iraq,” -BIN LADEN

“If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime–Pol Pot or others–that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.” – DICK DURBIN

“I believe that the president’s leadership in the actions taken in Iraq demonstrate an incompetence in terms of knowledge, judgment and experience in making the decisions that would have been necessary to truly accomplish the mission without the deaths to our troops and the cost to our taxpayers.” - NANCY PELOSI

“The reckless abuse of power by George Bush and his right-wing allies is an imminent danger to the nation and must be stopped. The Bush Administration has “poisoned the air and water” – Ted Kennedy quotes in a fund raiser letter for the dems

“There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing (going to war in Iraq) was a fraud.” -( Ted KENNEDY)

“No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says, we’re here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people . . . support your revolution,” (Belafonte)

Thursday, January 19, 2006

So You Want to Deal, OBL? Die!

There has been a tape released today, presumably, threatening another attack but offering a truce. Has he been reading the Senate's playbook? Why do I not say Republican or Democrat? Does it matter, really?

When this country is under attack, we are all Americans. It comes down to those of us whom are willing to stand up to preserve it, and those who will not. I do not want to hear from those who will not.

I will not call them names, as of yet. I do not desire to be bothered by them. Just as long as they do not give aid and comfort to the enemy...

Steve Emerson, a counterterrorism expert and Executive Director of the Investigative Project, was on MSNBC this morning. Here is the video (Hat tip to Andrew Cochran) and transcript, property of Andrew Cochran.

My personal belief is that Zawahiri is either hiding or dead. Why is he not out making statements to dispute that the USA got him? Whichever the fact, another one is that he is afraid. He is very afraid. Good! He had better be. Can he still contact anyone? Who can he trust? So many questions unanswered.

Why, after over a year in hiding, does al Jazeera suddenly put up a video that was probably made in early December? Was it not January 2006 when we declared OBL dead in Iran? Could it be to cover the facts of the success of USA strikes in Pakistan? Hmm...

Of Minutes, Murtha, and Mudville

I was going to give my analysis of last Sunday's Murtha segment on 60 Minutes, Sunday; but why bother when The Mudville Gazette has already done it so much better?

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit. (Check out the link trail).

Oh, and don't forget to check this one out:

Funny that Representative Murtha didn't pull that one out of his pocket as well, when he read the soldier letter to Mike Wallace.

Patriotic Mom comments.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

GOP House Party to Support the President of the United States

Attached is an email that I received from Republican National Committee (RNC). In the email, Michael DuHaime, RNC, Political Director, invites each one of us to host a State of the Union House Party with our friends. I suggest that you follow the links in the email and establish your own State of the Union House Party on Tuesday, January 31st. The GOP State of the Union House Party Program is a grassroots tool that brings together like minded people who support the President and the Republican ticket. Parties all across the nation can be easily organized and coordinated at the GOP website Folks, we are living in exciting times and are part of living history. Let us celebrate being on "the right side of history."

Dear Bosun,

Last week, Chairman Ken Mehlman e-mailed you inviting you to host your own State of the Union House Party on the evening of Tuesday, January 31st. You may have visited here to learn more, or even taken the first steps towards signing up and creating your party. Now, please take the next step and send out your invitations.

Setting up your party is now easier than ever. With just one click, you'll be all set to create and preview your party - the whole process takes two minutes or less. We even take the hassle out of sending invitations, with lists of Republicans near you to invite. You can even choose to hold your party at a local restaurant or other venue. Don't wait - create your party today.

A State of the Union House Party is a great way to share one of the most important political speeches of the year with your friends and neighbors. As a party host, we'll also send you a special GOP House Party Packet with a letter from Chairman Mehlman and unique ways to get involved in 2006. Set up your party today - only parties registered in the next six days will receive the GOP House Party Packet!

Now that you've had some time to consider Chairman Mehlman's invitation, I hope you'll take the next step and host a party. It's easy, it's fun, and it's vital to victory in 2006. Thank you for your continued support.


Michael DuHaime
RNC Political Director

P.S. Creating a party is just a click away. Don't miss this chance to celebrate President Bush's State of the Union Address with your friends and neighbors.

Devoted Husband, Loving Father....AND....a Great President

"What can you say about a man, who on Mother's Day sends flowers to his mother-in-law, with a note thanking her for making him the happiest man on Earth?"- Nancy Reagan

Many great posts can be found over at Mike's America, commemorating the 25th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's first inauguration. I'll leave it to others to point out his great accomplishments as our 40th President. What I'd like to do, is just make a brief mention of him as devout family man.

One of the things that has always stood out, is his devotion to his 2nd wife, Nancy Reagan. And in the twilight of his years, as his mind faded into oblivion, Nancy did not abandon him, but remained absolutely devoted to her husband, through his sickness as she had in his health, to the end of his days. When he learned of his illness, Ronald Reagan expressed the following:

"I have recently been told that I am one of the millions of Americans who will be afflicted with Alzheimer's disease... I only wish there was some way I could spare Nancy from this painful experience."

10 years, she suffered alongside him. This is what Nancy said, upon the passing of this great leader, and loving husband:

"If a death can be peaceful and lovely, that one was. And when it came down to what we knew was the end, and I was on one side of the bed with Ron, and Patty was on the other side, and Ronnie all of a sudden turned his head and looked at me and opened his eyes and just looked … Well, what a gift he gave me at that point... I learned a lot from Ronnie, while he was sick — a lot. I learned patience. I learned how to accept something that was given to you, and how to die."- ABC News

It's reported that throughout their life together, they always walked hand in hand; and often left love notes for one another. As a press secretary put it, "They never took each other for granted. They never stopped courting."

Ronald Reagan seemed to possess the same kind of charm, likeability, and eloquence in his writings as he did in his public speaking. I wanted to find a love letter to share with you. The following, is a favorite of mine...not to Nancy, but to his son, Michael. A father's loving advice to his son. It is the first letter that Ronald Reagan wrote to Michael Reagan just before the latter was to be married.

Dear Mike:

You've heard all the jokes that have been rousted around by all the "unhappy marrieds" and cynics. Now, in case no one has suggested it, there is another viewpoint. You have entered into the most meaningful relationship there is in all human life. It can be whatever you decide to make it.

Some men feel their masculinity can only be proven if they play out in their own life all the locker-room stories, smugly confident that what a wife doesn't know won't hurt her. The truth is, somehow, way down inside, without her ever finding lipstick on the collar or catching a man in the flimsy excuse of where he was till three a.m., a wife does know, and with that knowing, some of the magic of this relationship disappears. There are more men griping about marriage who kicked the whole thing away themselves than there can ever be wives deserving of blame.

There is an old law of physics that you can only get out of a thing as much as you put in it. The man who puts into the marriage only half of what he owns will get that out. Sure, there will be moments when you will see someone or think back on an earlier time and you will be challenged to see if you can still make the grade, but let me tell you how really great is the challenge of proving your masculinity and charm with one woman for the rest of your life. Any man can find a twerp here and there who will go along with cheating, and it doesn't take all that much manhood. It does take quite a man to remain attractive and to be loved by a woman who has heard him snore, seen him unshaven, tended him while he was sick, and washed his dirty underwear. Do that and keep her still feeling a warm glow and you will know some very beautiful music.

If you truly love a girl, you shouldn't ever want her to feel, when she sees you greet a secretary or a girl you both know, that humiliation of wondering if she was someone who caused you to be late coming home, nor should you want any other woman to be able to meet your wife and know she was smiling behind her eyes as she looked at her, the woman you love, remembering this was the woman you rejected even momentarily for her favors.

Mike, you know better than many what an unhappy home is and what it can do to others. Now you have a chance to make it come out the way it should. There is no greater happiness for a man than approaching a door at the end of a day knowing someone on the other side of that door is waiting for the sound of his footsteps.

Love, Dad.

P.S. You'll never get in trouble if you say "I love you" at least once a day.

Reagan Library for photos.
About marriage on Ronald and Nancy, for quotes.

Mikulski Urges Sec. Rice to Honor Slain Maryland Serviceman, Extradite Convicted Killer

HAT TIP TO: MICHAEL YON for alerting us in regards to Senators Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) efforts to extradite of convicted killer Mohammed Ali Hamadi to the United States.

Although I am not always in agreement with Senator Mikulski, it appears that she is right on the button with this endeavor. The two good senators, Mikulski and DeMint sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, on January 10, 2006, urging Sec Rice to formally request that the Government of Lebanon immediately arrest and extradite the cold-blooded murder and career terrorist, Mohammed Ali Hamadi, to the United States. Mohammed Ali Hamadi has sought refuge in Lebanon since being released from German custody ....... Mohammed Ali Hamadi brutally murdered a United States Navy diver, Robert Dean Stethem ( in 1985 )..... because he was an American serviceman. Mohammed Ali Hamadi was captured in 1987 and sentenced to life imprisonment (with the possibility of parole in 15 years) in 1989.

Source: Mikulski and DeMint's letter to Sec. Rice

When Mohammed Ali Hamadi was originally released in December, The Bosun Locker, along with several other bloggers and media outlets alerted the public to the story. Since then the story has slipped from the mainstream media and almost been forgotten if it were not for Michael Yon. I would like to commend Michael for bring it back to the forefront and also commend Senators Mikulski and DeMint for their efforts in getting Hamadi rearrested and extradited to the United States.

Here is the background of Hamadi's release and an interesting timeline: On November 25, 2005, Susanne Osthoff and her driver were take hostage in Iraq's Sunni Triangle. On November 30th, 2005, German leader, Merkel, stamped her mark on German foreign policy and vowed that her government will "not let ourselves be blackmailed" by militants who kidnapped Osthoff and her driver. It was odd that Merkel would publicly make such a big fuss and also indicate her solidarity to the United States during that same speech.

Then, a few days later (about the December 15th, the exact date was not clear) Germany quietly released Hezbollah member, Mohammed Ali Hamadi, jailed for life for the murder of a US Navy diver, disregarding Washington's desire that he be extradited or remain behind bars. Eva Schmeirer, a spokeswoman for Germany's Justice Ministry (perhaps a misnomer) released a statement that, "He served his term...." The German government said there was no link between Mohammad Ali Hamadi's release and that of German hostage, Osthoff, who was released on December 18th.

Source: The Scotsman and International Herald Tribune.

A good terrorism reference link at The Scotsman that may provide additional topics of interest is: International terrorism

Now for some information that the mainstream media has so far refused to explore and that our legistative branch may want to look into:

Mohammed Ali Hamadi's brother, Abbas Hamadi, was arrested in Germany in 1987 and charged with helping to kidnap two German businessmen in a bid to use them as bargaining chips for Mohammed Hamadi's freedom. He was also a suspect in the 1985 terrorist act. Abbas was released in 1993 after serving half of his sentence. At the time, German news media reported, that he was let go as part of a deal between the German government and Hezbollah to release two other Germans held hostage in Lebanon. But, German officials denied that assertion just like they deny it today.

Source: Security Watch

Mohammed Ali Hamadi's release in December sounds eerily similar to the release of his brother, Abbas', release in 1993. However, only Merkel, German intelligence, Hamadi, and Hezbollah know for sure what happened and obviously none of them are talking about it.

I also find it odd that when Osthoff was released, she issued a press release through Al-Jazeera praising her captors:

"They said we don't want money ... Maybe we want from Germany ... hospitals and schools in the Sunni triangle [area northwest of Baghdad], and they would like to get money in the form of humanitarian aid ... She described her captors as "poor people" and said that she "cannot blame them for kidnapping her, as they cannot enter [Baghdad's heavily fortified] Green Zone to kidnap Americans ... Al-Jazeera went on to say that Osthoff and Shalid al-Shimani, her Iraqi driver, were seized on 25 November in the northwestern Nineveh province of Iraq. She was freed on 18 December, as was her driver."

Source: Al-Jazeera

Now according the United Press International, Osthoff may also be tied to Federal Intelligence Service of Germany Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND). That may explain why her release and Hamadi's release were so quick. According to UPI, there may have been a ransom paid to gain the release of Osthoff. If Merkel and her German government have sold their souls to Hezbollah or another terrorist organization, so to speak, as did some in the German business community and government officials did in the Oil for Food scandal in Saddam's Iraq, there will undoubtedly be more problems to deal with in the future. Of course, this is speculation and based on an unsubstantiated article in United Press International and on January 9th, Middle East Times on January 10th, and now entering the blogosphere for debate:

Susanne Osthoff, the German archeologist kidnapped by Iraqi gunmen on Nov. 25 and released before Christmas was connected with BND, and had helped arrange a meeting with a top member of the terrorist organization al-Qaida, possibly Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi himself, according to well informed German sources Sunday. Source: UPI International Intelligence, Corridors of Power: The lady was a spy, By ROLAND FLAMINI, UPI Chief International Correspondent.

Let get back on track with the career terrorist, Hamadi, and leave Osthoff until more information is available.

While discussing the Hamadi brothers we also need to also look at the Hezbollah terrorist organization and one of its main players, Imad Fayez Mugniyah. Mugniyah has apparently been active on the terrorism circuit for the past 20 years. According to Laura Mansfield's Notebook, America's Truth Forum, there appears to be striking similarities between the terrorism in the past 20 years at the hands of Mugniyah and the practices of the present-day terrorist activities in Iraq. Mugniyah has been tied to kidnappings and bombings throughout the world over the past two decades, including the following:

    • April 18, 1983 bombing of the United States embassy in Beirut, which killed 63 people including 17 Americans
    • October 23, 1983 simultaneous truck bombings against the French paratroopers and US Marine killing 58 French soldiers and 241 Marines.
    • September 20, 1984, he attacked the US embassy annex building.
    • Linked to the numerous kidnappings of Westerners in Beirut through the 1980s –
      some were killed, some by beheading, and a few were eventually released
    • March 17, 1992 bombings of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires Argentina, which killed 29
    • July 1994 bombing of the AMIA cultural building in in Buenos Aires Argentina, killing 86 people
    • Orchestrated the 2000 abductions of three Israeli soldiers in the southern part of Lebanon
    • Abduction of Israeli Colonel Elchanan Tenenbaum. Source: Laura Mansfield

You may also want to read an interesting two-part series about Hezbollah, "In the Party of God," written by New Yorker Reporter at Large, Jeffrey Goldsberg, published in the New Yorker in October 2002:

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Alito's Hearings: The Real Scoop on Pundit Review

Are you interested in finding out what really happened at the hearings for Justice Alito? Well, here is the latest scoop by the people that were actually there. Tune in at 9pm EST. The links will help you streamline, and it is free!
Tonight on Pundit Review Radio we will close the loop on the Alito confirmation hearings. We will also talk to a blogger who was invited by the Republican National Committee to attend the hearings and cover them live. Matt Margolis, founder of Blogs for Bush and GOP Bloggers will join us to discuss this interesting strategy of inviting bloggers and their readers to have a first hand account of the hearings. What else is behind this strategy? A desire to go over the heads of the dreaded MSM? We’ll find out. Is there any doubt that the political elites understand the importance/impact of blogs?

Pundit Review Radio
Sunday Evenings, 9pm est
Streaming live at
Call us toll free at 877-469-4322

Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin & Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. This unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening at 9pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Leader.
Please give them a call with your questions, statements, recommendations, etc. Remember to be polite. Thank you, and have a great weekend!

Think the NY Times Will Ever Publish Stories on Our War Heroes?

If nothing else, read about his background and how he feels toward the United States. -Wordsmith

January 04, 2006

Soldier awarded Silver Star

By William Cole
The Honolulu Advertiser

CAMP H.M. SMITH — Even as Master Sgt. Suran Sar charged multiple enemy firing at him in the mountains of Afghanistan, he knew it wasn’t his turn to die. But he came within a hairbreadth. As Sar burst into a windowless wood-and-earthen mountain shelter near the Pakistan border, an enemy fighter fired a burst from his AK-47 at point-blank range.

Two of the bullets missed. A third creased Sar’s Kevlar helmet and snapped his chin strap. Sar won’t give the specifics of what happened next, but the Army Special Forces soldier collected a handful of firearms — most of which weren’t given voluntarily. And yesterday a Silver Star was pinned on Sar’s chest.

Recalling the March 5 firefight, Sar said: “At that point, I knew I’m coming home.” He added, “I already know, if I’m supposed to go, I do believe, I’m Buddhist, and if I’m supposed to go, I’ll go.”
-Marco Garcia, AP photo

Sar, who is Cambodian and has been a U.S. citizen since 1986, that day flanked a ridge and surprised other militants who had his team pinned down, and is credited with saving the lives of fellow service members with Operational Detachment Alpha 732.

Yesterday’s recognition was the latest remarkable turn for the humble man who is based at Camp Smith but grew up under the murderous regime of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

“He didn’t want this,” Army Brig. Gen. David P. Fridovich, commander of Special Operations Command-Pacific, said of the ceremony attended by more than 100 command members and local media.

The attention was not intended to embarrass Sar, 39, which it did. Rather, it was to recognize his achievements and “what he has given back to the nation,” Fridovich said.

“You’ve already given us so much more in return than we could ever repay you,” Fridovich said.

Bronze Star in works

The Silver Star is the Defense Department’s fourth-highest award. Sar additionally received a Meritorious Service Medal, and a Bronze Star with “V” for valor also is in the works for the ‘Ewa Beach man’s involvement in another firefight in April.

The Army has awarded 37 silver Stars for Afghanistan service since the war started in 2001.

Thirteen other troops from the joint-service command also received medals for their involvement in efforts, such as Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines.

About 250 troops representing the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps are assigned to Special Operations Command-Pacific at Camp Smith. Of those, about a dozen are deployed to the Philippines for anti-terrorism and humanitarian relief efforts.

Sar has been based out of Oahu since September. He was with the 7th Special Forces Group and on his second deployment to Afghanistan over the winter and spring, and he fought in the first Gulf War.

Sar said he doesn’t see himself as a hero. A hero to him is the weapons sergeant who was part of his team and was killed in Afghanistan in June. The soldier was a fellow immigrant; his father was from Mexico.

“The hardest thing I ever have to face was facing his mom, and that’s what I wear (these medals) for,” Sar said.

What happened March 5

The March 5 mission was to check out a suspected shelter on a ridge in Paktika province, a tribal and lawless area that locals call Waziristan where official boundaries between Afghanistan and Pakistan aren’t recognized.

As two Black Hawk helicopters landed early that winter morning, they came under small-arms fire. Sar bounded toward the shelter on the wooded ridge, at an elevation of 9,000 feet. Some enemy fighters dropped their weapons. Others did not. Altogether, there were at least 15 enemy forces.

As Sar entered the shelter, with a medic behind him, his helmet was struck by the bullet.

“It feels like somebody hit me with a small hammer,” Sar said, adding that he quickly found out he was OK.

The second team of six special operations troops was pinned down, and Sar was able to flank the ridge and catch enemy fighters by surprise, providing relief for his team. One other U.S. service member received a graze to the leg.

Hard life in Cambodia

Sar grew up in Cambodia under the oppression of the Khmer Rouge, which separated his family members by age, he said. His father was prosecuted by the Khmer Rouge and Vietnamese, and his older brother was executed by the Vietnamese.

Speaking in a quiet voice, Sar said his mom and two little brothers died of starvation.

He came to the United States in 1981, became a U.S. citizen five years later and has been in the Army for 20 years — the past 15 in Special Forces.

“I tell you, I love this country more than my birthplace,” Sar said. “I came from Cambodia and I lost (a lot) of my family there, and nobody here can tell me what it’s like, the loss of freedom. ... This country gave me so much, and this is a small price to pay, the long deployments away from home.”

Hat Tip: PebblePie.