Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Bolton must be confirmed

Yes, I know I have been AWOL. But, I am back now and will have much to say about the current situations and issues that we face now.

I will be starting with the Bolton nomination as the US Ambassador to the UN. I have been a supporter of Mr.Bolton since his name was first whispered as a possible selection for the post. All you need to do is look through my archives to see this. Mr. Bolton has more than proved his effectiveness. David Limbaugh has some observations in his article which supports the Bolton nomination.
"Liberals don't like it one bit that Bolton sees his role as vigorously representing the national interests of the United States, just as every other U.N. ambassador advocates the positions of his own country. They don't support Bolton's efforts to reform the United Nations, a corrupt organization that has consistently mistreated the United States and made a mockery of human rights -- a cause it purports to champion. They cringe when Bolton exposes U.N. hypocrisy, such as when he pointedly challenged Louise Arbour, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, on his threat to charge Israeli leaders with war crimes.
They don't like Bolton's unambiguous defense of Israel's actions in response to Hezbollah's unprovoked attacks, in which they killed and kidnapped Israeli soldiers and shot missiles indiscriminately into Israeli civilian populations. They resent Bolton's rejection of the U.N.'s moral perversion in giving the terrorists a pass for their atrocities and portraying Israeli acts of self-defense as war crimes. "
I guess those on the left, who thin the UN is the answer to all the world's ills, do not like some one that is willing to point out the Emporer is naked. When will the UN commissioner of human rights condemn terrorist groups? Not in his lifetime you can bet on that. For those who whine that other countries do not think Mr. Bolton is not doing a good job, ask me if I care what they think. No doubt they would prefer a panty waisted roll over for an ambassador.

Mr. Prager ends his article with this:
"As Bolton knows, it's hard to negotiate with savages of that mindset. That's why in an interview with Fox News' Brit Hume, Bolton dismissed Syria's requests for dialogue with the United States. Bolton told Brit, "Syria doesn't need dialogue to know what they need to do. They need to lean on Hezbollah to get them to release the two captured Israeli soldiers and stop the launch of rockets against innocent Israeli civilians." Exactly.
To put it bluntly, Republicans support Bolton's nomination precisely because of his clarity of thought and speech -- and his unapologetic representation of America's interests. Democrats oppose him because they sympathize with the negative view of Bolton held by foreign envoys who have anything but the best interests of the United States in mind.
If it bothers you that we have a staunch defender of America's interests serving as our ambassador to the United Nations and believe, instead, that we should routinely subordinate our interests to other nations openly hostile to us and contemptuous of the very idea of human rights, then you, too, should join the liberal chorus against confirmation of this fine public servant."
Mr.Bolton's nomination should be confirmed without delay. Natuarlly, the dems, lefists and terroist supporters, ass kissers and appeasers will try and filibuster this nomination. I hope that their attmpts will be in vain. Write or e-mail your Senator demanding that Mr. Bolton be confirmed. - Sailor

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Is Rat Jack Murtha in Trouble at Home?

Is the left's favorite Marine in trouble at home? Could be Rat Jack Murtha may have a fight on his hands to keep his seat in Congress. Murtha's recent comments about the US being the biggest threat to peace and his totally asinine comments on the redeployment of US forces to Okinawa, have some people thinking it may be time for Rat Jack to be voted out of office. Robert Novak has some insights in his recent column.

"Murtha's opposition to the war has never been the real issue. His assertion that the U.S. is the greatest danger to world peace is only the most recent and perhaps most striking example of his potentially dangerous venture into the great left. Even more offensive were his statements condemning Marines who allegedly participated in a massacre in Iraq, which gave no regard to the presumption of innocence or the existence of evidence (the Marines involved maintain their innocence).

In fact, by stating that he had high-level confirmation that a massacre occurred, Murtha may have set a trap for himself. As the court martial begins, he is likely to be subpoenaed in the pre-trial hearings to testify to allegations of inappropriate command influence on the trial. He risks having his high-level sources of information exposed, or exposed as flimsy -- or even non-existent."

One of the defense lawyers in the Marine case have already stated they will call Murtha as a witness. Just a little note here to Rat Jack, the people of Okinawa will not welcome more US forces as Rat Jack claimed. For years now, these folks have been demanding a reduction in US forces. One other thing, Okinawa is over 4000 miles from Iraq. Looks like Rat Jack has forgotten his logistics. - Sailor

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

New York Times: Grey Lady Traitor

Doc Farmer weighs in on the NY Times and their callous disregard for the safety of Americans, all in the quest to advance their political agenda. It is high time the Department of Justice got off their collective asses and openned up an investigation into this affair. - Sailor

New York Times: Grey Lady Traitor

Written by Doc Farmer
Wednesday, June 28, 2006

I have a very
simple question. Has American gone completely insane?

No, I'm not posing this query because of the latest episodes of "The Jerry Springer Show," although I still marvel at the number of trailer parks our great nation must have supplying the "guests" on that program.

On September 11, 2001, America was attacked in a brutal and cowardly manner by 19 evil men following another evil man (Usama bin Laden) and an evil ideology (Islamofascism). While UBL had declared war on America years before, it took this abomination to finally get America to sit up and take this threat seriously. George W. Bush took immediate action and followed terrorists' declaration of war with one of his own. Not a war against Usama, or his followers, or even Al Qaeda, but a war against terrorism itself.

This is a World War. Whether Congress has or hasn't "declared"
war in the constitutional manner, it have given its vocal, and repeated, approval to this war. It is World War IV (World War III was the "cold" war, which Reagan won). America has, with its allies, won every World War in history. However, this may be the first World War that America could conceivably lose. Not because of our lack of military might. Not because our enemies are right, either morally or ethically. Not because our president, or this administration, or our brave troops, are lacking in will or determination.

No, we may well lose this war because of the New York Times.

The Grey Lady, as the New York Times has been called in the past, is a traitor. Its reporters are traitors. Its editors are traitors. Its publisher is a traitor.

Please note that I do not use this term lightly. I am speaking strictly from a legal and
constitutional basis. The New York Times is purposefully, willfully, and with malice aforethought, providing aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war.


Why is the New York Times doing this? Why is it being aided and abetted by other members of the so-called "mainstream" media? Why is it being defended by politicians, pundits, and the putrid pukes of lib/dem/soc/commie-dom? What possible gain could the Times garner from America's defeat?

Probably the only thing about which the Times cares: the defeat of Bush. Lord knows, the newspaper has been doing everything possible to undermine the president, this administration, and the political party/ideology to which they belong. The so-called "right," or
rep/con/tairs as I prefer to call them. For that, the paper misuses the freedoms of this great nation in order to ensure that everyone potentially loses those freedoms.

Including, ironically, itselves.

The editors never seem to consider that, however. Do they truly believe that "freedom of the press" (or any other freedoms, for that matter) would still apply to them should Islamofascism win this war? Would the New York Times still exist, say, if Nazi fascism had won the day over six decades ago?

This is the dichotomy of a free press controlled by a lib/dem/soc/commie ideology. The Constitution, which the MSM hide behind no matter what crime they commit, would be the first thing destroyed if America loses World War IV. Free speech for the media would be gone, just as it is now for rep/con/tairs who speak up against the media's abuse. Oh, we're not jailed, but we are
vilified, ridiculed, and (wherever possible) ruined and defamed by the lib/dem/soc/commie press. Don't believe me? Ask Ann Coulter (Hubba! Hubba!), who is constantly slandered, libeled, misquoted, importuned, and attacked by her political, immoral, and unethical opponents. Luckily, Miss Coulter (Hubba!²) is quite able--and ever so willing--to defend herself from this collection of liars and misanthropes (or would they be misgynothropes in this case?).

Can we as a nation defend ourselves from the dangers created by a press hell-bent on our nation's destruction?

Well, putting aside the unfortunate irony that the New York Times can take every opportunity to demolish this country and all it stands for, while Americans cannot burn the New York Times building to the ground, crush the ashes and salt the
earth so that nothing may ever grow there again, then take the staff and publishers of said media monument (more a tabloid turd, actually) and do to them what Al Zarqawi did to Nick Berg, there are a limited number of options available to us.

Option One: Arrest Arthur Sulzberger Jr., Janet L. Robinson, Leonard P. Forman, the editors and (ir)responsible reporters involved in this story on the charges of Treason, aiding and abetting terrorism, sedition, jay-walking, bad breath, chewing their own toenails, farting in elevators, and anything else the government can throw at these bastards. Don't just throw the book at these toe-rags, dump an entire law library on their heads. Sadly, this will never happen. Why? Because the federal government in general, and the Bush administration in particular, don't have the testicular fortitude necessary to do the right thing. Dubya will gladly defend this nation abroad, but for some reason he
(and every president since Lincoln) doesn't believe it is right to bring traitors to task for their treason. Which is why Hanoi Jane, Hanoi John, Baghdad Jim, and Slick Willie are still walking the streets. Note to administration: First Amendment protections do not extend to illegal acts. Please try to keep this in mind.

Option Two: Boycott the New York Times and all of its other affiliated newspapers and broadcasters (the list is at the end of this article). Also, contact all of its advertisers and tell them what you think of their financial support of traitors. Granted, the NYT has had dropping circulation (even when it fakes its own numbers), but it has been a gradual decline. I think the words "screaming plummet" would
be a nicer outcome.

Option Three: File a class action suit against the New York Times Company for ten times its asset base. However, this option includes the use of effing lawyers, who will get 33% of the take, so it's not really the most preferred alternative. Unless, of course, we figure out a way to get rid of the lawyers right after the verdict, that is. Hmmmmm.

Option Four: Invade the New York Times Building with a well trained and heavily armed strike force, make the entire staff strip naked, and march them down the middle of West 43rd Street to the catcalls and ridicule of as many rep/con/tairs as can be bussed in, until they are locked in stocks outside the mayor's office and pelted with rotting vegetables, sprayed with eau de skunk, injected with the
Ebola virus, and forced to watch Paulie Shore movies until their eyes explode. (Hyperbolic? Yes. But as you might have guessed, this is a personal favorite....)

Option Five: All of the above.

Sounds extreme? Oh, it is, absolutely. But if it comes to a choice between their freedom to destroy the Constitution, the Nation, and our way of life, or our freedom to preserve the Constitution, the nation, and our way of life, I choose the latter.

Oh, one more thing to consider. If the mainstream media gets their way, and they force America to lose this war as they forced it to lose in Vietnam, you can pretty much be assured that ALL of America will face Option Four. Including the mainstream media.


Want to take Option Two? Here are the holdings of the New York Times Company:

The New York Times (New York, NY)
The Boston Globe (Boston, MA)
The Courier (Houma, LA)
The Daily Comet (Thibodaux, LA)
The Dispatch (Lexington, NC)
The Gadsden Times (Gadsden, AL)
The Gainesville Sun (Gainesville, FL)
International Herald Tribune (Global)
The Ledger (Lakeland, FL)
The Press Democrat (Santa Rosa, CA)
Petaluma Argus-Courier
(Petaluma, CA)
Sarasota Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, FL)
Spartanburg Herald-Journal (Spartanburg, SC)
Star-Banner (Ocala, FL)
TimesDaily (Florence, AL)
Times-News (Hendersonville, NC)
The Tuscaloosa News (Tuscaloosa, AL)
The Star-News (Wilmington, NC)
The Worcester Telegram & Gazette (Worcester, MA)
KFOR-TV (Oklahoma City, OK)
KAUT-TV (Oklahoma City, OK)
KFSM (Fort Smith, AR)
WHNT (Huntsville, AL)
WHO-TV (Des Moines, IA)
WNEP (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, PA)
WQAD (Moline, IL)
WREG-TV (Memphis, TN)
WTKR (Norfolk, VA)
Discovery-Times Channel (Cable)
The New York Times
Syndicate and News Service

About the Writer: Doc Farmer is a writer and humorist who is also a moderator on ChronWatch's Forum. He formerly lived in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, but now resides in the Midwest. Doc receives e-mail at docfarmer9999@yahoo.co.uk.

Monday, June 26, 2006

Rebuild the Towers

This stalling and political posturing has gone on long enough. I an asking all of you to sign the petition at the Twin Towers Alliance. Here is their mission statement:

"Who Are We?

We are Democrats and Republicans, New Yorkers and Californians, Northerners and Southerners. We come from Idaho and Michigan, Canada and Hungary, Japan, Australia, and China. We live in Italy, Denmark, New Zealand, Mexico and Holland. In other words, we’re from diverse backgrounds and probably disagree on a number of things — but, we are united in believing that the Twin Towers should rise again.

We are the millions who cheered last year when Donald Trump called for new Twin Towers and who then had to watch as he was lampooned by clueless, self-important critics.

We are people with common sense, who recognize that failure to rebuild the Twin Towers would be seen around the world as capitulation and cannot resign ourselves to that undesirable and unnecessary fate.

It doesn’t have to end that way - nothing insurmountable stands in the way of building dazzling new Twin Towers as the crown jewels of a vibrant new World Trade Center.

If you are one of us, please do not hesitate to take a stand. You can either be part of the solution or part of the problem. We need you now. Lend your name to this cause and encourage others to do the same. The timing could not be better.

The power structure at Ground Zero is falling apart at the very time we are prepared to come together in record numbers! The groundwork has been laid for a victory of idealism over cynicism and resolve over apathy. We have a rare opportunity to stand together and be counted or we won’t count at all.

The People are speaking - our leaders should listen:


Why do anything else?

Please spread the word by adding the following signature to your emails and suggesting others do the same. And please do bypass the gatekeepers and make our case in the blogosphere. Thank you.



The sooner we get the towers rebuilt, the sooner we tell this terrorist scum that we will not be intimidated! - Sailor

So Much for the Tolerance of the Left

Amanda Doss purchased the domain Murthalied.com. Since then, she has been bombarded with some of the more vile attacks I have seen. The left always preaches tolerance, so much for that. I am going to post what is on Amanda's site and I am going to ask all of you to go there and send a message supporting her. - Sailor

"Have you been wondering whether you should support the Democrats or the Republicans? Do you think that both parties have some positive traits and some negative?
Let me introduce myself. I am Amanda Doss, web designer by profession. I have created websites for many different businesses and people. I have created websites for child care centers, autobody shops, Catholic churches, Methodist churches, screen-printing businesses, and more. I have also created websites for both Democrats and Republicans.

At the bottom of each the websites I design, I put copyright information as well as designer information, including my email address for professional responses. From the websites that I created for Democrats, I have NEVER received a negative, hateful, or inappropriate email from their Republican opponents.

However, shortly after I purchased the domain name MurthaLied.com, my personal information (including where I live, my picture, my client list, and my email address) was posted on several "Liberal" blogs. Keep in mind, this information was posted BEFORE I had even created a website for MurthaLied.com.

I would like to share some of hateful and even threatening emails I have recently received due to these blogs, before this website was even created. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, please feel free to email these "sweethearts" and let them know how proud of them you are for the way they represent the Democratic party.

Please note: the information below is very graphic in nature. Please do not continue reading if you are not over the age of 18, or if you will be offended by graphic language.

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 11:52:22 -0400
From: "Ryan Gibbs"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com
Subject: Swift Boat Trash

No matter what your father did for this country, you have none of these qualities..You know nothing about the military from your own personal experience other than some officer's brat. You seem to want to attack Senator Murtha but be be careful who you attack Ms. Doss, this isn't John Kerry. This is a decorated Marine with many, many credentials to back him up. Please continue to try though, we will bury your threats, expose your lies, and most of all we will make it personal about you too. It is real easy in this day and age to find out people's spending habits, their comings and goings, and all the little things such as ex-boyfriends,ex-friends, and ex-colleagues in between. We will dig dirt up on you, it has already started.

As they say in wingnut land... "Bring 'em on.."

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:46:01 -0400
From: "Dean Bowling"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com
Subject: streetwalking

Interesting that a political whore would pick a name like "streetcorner". I've wonder who you'll be doing on the corner. (ick!)

From: "ohm made"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:04:44 -0500
Subject: Swiftboating


I've got a great idea. Why don't YOU go to Iraq? You seem to take joy in the
killing of innocent "brown people", so why are you here in this country making
websites eh? Too much of a sissy to stand up for what you allegedly believe in?
Or too much of a total windbag pussy to put your money where your lying mouth

Come on Amanda!

Just as Murtha said about Rove, you sit in your air-conditioned trailer-home in
Texarkana, telling the troops we'll "stay the course". You're wrong. They will
do the fighting, they will do the killing and they will do the dying. While
you, waste our air, pollute our politics, and lie your conniving and ugly and
slowly deteriorating face off.

Go fuck yourself. Better yet, prepare for the swiftboating we're about to do to you!

Los Angeles / Berlin

From: Srogercox@aol.com
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 11:44:19 EDT
Subject: History will smear you
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com

Swiftboating moron,
You will be remembered as the shit on Murtha's boot heel.
Roger Cox

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: "bart bennett"
Subject: HEY!
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com

You now have millions and millions of people all over your disgusting attempts to smear a decorated Veteran and patriot like John Murtha, millions who will be after your disgusting lies every second of the day. You vile "swiftboaters" (translation: idiot cowards and despicable liars) will get your asses kicked all over the media this time, you are the lowest form of human beings there could possibly be, and on top of that YOU are just plain ugly. Please crawl under a rock and die. You know nothing about war, you know nothing about this insane occupation, all you know is lies, smears and absolute BULLSHIT. The Bush "administration" is packed from top to bottom with the most pathetic collection of draft dodging/deserting cowards ever assembled in one place, and the fact you lowlife scum actually think ANYONE would beleive in these men anymore is laughable. Truth hurts, doesnt it, you fucking freaks? You are DONE. The rock awaits, scum.

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 06:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Chad Boyer"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com

From: "healthscript psychotherapy"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com
Subject: stop creating garbage
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:41:52 -0400

You are really mentally ill, seek treatment now.

Jan Falk, LCSW (mother of three and sick of this kind of real moral depravity)

From: "healthscript psychotherapy"
To: admin@kerrystreason.com
Subject: morons, inc/
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:45:58 -0400

you need treatment, seek it quickly. very very sick.

Jan Falk, LCSW
(mother of three, real Americans don't fight in STUPID illegal Wars you ignorant slut)

From: Bozoshow21@aol.com
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:06:26 EDT
Subject: Thank God for John Murtha.....
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com

my father, grandfathers, uncles who faught courageously for our country while the cowards who fill your wallet sat back and let them risk their lives. Every day you right wingers show you have no shame or decency.

From: "Lynn"
To: oscregistration@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 13:59:17 -0400

You people are scums liar rats pigs cowards. Murtha & Kerry are more patriotic than Bush and faggot draft dodging piece of shit Cheny will ever be! You type of people should have come back from vietnam in bags...

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 07:53:51 -0400
From: "Rob Chudzik"
To: amandapdoss@yahoo.com
Subject: Swiftboater!!!???

Nice try....trying to impugn Jack Murtha now? You'll be burning in hell soon....


For comments or questions, please email


So much for civility.

The New York Times at War With America

Here is another oponion piece on the how the NY Times is putting the lives of all Americans at risk. Michael Barone takes the NY Times to task in his opinion piece. I will post the last two paragraphs of his piece and then a link to the salf serving and overly officious answer to e-mails from Bill Keller.

"The counterargument is that it is a dangerous business for the government to prosecute the press. But it certainly is in order to prosecute government officials who have abused their trust by disclosing secrets, especially when those disclosures have reduced the government's ability to keep us safe. And pursuit of those charges would probably require reporters to disclose the names of those sources. As the Times found out in the Judith Miller case, reporters who refuse to answer such questions can go to jail.

Why do they hate us? Why does the Times print stories that put America more at risk of attack? They say that these surveillance programs are subject to abuse, but give no reason to believe that this concern is anything but theoretical. We have a press that is at war with an administration, while our country is at war against merciless enemies. The Times is acting like an adolescent kicking the shins of its parents, hoping to make them hurt while confident of remaining safe under their roof. But how safe will we remain when our protection depends on the Times?"

This is a link to Bill Keller's defense on printing this. Keller is obviously blinded by his hatred of the Bush Administration and does not give a rat's ass as to how he places us all in greater danger. - Sailor

Sunday, June 25, 2006

In Rememberance

This past Monday I received the sad news that a dear friend of mine passed away at the all too young age of 44. To Jerry's family and especially to the love of his life, Kathi, I wish to convery my deepest sympathies for your loss. Jerry was a good and close friend and some one I respected greatly. I said this morning and I will say it again, Jerry has not left us, he has merely moved on. Rest in peace my friend and know you were loved and respected. Go Sooners! - Sailor

Saturday, June 24, 2006

NY Times Gives Away Secrets to Terrorists

What is it with the NY Times? Are they so blinded by their hatred of the President that they willing put all of us in jeopardy? Revealing the secret and legal program of sifting through bank records in an attempt to smoke out those financing terrorists, the NYT has put us all in greater danger. It is time that there was a crackdown on these intelligence leaks. this is not a whistle blower, whom ever leaked this information is a traitor and should be dealt with accordingly. The reporter involved should have their carcass tossed in jail until they reveal their source.This is not about freedom of the press, this is about an irrespomsible press, willing to go to any lengths to promote their own agenda. No wonder the Times is losing readership

Here are some snippets from a Washington Times editorial on this issue.

"Once more the spoiler. Despite the earnest persuasion of the White House to preserve a useful weapon in the war against the terrorists, the New York Times has revealed the workings of a covert surveillance program, indisputably within the law, to use administrative subpoenas to examine, through a Belgian financial consortium known by the acronym SWIFT, the financing of international terrorism. Once the story was out, the Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal covered it as well. Now the program is damaged, perhaps severely so, and the financing of terror is harder to track. This is another unnecessary leak, six months after the New York Times revealed a secret National Security Agency terrorist surveillance program.

In its earlier scoop, the New York Times could reasonably argue legal uncertainty. Not this time. The Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Miller in 1976 that no right to privacy attaches to the type of third-party financial-transaction information SWIFT has provided to the Treasury Department. The Right to Financial Privacy Act, enacted by Congress in 1978 in the wake of United States v. Miller, allows just the administrative subpoenas Treasury has been using. So does the Patriot Act. The SWIFT transactions that Treasury has been examining are international in nature. The searches are specifically targeted at suspected or known terrorists, a "sharp harpoon aimed at the heart of terrorist activity," as Treasury Secretary John Snow puts it. The claim that the rights of American citizens are infringed is irrational, unduly partisan, or both."

The Times was absolutely irresponsible here. This is a legal program. Unfortunately the editors of the Times have no problem putting us all in danger if it meests their agenda to do so. Shame on the Times. They have no ethics what so ever. - Sailor

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Remind Me: Who Are the Bad Guys Again?

I know I have been away for a bit. Reality and some PC issues have kept me on my toes. I am back and I am going to mark my return with a fine article by my good friend, Doc Farmer. - Sailor

Remind Me: Who Are the Bad Guys Again?
Written by Doc Farmer
Wednesday, June 21, 2006

I'm a bit ticked off today. Yeah, I know; that seems to be the normal state of affairs for a columnist/commentator/curmudgeon.
But I believe that my ticked-ness is more than justified.

Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston Texas, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras Oregon, were kidnapped by Al Qaeda operatives the other day. Not captured in battle and taken to a prisoner of war camp. The driver in their convoy was killed, and they were taken at gunpoint to an unknown location.

They were definitely tortured.

They may have been disemboweled.

They were almost certainly beheaded.

Their bodies were dumped and the area surrounding them was booby-trapped, in the hope of killing more US/Coalition troops.

Now, let me ask you a very simple question: Where is the outrage on the part of the media? Why haven't we seen photo after photo of their corpses on the news? Why haven't the editors over at the vaunted New York Times started publishing a steady stream of cover stories--complete with graphic images at a wide variety of angles--to be continued every
single day over the next two months? Where are the demands for inspections of Al Qaeda detention facilities? Why haven't there been calls for investigations of the practices of these terrorists? Why hasn't Jack Murtha (D-JackA**Ville) demanded that the heads of Al Qaeda (with or without their bodies attached) be brought before a congressional committee?

Because Al Qaeda, to the lib/dem/soc/commies, the peace-activists (see also: morons), the mainstream media, and the political portsiders have already decided who the bad guy is.


Yup, that's right. The MSM and their cohorts could waste NO time trying to figure out ways to blame Dubya for the death of these two servicemen. I guess constantly (and gleefully) yelling "2,500 Dead! 2,500 Dead!" wasn't getting them enough attention. They've even shopped around and found an uncle of
one of these soldiers so they could get their "Let's All Blame Bush" sound-byte. From Mother Sheehan to Father Pearl to (now) Uncle Mario. I wonder if he'll camp out in a Crawford ditch or hug South American dictators to keep up his facetime in the various news outlets.

The mainstream media won't be overly bothered with the facts. God knows, they haven't let the truth get in the way of a good story (in their eyes, anyway) for quite some time. So, they'll use these two heroes to advance their point.

Yes. Heroes. Like every single soldier, sailor, airman, marine, guardsman, and merchant marine out there today. The Mainstream Media will USE them to put forward THEIR agenda: we're bad, terrorists are good, and the soldiers
wouldn't have been put in danger in the first place were it not for Dubya.

Note to the Mainstream Media, lib/dem/soc/commies and turncoat politicians:
You bastards!

I am sick to the back teeth of you, your lies, your half-truths, your mis-directions, your obfuscations, your spin, your (im)moral relativism, your arrogance. I'm sick of you USING our troops--especially the dead ones--in order for YOU to claw back power, and at the same time to empower and embolden our enemies.

There was a discussion on the ChronWatch Forum recently, asking whether
journalists have to abide by any kind of a code of ethics. My view on that was similar to my view on the extended lists of oxymorons--House Ethics, Senate Ethics, F*****g Lawyer Ethics, etc. They claim to have ethical guidelines, they say the words, but words alone are not evidence of ethics. Following those words, living those words, ARE evidence of ethics--or, at least, ethical behavior. One of our more well-informed posters, who goes by the moniker of "CodeMoose" (he's obviously a programmer with antlers--I wonder if his boss is a flying squirrel) actually provided a list, from a group called the "Society of Professional Journalists." You can read it here. The point is, if you go through that list, and think of the recent history of the mainstream media, I
don't think you'll find ONE ethical standard that they've followed. But it's Bush and the rep/con/tairs who are evil and corrupt, and the MSM isn't biased, oh no no no no no....

Let me give you a couple of points to work with here. The people responsible for the death of those soldiers, and the other soldiers and innocents, who have died before them, ARE THE TERRORISTS! Not the other soldiers, not their field commanders, and not their commander in chief. We are WINNING the war against terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, while you in the MSM are doing everything possible to make us LOSE the war against terrorism in the headlines and the
broadcasts. The number of dead terrorists (which you never seem to tout) is FAR higher than the number of dead soldiers. This is one of the lowest per-capita and raw-number casualty wars for U.S. forces in history, but you're bent on making it seem like the highest. Here's a news flash, MSM: more U.S. soldiers died in a TRAINING EXERCISE for D-Day--in a single day--than have died in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You talk about being unbiased. You lie. You are extremely biased. Yet you lie to us and yourselves about this obvious -- and documented -- truth. You constantly try to make Iraq another Vietnam. Why? Because YOU guys won the Vietnam War. America lost, but YOU won. So what if over 3 million innocents were slaughtered
because we were forced out of South East Asia by the media, huh? WE -- America -- were the bad guys, after all. How many more will need to be sacrificed at the alter of lib/dem/soc/commie beliefs and Blame America First doctrines? And will it bother you if/when an American city is nuked, gassed or otherwise WMD'd by your terrorist compatriots?

Naw, you'll just blame Bush.

We are in the midst of a war. A war not of our choosing. A war brought to our shores by men who have corrupted an entire religion in order to develop their thirst for power, blood, and attention. Instead of focusing on how the United States should treat terrorists like soldiers and give them full Genève Convention status, perhaps you should focus on how closely the terrorists are following those doctrines of war (see also: not at
all). Instead of posting photos of near-naked terrorists with panties on their heads, perhaps you should post the photos of the slaughtered remains of those two soldiers after they had been tortured--REALLY tortured. Instead of publishing the photos of the head of Al Zarqawi and wondering if he had been beaten, or if we possibly harmed any innocents when we dropped two 500-pound bombs on his not-so-safe house, perhaps you should publish the photos of Daniel Pearl's head. His severed head. As well as the video of Zarqawi SAWING his head off.

And then, you can come back and tell America who the real enemy is.

Besides yourselves, that is.

About the Writer: Doc Farmer is a writer and humorist who is also a moderator on ChronWatch's Forum. He formerly lived in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, but now resides in the Midwest. Doc receives e-mail at docfarmer9999@yahoo.co.uk.


Thursday, April 06, 2006

Updated Radio Schedule

Here is my updated radio schedule. Just click on the Hear Sailor banner on the right. - Sailor
"Thursday 06 April 06
10pm to Midnight CDT

Friday 07 April 06
8am to 10am CDT

Saturday 08 April 06
9am to noon CDT Oldies with Sailor and Meg
4pm to 6pm CDT

Monday 10 April 06
10am to Noon CDT

Wednesday 12 April 06
8am to 10am CDT"

Monday, April 03, 2006

Salvaged WTC Steel Put to Good Use!

Steel salvaged from the World Trade Center is being put to good use. It is being used to build the USS New York, and amphibouis assualt ship, with a miision to seek out and deal with terrorists. I will post the entire article with a link to the source.
" Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Monday, April 3, 2006 4:05 p.m. EDT

Navy Ship Built With World Trade Center Steel

With a year to go before it even touches the water, the Navy's amphibious assault ship USS New York has already made history - twice. It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center, and it survived Hurricane Katrina.

That combination of disasters gives the ship a unique standing among the 500 or so Avondale, La., shipyard workers building it, said Tony Quaglino, a crane superintendent who postponed retirement to have a hand in the New York's construction.

"I think Katrina made us more aware of the tragedy in New York," said the 66-year-old Quaglino. "One was manmade, one was natural, but they're both a common bond."

USS New York is about 45 percent complete and should be ready for launch in mid-2007. Katrina disrupted construction when it pounded the Gulf Coast last summer, but the 684-foot vessel escaped serious damage, and workers were back at the yard near New Orleans two weeks after the storm.

The ship was an impetus for many of the yard's thousands of workers to return to the job, even though hundreds lost their homes, Quaglino and others said.

Northrop Grumman employed 6,500 at Avondale before Katrina. Today, roughly 5,500 are back on the job, working on the New York and three other vessels. More than 200 employees who lost their homes to Katrina are living at the shipyard, some on a Navy barge and others in bunk-style housing.

"Their dedication and devotion to duty has been, to say the least, epic," Philip Teel, a vice president for Northrop Grumman Corp. and head of its ship systems division, told a Navy League dinner audience in New York on March 22.

"It sounds trite, but I saw it in their eyes," Teel said in a separate interview. "These are very patriotic people, and the fact that the ship has steel from the trade center is a source of great pride. They view it as something incredibly special. They're building it for the nation."

USS New York is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft.

"It would be fitting if the first mission this ship would go on is to make sure that bin Laden is taken out, his terrorist organization is taken out," said Glenn Clement, a paint foreman. "He came in through the back door and knocked our towers down and [the New York] is coming right through the front door, and we want them to know that."

When terrorists crashed two jetliners into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, destroying the twin towers and killing nearly 2,800 people, the $700 million ship was already on the drawing board but had not been assigned a name.

Months later, New York Gov. George Pataki asked the Navy to commemorate the disaster by reviving the name New York for a ship whose role would include fighting terrorism. That required an exception to Navy policy of assigning state names only to nuclear submarines, as they had been to battleships in earlier era.

Then-Navy Secretary Gordon England, in announcing the decision, said the New York would "project American power to the far corners of the Earth and support the cause of freedom well into the 21st century." Its motto is "Never Forget," a slogan among New Yorkers since Sept. 11.

Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, La., to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there."

Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up."

"It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back."

The next big event came on March 14, when shipyard cranes lifted that bow section and guided it into place with the rest of the hull.

Later ships in the class will include USS Arlington, the location of the Pentagon, also struck by a hijacked jetliner on Sept. 11, and USS Somerset, named for the Pennsylvania county where United Flight 93 crashed after its passengers fought off hijackers apparently planning to attack another Washington target.

The New York revives a name borne by at least seven previous ships - most recently the nuclear submarine SSN New York City, retired in 1997 after 18 years service.

© 2006 Associated Press."
Fair winds and a following sea to her and her crew. Haze grey and away! - Sailor

Thursday, March 30, 2006

Pictures the MSM Will Not Show You

Here are some pictures of the LA Immigration protests the MSM did not publish(hat tip to Doc Farmer). You are not going to be happpy. - Sailor

Monday, March 27, 2006

The Tipping Point of Truth

For month upon month, we have heard that mantra of the left, MSM, so called experts and pundits, that Saddam had no ties to al-Qaida. Even the 9/11 Commission was not able to connect the dots. Now we have actual captured documents, CD, PC's and other hard data, clearly showing ties between Saddam's Iraq and al-Qaida. These documents also detail Saddam's drive for nuclear weapons. In the coming weeks and months, as more are translated, we should have a much clearer picture of both Saddam's ties to al-Qaida and his WMD programs. Of course, do not hold your breath waiting for the aforementioned groups to admit they were in error. Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu has a few things to say in his commentary on this matter.
"Many editorialists, columnists, and talking heads in the media, backed by like-minded management and production staff, picked up these themes and ran with them. Consequently even people who know better seem willing to concede the leftÂ’s foreign policy talking points. But how much longer will this travesty persist in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence?

Reams of documents -– ultimately numbering in the millions of pages by the time CDs, hard drives, and computer memories are downloaded and printed -– are slowly beginning to be translated and released for analysis. These documents - though only 2% or so are translated and available -– substantiate without doubt the following allegations: Saddam Hussein and bin Laden, the Baathist regime and Qaida had extensive, wide reaching ties. Saddam was, at a minimum, a supporter of the 911 attacks if not a sponsor of them. Saddam'’s intelligence services trained more than 8,000 Qaida terrorists, primarily from Somalia and Sudan, at camps such as Salman Pak and Ansar al-Islam within Iraq. And Saddam helped finance Qaida and similar terrorist groups.

Further, the documents substantiate a broad, on-going program Iraq had to develop nuclear weapons. Indeed, Saddam had instructed his minions to begin preparing to re-energize the program after UN sanctions were lifted, a hope he had reinforced by French, Russian, and German diplomats, and traitors like British Parliamentarian George Galloway, all of whom convinced him that delay and obfuscation of the UN would get him off the hook. "
Mind you, as the Colonel staed, only 2% of these documents have been translated and there is already a clear picture of how deep Saddam's ties were Qaida-Qaeda. I am sure there are those on the far left that will decry all of these documents as forgeries. But then again, some of them think 9/11 was a Bush plot.
"In addition to the air sorties an uncounted amount of WMD were transported to Syria by commercial trucks -– familiar 18-wheelers -– and other civilian vehicles, including ambulances. "“Saddam was convinced,"” according to Sada, "“that commercial trucks could pass right through security checkpoints" ... and they did."” American CIA overhead assets -– spy satellites - were on the lookout for military trucks and ignored "“routine"” commercial traffic.

General Sada is not a lone voice in this matter. The Mossad, Israeli intelligence service, has long claimed that the weapons were transferred out of Iraq. American generals Paul Vallely and Thomas McInnerny noted in their 2004 book, Endgame, that extensive stockpiles of WMD were hidden in three locations within Syria and in the Syrian-controlled terrorist camps of the Bekka Valley in Lebanon. Included in the stocks were nerve agents like Tabun, Sarin 1, and Sarin 2. They did not remain hidden for long.

Up to 20 tons of these chemical agents were intendQaidar use by al Qaeda terrorists in attacking three targets in Amman, Jordan in 2004 – the Jordanian Ministry of Defense and Intelligence Service buildings, and the American Embassy. These were to be simultaneous truck bomb attacks that were thwarted by good counter-intelligence work. The trucks were large 15-ton capacity powerful vehicles that could power through barriers and obstacles to crash into the buildings. At that time the homicide drivers would detonate the ammonium nitrate load triggered by plastic explosives - probably C-4. Resting atop the explosive load were Saddam’s chemicals, sufficient to kill upwards to 100,000 people in downtown Amman, by conservative.

Supporting these allegations are details from post-war weapons inspectors Kay and Duelfer Reports that speak extensively to plans for continuing special weapons programs that they uncovered along with scientists who testified that they were told to memorize their research and destroy documents with the intention of reconstituting their nuclear programs "“after the crisis passed."” Shockingly, the mainstream media has intentionally overlooked these data, preferring to advance its own agenda."
If the media admits they were wrong on WMDs, their entire political agenda to discredit the President goes out the window. So much for finding the truth. In many media outlets, therattemptalready been an attmpt todismissnalize Sada and dimiss what he has said and written as fiction created to sell his book. Had Sada affirmed what the MSM has been telling us, you bet your last dollar the MSM would be touting him as some sort of hero.

9/11 Commissioner, Bob Kerrey has some comments as well.
""This is a very significant set of facts," Kerrey told the New York Sun.

"I personally and strongly believe you don't have to prove that Iraq was collaborating against Osama bin Laden on the September 11 attacks to prove he was an enemy [of the U.S.] and that he would collaborate with people who would do our country harm," the Nebraska Democrat explained.

While Kerrey cautioned that the 1995 pact doesn't implicate Saddam directly in the 9/11 attacks, he contended: "It does tie him into a circle that meant to damage the United States."

"Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States," Kerrey said, adding that the relationship between the Iraqi dictator and the al Qaida chief would become clearer as more materials from the former regime get translated and analyzed.

The newly released Iraqi intelligence document - first reported by the Weekly Standard last Sunday - details a February 19, 1995 meeting between an official representative of Iraq and Osama bin Laden, who is said to have requested Iraq's help with "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. "
Both articles make for some very thought provoking reading. It remains to be seen if the MSM will admit to their errors, though I think it hiforeseeableely for the forseeable future. - Sailor

Saturday, March 25, 2006

New FEC Rules Would Regulate Paid Web Ads UPDATE

I found this article buried in AP Tech News. I am trying to find out more, but on the surface, it looks like the FEC will keeps it's hands off the blogosphere.
"There has been an explosion of political activity on the Internet and political bloggers who offer diverse views say they should be free of government regulation.
n a summary of the proposal, the FEC said the rules "are intended to ensure that political committees properly finance and disclose their Internet communications, without impeding individual citizens from using the Internet to speak freely regarding candidates and elections."
The revised definition includes paid Internet advertising placed on another person's web site, but does not encompass any other form of Internet communications.
A recent federal court decision on campaign finance law held that the previous definition of "public communication" impermissibly excluded all Internet communications."
If anyone has more on this, a clarification or the actual text, please use my comments to leave a URL. - Sailor

UPDATE: I found the text of the FEC ruling. It is in .PDF format and 96 pages. - Sailor

Friday, March 24, 2006

50,000 Visitors

The 50,000th viewer to this blog came today. For the big boys of the blogosphere, this is a mere drop in the bucket. For this sailor, it is nothing short of a miracle! Thank you! - Sailor

Bloggers Beware

Looks like the attempt to protect bloggers from regulation by the FEC, under the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, is about to hit the House floor for debate. There are many who oppose this attempt to allow myself and my fellow bloggers our rights to free political speech. Free political speech is the cornerstone of democracy and bloggers are no different than that fellow standing on a soap box, in the public square, so many years ago. Any attempt to regulate his free political speech, would have met with a firestorm of protest. The blog, is merely electronic version of the soap box and public square. If the FEC is going to regulate the blogs, by using some sort of formula to figure out how much a blogger has "contributed" to a candidates' campaign, then the FEC should have to do the same to a campaign volunteer handing out a candidates' literature, or to any organization that provides volunteers to any candiates' campaign (are you listening Big Labor?). Jason Barnes provides some details on those for protecting the free political speech of bloggers and those that are opposed.
"Bloggers -– The Second Front

The House, meanwhile, is considering the Online Freedom of Speech Act proposed by Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, The "blogger protection bill," as it is known in some circles, simply codifies the current status of Internet bloggers. Senators Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., are co-sponsoring a similar bill in the Senate.

Blogger-backers believe the bills are necessary because the Federal Election Commission is considering whether to apply the rules of McCain-Feingold to Internet communications. In fact, FEC Chairman Michael Toner delayed a long-awaited decision on the matter until the end of March to allow the House to consider Hensarling's bill.

Given Toner's public support for the measure, bloggers believe the delay was a warning. "It couldn't be more clear," wrote Michael Krempasky, one of the founders of Red State, a popular conservative blog. "Pass [this bill] or face regulations on the Internet, period."

Instead, the House passed on the opportunity to vote on the bill. It was held up in committee. At present, it does not appear that it will pass before the FEC decision. A staffer in Hensarling's office told NewsMax they anticipate floor debate sometime during the week of March 28, but it's still unclear whether it will pass at that point."
It makes one wonder why Congress is so hesitant to protect the basic American right of free political speech. What is it that they are afraid of, or who is behind the efforts to block this type of legislation?
"Traditional media organizations have come out in favor of increased regulation. "It is imperative," wrote the New York Times in an editorial, "that the courageous lawmakers who supported the McCain-Feingold reform law four years ago stand together against making the Internet a cornucopia of political corruption."

Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, countered, "A better argument for the New York Times would be to tell America that they really want to end political conversation on the Internet to resurrect their power over political commentary.""
It is not really surprising that the New York Times favors restricting the free politicall speech of the blogosphere, they are likely afraid of the competition. Typical of the types at the Times and other opponents of keeping the blog free from FEC regulation, their view issimplyy stated as 'free speech for me, but not for thee'. Any FEC regulations that stifle the free political speech rights of bloggers, is sure to end up in a court battle. This is about your First Amendment rights!

As for me, should the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules. - Sailor

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Internet Radio Update

I will be on air, Wednesday, 22 March 2006, from 8pm to 10pm CST. Just click on the banner to the right. See you on the radio! - Sailor

Best job market in 5 years for grads

Much to the chagrin of the left, democrats and the leftist MSM, the economy counties to grow and expand. If their efforts to minimize this fact, the aforementioned group makes claims that the jobs being created are all low paying one. Here is a report that takes the air out of that balloon.
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. college graduates are facing the best job market since 2001, with business, computer, engineering, education and health care grads in highest demand, a report by an employment consulting firm showed on Monday.

"We are approaching full employment and some employers are already dreaming up perks to attract the best talent," said John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

In its annual outlook of entry-level jobs, Challenger, Gray & Christmas said strong job growth and falling unemployment makes this spring the hottest job market for America's 1.4 million college graduates since the dot-com collapse in 2001.

The firm pointed to a survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers which showed employers plan to hire 14.5 percent more new college graduates than a year ago."
The article also pointed out that there have been increases starting salaries in several job categories. Unemployment now stands at 4.8%, which is some what better than it was under the previous administration.

Collapsing economies, do not create jobs, a fact that has been over ignored by the MSM. This economy continues to expand despite the higher costs for energy. A note to those claiming the economy is crashing, the facts do not support your conclusions. - Sailor

Monday, March 20, 2006

Sunshine for the Iraq Files

Finally, massive numbers of documents, audio and video tapes have been released for scrutiny. These items were captured in Iraq and Afghanistan and may contain insights into alliances, WMDs, terrorist links and other vital information that will help aid fighting terrorists world wide. An article at OpinionJournal, maps out the struggle to get these items released.
"Mr. Hoekstra told us last week he's been talking to Mr. Negroponte and other senior DNI officials in recent days, and that they've committed to begin "aggressively" releasing documents on the Internet. He says he also senses a spirit of openness and compromise that he hadn't before. For example, DNI officials initially balked at releasing their own potentially flawed translations of the largely Arabic-language documents. But they have now agreed to do so with the caveat that interested parties would be well-advised to double-check the accuracy of the DNI's work.

The Congressman has also been told that documents won't be kept secret because of mere uncertainty about possible--and vague--"national interest" implications. And, finally, Congress will have an oversight role regarding documents that the DNI decides should remain classified for whatever reason.

We don't think Mr. Hoekstra is exaggerating when he says that removing these materials from the exclusive domain of the U.S. intelligence community and offering them to all interested analysts will cut years off the amount of time it takes to extract the important information they contain. While some of what's uncovered may be misleading, we trust an open process to discover the truth more than we do intelligence services with a stake in defending their previous (mis)judgments.

This information may well shed light on whether Saddam planned the insurgency that we and the Iraqis are now fighting, or whether he canoodled with Islamist terrorists, as some of the documents already translated suggest. We are learning from the new book on Iraq by Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor that many of Saddam's own generals believed he had weapons of mass destruction and was prepared to use them. So much for the allegation that "Bush lied" about WMD; Saddam lied to everyone."
It took a great deal of effort By Mr. Hekstra and Mr. Santorum to get a fire lit under the asses of the DNI. You can find the documents on-line. They are in PDF format, so you will need Adobe Reader to view them. Be warned that the vast majority of the documents have not been translated and are still in Arabic. - Sailor

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Censure Feingold?

Senator Russ Feingold has been hemming and hawing about censuring President Bush over the NSA wire tapping. Quite frankly, Feingold is a presidential wannabee, trying to impress the far left of the dem party, of which he one of. Naturally, wire tapping done without warrants, by Roosevelt, Truman and other dems was all quite legal. Lets not forget Carter's warrantless searches either. I have yet to hear Feingold whine about the illegalities there. There was also Clinton's wide ranging electronic eaves dropping whish the NY Times supported in an editorial. Terence P. Jeffrey asks if Feingold should be censured and provides some insight as to why in his article.
"There is a difference, however, between the eavesdropping Roosevelt and Truman authorized and the Bush eavesdropping. Roosevelt and Truman did it in peacetime without congressional authorization. Mr. Bush is doing it during a war Mr. Feingold voted Sept. 14, 2001, to authorize.

Nonetheless, Roosevelt and Truman acted within their constitutional authority to defend the nation against attack. They were doing their duty, as is President Bush.
But in the Senate on Monday, while introducing his censure resolution, Mr. Feingold said, "The president's claims of inherent executive authority, and his assertions that the courts have approved this type of activity, are baseless."

Franklin Roosevelt could not have agreed. On May 21, 1940, the United States was at peace, but Roosevelt wasn't taking chances. "It is too late to do anything about it after sabotage, assassination and 'fifth column' activities are completed," Roosevelt wrote Attorney General Robert Jackson in a memorandum cited by Senate Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts in a letter he sent last month to Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter. "You are, therefore, authorized and directed in such cases as you may approve, after investigation of the need in each case, to authorize the necessary investigation agents that they are at liberty to secure information by listening devices directed to the conversation or other communications of persons suspected of subversive activities against the government of the United States, including suspected spies. You are requested furthermore to limit these investigations so conducted to a minimum and to limit them insofar as possible to aliens."

Truman went further. Testifying before the Church Committee Oct. 29, 1975, Attorney General Edward Levi quoted a letter Attorney General Tom Clark sent Truman in 1946. Clark wanted to continue Roosevelt's program. Warrantless eavesdropping, he argued, was needed "in cases vitally affecting the domestic security, or where human life is in jeopardy."

In his letter to Mr. Specter, Mr. Roberts notes that "Truman broadened the scope of the authorization by removing the caveat that such surveillance should be limited 'insofar as possible to aliens.' "

Federal appeals courts have upheld the authority Roosevelt and Truman used. "[B]ecause of the president's constitutional duty to act for the United States in the field of foreign relations, and his inherent power to protect national security in the context of foreign affairs, we reaffirm... that the president may constitutionally authorize warrantless wiretaps for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence," the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the 1973 case of United States v. Brown. "
Even the Courts have upheld the President's authority to conduct warrantless wire taps to collect foreign intelligence. Feingold and the rest of the left is quite selective in what they consider illegal wire taps and high crimes and misdemeanors. Perhaps Feingold should be censured for bringing nonsense like this to the Senate floor. - Sailor

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Forever Blue Projects

A dear friend, and the lady of one of my brethren, is putting together some events to honor Navy SEALs. As some of you may know, the SEAL Community lost 11 members not that long ago. This loss was staggering, especially to such a small community. Navy Blue's (that is the name she uses to post with), project is threefold:
"To partner with the Naval Special Warfare Foundation in educating the public about the history and role of America'’s Naval Special Warfare Sailors.

To raise funds that directly benefit the Naval Special Warfare Foundation in its mission to serve active duty naval special warfare personnel and their families, and the children of fallen US Navy SEALs.

To honor the US Navy SEALs for their service to our country and remember their fallen comrades, including the eleven SEALs who died during combat/rescue operations in June 2005."
Please support Navy Blue by visiting the web site she has created and by helping and participating as you can. - Sailor

Myths of Iraq

We have all seen the reporting on Iraq by the MSM. I have posted about this here numerous times, especially pointing out the distortions, spin, half-truths and outright lies. I will continue to do so, as long as the MSM tailor's their information to meet their world view and agenda. Of course, there are still those that believe there is no media bias. I fully believe it is because their agenda and world view is the same as the MSMs. Once again, Ralph Peters, explodes the myths on Iraq the MSM is trying to force feed us.
" Consider just a few of the inaccuracies served up by the media:

Claims of civil war. In the wake of the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra, a flurry of sectarian attacks inspired wild media claims of a collapse into civil war. It didn't happen. Driving and walking the streets of Baghdad, I found children playing and, in most neighborhoods, business as usual. Iraq can be deadly, but, more often, it's just dreary.

Iraqi disunity. Factional differences are real, but overblown in the reporting. Few Iraqis support calls for religious violence. After the Samarra bombing, only rogue militias and criminals responded to the demagogues' calls for vengeance. Iraqis refused to play along, staging an unrecognized triumph of passive resistance.

Expanding terrorism. On the contrary, foreign terrorists, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, have lost ground. They've alienated Iraqis of every stripe. Iraqis regard the foreigners as murderers, wreckers and blasphemers, and they want them gone. The Samarra attack may, indeed, have been a tipping point--against the terrorists.

Hatred of the U.S. military. If anything surprised me in the streets of Baghdad, it was the surge in the popularity of U.S. troops among both Shias and Sunnis. In one slum, amid friendly adult waves, children and teenagers cheered a U.S. Army patrol as we passed. Instead of being viewed as occupiers, we're increasingly seen as impartial and well-intentioned.

The appeal of the religious militias. They're viewed as mafias. Iraqis want them disarmed and disbanded. Just ask the average citizen.

The failure of the Iraqi army. Instead, the past month saw a major milestone in the maturation of Iraq's military. During the mini-crisis that followed the Samarra bombing, the Iraqi army put over 100,000 soldiers into the country's streets. They defused budding confrontations and calmed the situation without killing a single civilian. And Iraqis were proud to have their own army protecting them. The Iraqi army's morale soared as a result of its success.

Reconstruction efforts have failed. Just not true. The American goal was never to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure in its entirety. Iraqis have to do that. Meanwhile, slum-dwellers utterly neglected by Saddam Hussein's regime are getting running water and sewage systems for the first time. The Baathist regime left the country in a desolate state while Saddam built palaces. The squalor has to be seen to be believed. But the hopeless now have hope.

The electricity system is worse than before the war. Untrue again. The condition of the electric grid under the old regime was appalling. Yet, despite insurgent attacks, the newly revamped system produced 5,300 megawatts last summer--a full thousand megawatts more than the peak under Saddam Hussein. Shortages continue because demand soared--newly free Iraqis went on a buying spree, filling their homes with air conditioners, appliances and the new national symbol, the satellite dish. Nonetheless, satellite photos taken during the hours of darkness show Baghdad as bright as Damascus."
Indeed there are still problems and all is not the picture o peace and tranquility. But, the Iraqi people are making it quite clear that they will no longer tolerate the violence and sectarian strife. This is evidenced by the number of Iraqis coming forward and supplying information to the authorities on suspected terrorists and others. Iraqi forces were the ones that responded after the mosque bombings, US forces stayed in reserve. Those that want to see democracy fail in Iraq are going to be very disappointed. - Sailor

Monday, March 13, 2006


I have added a link to United States Central Command in the right margin. - Sailor

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Internet Radio Schedule

For any of those interested in hearing the Sailor on internet radio, here is my schedule: (all times are CST)

Friday 10am to Noon and 8pm to 10pm

Saturday 9am to Noon for Oldies with Meg and Me
and 4pm tp 6pm

Sunday 6pm to 8pm

Monday 10am to Noon

Tuesday 2pm to 4pm

Wednesday 10pm to Midnight

Click Here to select your player and bandwidth.

See you on the radio.

Be there or be square! - Sailor

All bad news, all the time

The continuous stream of bad news about the war on terror continues to dominate the MSM. A good deal of this is distorted, spun and in some cases downright incorrect. Of course there are those that actually believe there is no media bias, likely because what they read and see, concurs with their own world view. Jack Kelly points out some of the media distortions in his column. The fact that this distorted reporting lends aid and comfort to those that want us dead, is lost on many.
""Some lawyers who represent deserters say the war in Iraq is driving more soldiers to question their service and that the Pentagon is cracking down on deserters to discourage antiwar sentiment," wrote reporter Bill Nichols.
'The last thing (Pentagon officials) want is for people to think ... that this is like Vietnam,' said Tod Ensign, head of Citizen Soldier, an antiwar group that offers legal aid to deserters."
Mr. Ensign is full of horse manure, as Mr. Nichols demonstrates in his story. The data show desertions have plunged since 9/11, and are much lower than during the Vietnam war.
The Army, Navy and Air Force reported 7,978 desertions in the 2001 fiscal year, but only 3,456 in 2005, Mr. Nichols noted. In 1971, the Army reported 33,094 desertions, 3.4 percent of its total force. In 2005, desertions represented just 0.24 percent of 1.4 million of active service members."
The headline of the USA Today article would have led one to believe that desertions had increased because of the Iraq War, when in fact they were decreasing from the years prior to the war. The full article did point this out. But too many never bother to read past the headline
"For instance, The Washington Post reported on Feb. 25 that 120 Sunni mosques had been attacked in retaliation for the destruction of the Golden Mosque, holy to the Shiites. In a March 3 news conference, Gen. George Casey, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said:
We can confirm attacks on about 30 mosques around the country, with less than 10 of those mosques moderately damaged, and only two or three severely damaged. We visited eight mosques (in Baghdad) that were reportedly damaged. We found one broken window in those eight mosques."
Exaggeration and misinformation are hallmarks of chaotic situations, and it is hard for journalists who do most of their reporting from the safety of their hotels to sort fact from fiction. But Secretary Rumsfeld noticed a pattern in the errors:

"Interestingly, all the exaggerations seem to be on one side," he said. "The steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and give heart to the terrorists.""
Mr. Kelly has more and is well worth the time to read. The media seems to be going out of their way to have us believe that Iraq is in a civil war. - Sailor

Saturday, March 11, 2006

Missing The Boom, The Duping of the American People

To read and listen to the leftist MSM, one would think that the economy is in a shambles. You can read the same nonsense on the leftist blogs and of course, any web site that has the DNC's stamp of approval. The facts, do not bear any of this out, though the American people have been duped, by these distortions, half-truths and in some cases, outright lies. Investor's Business Daily points out some of the facts, that do not fit into the agenda's of the aforementioned groups.
"So before the data are spun beyond recognition by others, let's recount the good news: Since May 2003, when President Bush's tax cuts became law, the U.S. has created 4.7 million jobs. Payrolls have now expanded for 30 straight months. The jobless rate, though up a tick at 4.8%, is still near its five-year low.

Worker pay is also on the increase. Average weekly earnings rose 3.5% last month from a year earlier — the best gain in more than four years.

Last summer, we all were fretting about the economic impacts of higher interest rates, surging energy prices and Hurricane Katrina. But over the last year, including the hurricane season, monthly job gains have averaged 197,000 -— more than enough to sop up the 130,000 to 150,000 monthly growth in the U.S. labor force.

Based on the continued job growth and powerful gains in retail spending, most analysts now expect GDP to jump at least 4.5% in the first quarter and 3% for all of 2006 — even as the Federal Reserve continues to tighten credit.

In spite of all the great news, Americans remain strangely downbeat. A Gallup Poll taken earlier this year found just 38% who viewed the economy as "excellent" or "good" — down from 46% at the start of the last recession.

Our own IBD/TIPP Polls have shown sharp drops in economic optimism and consumers' six-month outlook. (Results of our March survey are due Tuesday.)

No doubt about it, the economy keeps powering along. Yet many Americans seem to think it's all a mirage and are sold on the idea that these are the worst of times.

Why the gloom? Much of it, no doubt, stems from misreporting by the media. Against the backdrop of surging payrolls, for example, we keep seeing story after story, in print and on TV, about job "losses."

A recent study by the Media Research Center bears this out. It looked at TV news coverage of jobs in 2005 -— 151 stories in all - carried on all three major networks.

This, mind you, was a year that saw the creation of 2 million new jobs, the addition of $350 billion to gross domestic product and an increase of $2 trillion in the value of household financial assets.Yet more than half of the networks' job reports focused on losses, not gains -— a picture that wasn't just distorted, but wrong."
I, for one, am getting sick and tired of the MSM pontificating on the public's right to know. The American people do have the right to know, we deserve the facts from the media, not spin and distortions. - Sailor

Friday, March 10, 2006

The Perils We Face

Congressman Curt Weldon,(R-PA), recently gave a speech on some of the perils we now face and how these perils came to be. It is rather lengthy, but well worth yout time to read. I will post a few excerpts here.
"I think of Dr. Gordon Oehler. Buried in the bowels of the CIA, Dr. Gordon Oehler was in charge of non-proliferation. When Benjamin Netanyahu came out in 1997, Dr. Oehler told us that Israel had evidence that Russia was working with Iran on the Shahab missile system. He came over to brief Congress and made a fundamental mistake that you didn’t make during the Clinton years: he told us the truth. He said, “We have the same information that Israel has: that in fact there is cooperation between Russian engineers to allow Iran to build a missile system that will one day threaten Israel directly and will eventually threaten all of Europe and the U.S.”

Because of Gordon Oehler’s work, we introduced the Iran Missile Sanctions bill. I was a prime sponsor and had bipartisan support. In spite of Al Gore personally lobbying against the bill, we passed it in the House with 398 votes. I got called back down to the White House a second time. The vice president lobbied us for another 90 minutes, before the Senate voted and passed it with 98 votes. That was four months before Clinton vetoed the bill.

As you all know, last summer, Iran paraded the Shahab-3 missile system down the streets of Tehran. It’s now complete. In 1997, we could have stopped it. Gordon Oehler was that patriot who told us the truth, and for that, he lost his job."
Then there is this on Able Danger.
"When the data-mining operation was shut down, General Lambert was in charge of the Special Forces operation, and he saw one of the military analysts in an airport a month or so later and said, “Why did you destroy my data? That data was being used to understand where al-Qaeda cells were worldwide.” Eric Kleinsmith, who has testified before my committee that he was ordered to destroy that data, said, “General, I had no choice. I was told that data had to be destroyed.” The Clinton administration didn’t want that data kept at Fort Belvoir because of the Chinese proliferation study that had been done in the months leading up to that revelation.

Unbeknownst to me, that team, known as Able Danger, was doing unbelievable work on al-Qaeda cells in 1999 and 2000. Now, I knew the operation of data mining, but I didn’t know the specifics of what they were doing until last May, when I went to publish my book, Countdown to Terror, and I called them back in to give me a chart they had given me after 9/11 occurred. They said, “Congressman, let us tell you what we were doing in Able Danger.”

Now, these weren’t people off the street. These are career military intelligence officers:

* Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Schaffer, a 23-year Army veteran, bronze star recipient; letters of commendation in his file from every DIA director; deployed in Afghanistan with our troops under cover under an assumed name as an intelligence officer.
* Scott Philpot, Navy Captain, commanding one of our newest destroyers next month. An able intelligence officer working as the point person for the head of SOCOM.
* General Schoomaker, leading Able Danger.

The two of them – Schaffer and Philpot, came to me privately and said, “Congressman, our unit identified five cells of al-Qaeda a year and a half before 9/11.”"
All and all a must read! - Sailor

Rep. Curt Weldon, R-PA, delivered the following speech at Restoration Weekend, which took place at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix February 23-26, 2006