Friday, July 11, 2008

Jungle rescuers wore CHE t-shirts!

In an interesting angle on the recent rescue of three US citizens and others from the FARC revolutionaries in the Columbian jungle, the Patriot Post reports the rescuers wore Che t-shirts as a ruse to convince the revos they were with FARC:

FARC hostages rescued

Colombian soldiers staged one of the greatest hostage rescues in history last week, all thanks to a little acting. A disgruntled member of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) decided to help the Colombian army rescue three American contractors, former presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt and 11 others held captive in the Colombian jungle. The double agent convinced the commander in charge of the hostages that FARC leaders wanted the 15 hostages transported to another location. The rescue crew of 12 Colombians—some dressed as FARC members and others wearing Che Guevara T-shirts and pretending to be part of a fake group called the International Humanitarian Mission—had a helicopter waiting to transport the hostages to their next destination. Everyone, including the hostages, was fooled until the Colombians revealed themselves once they were safely in the air.

Ironically, it was the Che T-shirts that were the most convincing part. “They were wearing Che Guevara shirts, and I thought: It’s the FARC!” said Betancourt. The Associated Press couldn’t bring themselves to mention that fact, calling the apparel simply “white” shirts. As Betancourt’s story is told, however, it will serve to bring down the myth that Che was a romantic hero instead of a terrorist thug. Indeed, Investor’s Business Daily notes, “In reality FARC is Che in action. No group has more right to claim the Guevara legacy than these jungle terrorists who actually have been at it since the days of Che.” The story also is damaging for FARC in that even Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez are distancing themselves from the terrorist group they have long supported.

As a thank you for Colombia’s daring rescue of three American citizens, we suggest that Congress pass the free-trade agreement currently being held hostage by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Maybe if Republicans wear Che T-shirts, they can trick her into it.

A quick perusal of major news sites reveals this quote from Ingrid Betancourt, the former Columbian presidential candidate:

"They spoke with Commander Enrique and Cesar," she said of her captors. As she looked closer, she saw that the men from the helicopter were wearing shirts emblazoned with the likeness of Che Guevara, the Argentine hero of the Cuban revolution. "I thought, this is FARC," she said.

Funny, I don't recall seeing any mention in the MSM TV news reports. God forbid we should link the Obamessiah campaign to FARC!
(note: the t-shirt image above is ripped from a CHE t-shirt site. I don't want to drive any traffic or give any credit to the site -- I don't want to aid the enemy!)

Obama, the national security neophyte

From Mark Alexander at the Patriot Post today, comes this article questioning the appropriateness of the Obamessiah for POTUS:

This week, Iranian Islamist Mahmud Ahmadi-Nejad tested his new ballistic missile, the Shahab-3—range 1,250 miles. Next door in Iraq, 550 metric tons of “yellowcake” uranium ore, which Saddam intended to weaponize for use in his non-existent WMD program, were removed from Tuwaitha. (That’s enough for more than 100 medium-sized nuclear boomers.) And while al-Qa’ida has been routed in Iraq, there was plenty of evidence this week that jihadis are putting up fierce resistance in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Seems like this is as good a week as any to pause and ponder, “Who should be our next commander in chief?”

The most important constitutional role of our president is that of commander in chief—which is why every Patriot, every American, every human on the planet, should be deeply concerned about the prospect of a “President Obama.”

If Barack Hussein Obama, the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, persuades voters that he is a “centrist candidate” and parlays that deception into defeating John McCain, there will be plenty of “change” in the coming years—unpleasant at best and catastrophic at worst.

Arguably, since our nation’s founding, no candidate has been less qualified than Obama to be his political party’s nominee for president of the United States. And nowhere is Obama more ill prepared than in matters of national security.

Not to mention just about any other requirement of holding the office.

I've been waffling on who is the lesser of two evils of the two candidates. My thinking is that if the Obamessiah gets elected, after four years of this total screw-up we'll see a conservative resurgence. If McCain is elected and we see a dip in the economy, people will be calling it Bush III and we'll pay for it with Democrats controlling the Congress for a long, long time.

I'm waffling no more. Given the two options, I'm convinced that B. Hussein Obama's presidency would simply be too damaging, too dangerous for too long for this country. Look at the thirty years of damage the last ultra-liberal nutroot (Jimmah Carter) did to the USA.

Read the rest of the article here, and you'll be convinced as well.