The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped the first atomic bomb in the history of warfare says the Obama administration’s decision to send a U.S. delegation to a ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima is an “unsaid apology” and appears to be an attempt to “rewrite history.”

Gene Tibbets, son of Brig. Gen. Paul W. Tibbets, Jr., says Friday’s visit to Hiroshima by U.S. Ambassador John Roos is an act of contrition that his late father would never have approved.

“It’s an unsaid apology,” Tibbets, 66, told FoxNews.com from his home in Georgiana, Ala. “Why wouldn’t it be?  Why would [Roos] go? It doesn’t make any sense.

“I know it’s the anniversary, but I don’t know what the hell they’re trying to do. It needs to be left alone. The war is over.”

While controversial, America’s use of the Atomic Bomb to end World War II has been almost universally acknowledged to have ended the war sooner than other strategies available at the time, while at the same time saving thousands of American soldiers’ lives.  Apparently, Obama is ashamed of this and feels the need to apologize to a country who, at the time was guilty of killing a couple thousand Americans in a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

When asked about it, the Obama Administration did what it does best; it passed the buck:

White House officials on Wednesday referred calls to the State Department, which did not  respond to several inquiries about how the decision was made or if national veterans organizations were contacted prior to the announcement that a delegation would attend the commemoration.

Would you expect anything else from someone who spent most of his time in political office voting “Present” on important issues? This is yet another example of how the Obama Administration’s lack of Foreign Policy experience is destroying America’s reputation and credibility around the world. By the time The Obamasiah© leaves office in January of 2013, the world’s sole remaining super-power will be regarded as no more than a third-world banana republic by other world powers. This will be the lasting legacy of  Barack Obama.

THE SOLDIER

It is the soldier, not the protester, that guarantees the right of freedom of speech.

It is the soldier, not the priest, that guarantees the right of freedom of religion.

It is the soldier, not the journalist, that guarantees the right of freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not the police officer, that guarantees the right of due process of law.

It is the soldier, not the judge, that guarantees the right to a fair trial.

And it is the soldier; the one who salutes the flag, honors the flag, raises the flag at the beginning of the day, lowers the flag at the end of the day, folds the flag, and protects the flag, that gives American citizens the right to burn the flag.

Without men and women who love freedom so much that they are willing to stand up for it, fight for it, and yes — even die for it, there is no freedom.

Freedom is not free. If you are an American and you enjoy your freedom, thank those veterans who preserved it for you in the past and those currently wearing the uniform who protect it for you today.

The arrow points to the desent stage of the lunar module Eagle and its shadow.

For more LRO pictures of the landing sites, go here. Remember, the LRO will be lowering its lunar orbit as it continues to map the surface, so the next series of pictures of the landing sites should have much more detail.

Heck, we’d probably be strolling on Mars by 1980 at this rate, right? Well, as we all know, I was completely wrong there.

The fact that the space program, for all intents and purposes, was killed off shortly after the flight of Apollo 17 by the government budget process is only one of the harsh realities which sully the memory of America’s greatest scientific achievement. The other harsh reality is the existence of the conspiracy theorists who, to this day, claim that man never went to the moon.

Their theories have all been debunked by a plethora of highly-educated scientists and ordinary citizens too. They have been ridiculed for decades, yet they still cling to the belief that the U.S. government of the late 1960′s was able to convince the more than one million people involved with the space program to keep their mouths shut for over 40 years to keep the cover-up secret.

The New York Times talks about one of these whack jobs in an article published on July 13th, 2009:

Mr. Sibrel, who sells his films online, has hounded Apollo astronauts with a Bible, insisting that they swear on camera they had walked on the Moon. He so annoyed Buzz Aldrin in 2002 — ambushing him with his Bible and calling him “a coward, and a liar, and a thief” — that Mr. Aldrin punched Mr. Sibrel in the face. Law enforcement officials refused to file charges against Mr. Aldrin, the second man on the Moon.

In an interview, Mr. Sibrel said that his efforts to prove that men never walked on the Moon has cost him dearly. “I have suffered only persecution and financial loss,” he said. “I’ve lost visitation with my son. I’ve been expelled from churches. All because I believe the Moon landings are fraudulent.”

Well, we may finally be able to put the lie to these nutcases and their wild theories once and for all, thanks to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). The LRO was launched by NASA on June 18, 2009 and tasked with:

LRO will spend at least a year in a low polar orbit approximately 50 kilometers (31 miles) above the lunar surface, while its seven instruments find safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment and test new technology.

In addition, the LRO is taking high resolution photos of the surface of the moon, which will include at least some of the Apollo landing sites.

Jesus Diaz: Would the LRO return images of the moon landings when it flies over them?
Grey Hautaluoma (NASA Headquarters, Office of Public Affairs): Yes, it will. We don’t have a timeline yet for viewing the Apollo sites, but it will be in the near future.

My insides tell me that whatever the photos reveal, the crackpots will just come up with another conspiracy theory to explain them away, like they have done with the lunar rock samples. Oh well, at least the normal people will know that they’re full of dung.

The Jews and the Arabs have been at each others’ throats for what seems like forever. In 1948, the State of Israel was established and the Palestinians have had their noses out of joint ever since. The Palestinians show their displeasure over the situation by sending suicide bombers into Israel and killing innocent civilians in market places, night clubs, and buses. Israel usually responds by firing a couple of missiles into the West Bank or Gaza Strip. If Israel is really mad, they send troops and tanks into the West Bank and destroy settlements. Each points their finger at the other and blames them for every wrong thing under the sun.

In the later portion of the 20th Century, many Western leaders have advocated a two state solution to put an end to the fighting. Bill Clinton came the closest to making this solution a reality, but Yasser Arafat, then the leader of the Palestinians, rejected a proposal which gave the Palestinians practically everything they were asking for. Frankly, ever since this rejection I have always thought that the Palestinians, rather than wanting an end to the violence and bloodshed, have simply played games with the Israel and the West in order to keep the hate going. It is no secret that the Palestinians who are in charge of the government want to eliminate Israel completely, as do many Middle Eastern nations. I guess Israel finds it hard to make peace with nations who desire their destruction.

In my opinion, the Palestinians and the Israelis have been killing each other for so long that it no longer matters why they started fighting in the first place. The fight has become personal and inbred among the people in that region; it is simply what they do every day, just like eating, sleeping, or getting dressed. Palestinian children are taught from birth that Israelis and Jews are beyond contemptible, and that it is their duty to kill them. Death has simply become one more fact of life for the people who live in the region; so much so that it hardly raises an eyebrow anymore.

I am no great scholar of the Middle East and its conflicts. Most of what I know comes from cable news reports and internet news reports. However, I do find myself siding with Israel in this fight. It seems to me Israel, despite having hundreds of its innocent citizens killed by Palestinian suicide bombers every year, at least tries to conduct their fighting as a military campaign, targeting mostly those elements who are doing the bombing. They’re not perfect, of course, but when you’re fighting an enemy who hides behind women and children there isn’t much that can be done about collateral damage.

Will there ever be peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians? I think not. I don’t think there is anything Israel can offer the Palestinians which would convince them to stop the violence. I think the only thing which would cause the Palestinians to stop killing the Israelis would be for Israel to cease to exist. Neither side is rational anymore when it comes to discussing terms to end the conflict. As long as one side (or both) wants the violence to continue, it will continue unless or until one side ceases to exist.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Remember, Watergate is the liberal Holy Grail. They gather at partys to watch tapes of the hearings and the DVD of All The President’s Men. In short, nothing brings liberals more pride or pleasure than thinking about Watergate. Now it appears, that during the whole time, The Hildebeast™ was engaging in the very acts that they were prosecuting Nixon for. See if what she did back then reminds you of anything more recent:

The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel. Zeifman says that Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.

…

The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do?

“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.

The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Let’s see, Hillary hiding legal files which were material to an ongoing investigation — where have we heard that before? Oh yeah: The Rose Law Firm Billing Records. Apparently, for the Hildebeast™, this tactic is an oldy, but a goodie. Like most liberals, she appears to have only one play book when it comes to tactics, and that play book has never been revised. About all that play book is good for now is to establish her modus operandi.

With each day that passes, yet another reason why The Hildebeast™ should never again be allowed in the White House parking lot, let alone the White House itself, is presented to the public. A lot of these accounts are not new to conservatives; we’ve heard them before. However, now that the liberals are finally taking a hard, honest look at Senator Clinton, they are starting to see what conservatives saw twelve years ago.

Guess what? Even they can’t believe they supported her.

WE WILL NEVER FORGET.

Click here.

This quickly led to an exchange with the program’s token conservative, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, in which O’Donnell asserted that there is no right to own a gun:

Hasselbeck: “So you can’t- You can’t take way the right to, to bear arms.”

O’Donnell: “Well, it’s not really a right. There’s debate as to what that-”

Hasselbeck: “It is a right. It’s in our Constitution. It’s the Second Amendment.”

O’Donnell: “Well, let’s talk instead of yell.”

Hasselbeck: “I’m not yelling.”

O’Donnell quickly expanded the discussion into an attack on the NRA:

O’Donnell: “I know that the Constitution has been interpreted many, many times. In our country the president puts his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution. In the United States there is debate over whether or not the right to bear arms includes the lobby organization of the NRA, allowing no rules and no registration and absolutely, sort of, carte blanche, to make guns available to Americans in a way they’re not in the rest of the world.”

I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel like Rosie O’Donnell has any insight into what or what is not a right under the Constitution of the United States. Frankly, it was written by people who valued individual freedoms a lot more than she does and are smarter by a magnitude of at least ten.

Also, if the Second Amendment isn’t a right, how come Rosie’s bodyguard applied to carry a concealed weapon with her approval? Is it her position that people of prominence, like herself, have more rights than the average person on the street? That it is her right to have an armed bodyguard to protect her kids, but if Joe Sixpack wants to purchase a firearm to protect his family he’s out of luck? Does the hypocrisy ever end?

* Sarcasm Alert