Tag Archives: President Obama

Attorneys Cite President’s Unlawful Command Influence, Seek Dismissal of Charges Against Army Helicopter Pilot

In an earlier article, I highlighted unlawful command influence and prosecutorial misconduct as reasons cited by defense attorneys William L. Summers and R. Tucker Richardson III to warrant the dismissal of all charges against their client, Army Maj. Christian “Kit’ Martin. In this piece, however, I focus only on what those same attorneys wrote about the current political environment and the impact it’s having on members of the U.S. military.

Major Christian "Kit" Martin is shown at the controls of an AH-64A Apache helicopter in Iraq.

Major Christian “Kit” Martin is shown at the controls of an AH-64A Apache helicopter in Iraq.

Taking up almost three pages of the 37-page Motion to Dismiss document dated June 28, the attorneys’ words speak volumes not only about the case of Major Martin, 47, but also about others like him, including Sgt. 1st Class Kelly A. Stewart, an elite Green Beret combat veteran whose life story and wrongful conviction are chronicled in my first nonfiction book, Three Days In August.

Without further ado, I share the attorneys’ words below while taking the editorial liberty of deciphering some of the military jargon as needed and adding a few notes:

Major Martin’s case is just another example of how far some commanders are willing to go to gain political favor. Brigadier General Mark Stammer’s* Memorandum, Policy Letter 7 dated October 4, 2013, was posted on the Fort Campbell Portal and distributed to all commanders. It states that any allegation of domestic violence will result in immediate steps, including a 12 point checklist. It then states that these are the minimum actions commanders will take, they can make more if they wish (hint). The allegation does not have to be proved and no evidence is required. This is definitely a guilty until proven innocent policy and clearly shows BG Stammer’s inherent bias with regard to alleged domestic violence and sexual assault cases.

*NOTE: the attorneys referred to Maj. Gen. Mark R. Stammer as “BG Stammer,” because he was a a brigadier general at the time the document was submitted. Today, he serves as commander of Africa Command’s Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa in Djibouti, located in East Africa.

Many commanders like Brig. Gen. Stammer are now circumventing standard Uniform Code of Military Justice procedures and overruling Investigating Officers as a means of covering themselves and preventing further congressional inquiry into changing the role of commanders in the UCMJ process. Some commanders are also sacrificing soldier’s careers and lives in order to gain political favor and earn their next star, as well as a means of facilitating the army downsizing process. The stench of elitism and double standards has most recently been revealed by the case of General (Ret.) David Petraeus. General Petraeus had an extra marital affair, maintained private Top Secret information at his home including undercover agent’s identities, Security Council notes, etc. and then went to his paramour’s house and turned over these same highly classified documents to her. After all of this he then lied about his actions to the FBI. In return he received only a two year probation and $100,000 fine. Compare his proven actions to MAJ Martin’s allegations of mishandling classified information and how his case has morphed from a divorce, to an EPO, to a spy investigation, and now into now a court martial with sexual allegations.

1. Presidential UCI

The Unlawful Command Influence of BG Stammer at Fort Campbell is just one of many military examples of UCI throughout the armed services starting with the Commander in Chief and working its way down. In fact a military court has already ruled that President Obama as Commander in Chief has exerted UCI. In the trial of United States vs. SH2 Ernest Johnson, the judge ruled that the President’s statements did constitute unlawful command influence.

The President stated “The bottom line is this; I have no tolerance for this, I expect consequences…they got to be held accountable, prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharge. Period.”

This is almost verbatim what has happened to MAJ Martin.

Judge Marcus N. Fulton** found that “the Presidents statement raises concern that a particular result is required and this impinges on a convening authority’s discretion to refer or not refer a case to court martial.” He also stated that “these words must be evaluated for their capacity to improperly influence or appear to influence those with roles” (in a court martial). The court found that the case of United States vs. Johnson and United States vs. Simpson that the Presidents statement did “present some evidence of unlawful command influence.” He further found that the Presidents statement “could be interpreted as administrative steps that ought to be taken in addition to the specified judicial action and punishment.” He also stated that “the overall atmosphere surrounding the topic of sexual assault in the military…tends to exacerbate rather than ameliorate the effect of the comments in question.”

**NOTE: One source for comments similar to those attributed to the judge above is this one.

Judge Fulton also said these statements “constitute some-indeed substantial-evidence that the President would tend to impinge on the discretion of the convening authority to come to an independent decision” (EX U Military Authority Article, EX V US. vs Ernst Johnson)

2. CSA General Odierno***

The Chief of Staff of the Army has stated that “Sexual assault is the greatest threat to our service.” As the U.S. Army is still engaged in combat operation in Afghanistan, Iraq, most of the Middle East, and facing huge potential adversaries in North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China, this shows how politically pressured senior commanders are to show they are taking sexual assault and domestic violence seriously. (EX W.)

http://archive.armytimes.com/article/20130610/NEWS06/306100038/Odierno-leaders- We-lost-soldiers-trust

***NOTE: General Odierno retired from the Army after the Motion to Dismiss was submitted. See also my video related to General Ordierno here.

3. BG Stammer

General Stammer asserted, that if assaults occur in his military jurisdiction, he insists that they stay there because he has-

“absolute trust, faith, and confidence in the chain of command and our judges that they will address these issues fairly and timely…The Commander… is the leader…he is singularly responsible… him and him alone…I am going to hold him personally accountable for doing his job. He is not going to have an excuse.” (EX X.)

In a June 16, 2013, article**** in the Fort Campbell Courier, General Stammer reportedly said,

“I believe that leadership responsibility and accountability are crucial to successfully addressing the sexual misconduct issue. Most important, we need responsible leadership to change the culture of even the slightest bit of tolerance for ill-disciplined and criminal behaviors.” (EX Y)

****NOTE: The article actually appeared in the June 6, 2013, issue of the cited newspaper.

4. Policy Letter 7

BG Stammer’s Policy Letter 7 shows blatant UCI in that it directs commanders to take negative actions against Soldiers based merely on an allegation, even if this is an obvious ploy by an ex-spouse, and even if they no longer live together. Among its many requirements it directs that commanders will issue a protective order, move the Soldier to the barracks, require them to turn in their private weapons, and consider separation from service. Commanders will also contact social workers, consult the Family Advocacy Program, trial counsel, the victim advocate program, etc. all based on one person’s allegation.

5. Billboard

Another obvious example of BG Stammer’s UCI at Fort Campbell was the recent picture of a male soldier on an electronic billboard. The billboard was in front of the Family Resource Center directly across the street from the senior leadership housing at Gate 1, and the house of Acting Senior Commander BG Stammer. The message concerned sexual assault and depicted a male soldier, the sign read:

“Your new year’s resolution is to get the F$*K (bleep) away from him.” (EX Z.)

This billboard, along with BG Stammer’s public comments and interviews represent Undo Command Influence (UCI) of a personal interest and inflexible attitude toward Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Cases at Fort Campbell. (Article 37 sections III and IV). In January of 2015, the National Coalition for Men posted a picture of the billboard on their website and sent a letter to the CG, Major General Gary J. Volesky***** requesting the removal of the offensive picture and message, which thereafter rapidly occurred. (EX AA.)

*****NOTE: General Volesky is the commanding general at Fort Campbell now.

I’ve mentioned it before, and I’ll mention it again: there’s much more to come for Major Martin, a man who put on his first military uniform as a private in 1986, marking the beginning of a career that would not only include serving as an Army Ranger, cavalry scout and attack helicopter pilot but also include becoming a Regular Army officer and serving three combat tours in Iraq.

Learn more about Major Martin and his case by reading this story as well as others. After you read them, please SHARE THEM and stay tuned for more updates!

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Book Excerpt: Nation’s First Latino President Takes Office

Coming only days after the passage of a controversial trade agreement, recent Supreme Court Decisions on gay marriage and healthcare have many Americans upset with the folks in Washington, D.C., who claim to represent their interests. If you count yourself among them, I think you’ll enjoy the timely excerpt below from Chapter 11 of my recently-released crime-fiction novel, The National Bet:

Click image above to order a copy of the book.

Click image above to order a copy of the book.

With the line of succession to the presidency obliterated, surviving members of the U.S. House and Senate met for five days straight to discuss a one-time, extra-Constitutional means for resolving this never-before-experienced crisis. They were joined by a select number of individuals from outside the legislative branch who had been instrumental in securing the top-level resignations. Together, they worked to select a successor to serve out the remainder of President Obama’s second term.

Minus any smoke signals, several rounds of papal election-style voting took place during an exhausting three-day period until one man, a proven leader without the baggage of a Beltway insider, emerged from the pack.

Governor Franklin G. Rivera was a second-term governor from Wyoming who some people—but not the man himself—liked to refer to as “FGR.” Far more conservative than the three-term president who, decades earlier, had been associated with a similar three-letter acronym, Governor Rivera’s public approval ratings were higher than any other statewide office holder in the country.

With much trepidation, the governor accepted the job just a few minutes before noon Saturday, July 4, 2015.

After taking the oath of office behind closed doors and without fanfare, the nation’s first Latino president addressed the nation at 3 p.m., delivering the first of many difficult messages he would be called upon to share as Commander- in-Chief:

My fellow Americans, many of you have suffered tremendous losses during the past several months. To you, I offer a sincere apology on behalf of every elected official in Washington.

Members of Congress have, with the cooperation of too many American presidents, gotten away with robbery for far too long. They’ve allowed taxing and spending to get out of control. And they’ve allowed government regulation to trample common sense and decency. As a result, we’ve all paid a price higher than most of us care to calculate.

During the next twelve months, I pledge to work tirelessly to establish legal safeguards in our system via which we will do more than simply prevent members of Congress from increasing the national debt. The safeguards I propose will involve imposing stiff financial penalties on individual members of Congress who choose to waste taxpayers’ dollars on any projects or programs that increase the national debt and the burden on our children and grandchildren.

Even more important than that, however, is my top priority—ensuring that all of your assets, taken from you illegally by the previous administration, are returned to you as quickly as possible.

I’ve set July 4, 2016, as the date by which your money, the money that is rightfully yours, will be returned, with interest, to your bank accounts, to your 401K accounts and to your other retirement savings vehicles. It will be a Financial Independence Day when government no longer has its hands on your money.

President Rivera’s speech resonated with the justifiably jaded American people.

After learning more about the energetic sixty-year-old president’s background via biopic news and feature reports that surfaced following his appointment, most Americans seemed genuinely appreciative of the fact his legal-immigrant parents had set a good example for their oldest son and his five younger siblings, all of whom had been born in the United States.

Not surprisingly, they liked knowing Rivera’s parents had realized success as farmers, growing mostly wheat and soybeans on the flatlands of eastern Colorado. And they liked the fact that the new president’s four adult children seemed to be decent, well-educated people not seeking to ride their father’s political coattails.

In addition, they liked the fact he had become successful through hard work, determination and a steadfast refusal to run with the pack when the pack was heading in the wrong direction. And they liked how he seemed to take time to think before opening his mouth to speak and refused to compromise his Christian faith.

Most importantly, they liked how President Rivera’s early actions spoke even louder than his personal history.

In addition to signing an executive order on Day One that banned the use of taxpayer dollars on inaugural activities, he signed another that prohibited all federal employees from participating in inaugural activities, public or private.

The new president also completed the process of appointing cabinet members within two days and warned members of Congress not to waste any time in approving his nominees, saying, “We have important business to take care of!”

During his first year in office, President Rivera worked too hard and slept too little while waging a gallant effort to restore stability. Not a single round of golf was played, and vacations were off limits for White House staffers and all who remained employed on Capitol Hill.

I hope you enjoyed this tidbit from The National Bet. Beyond that, I hope you’ll share it and order a copy to see what happens before and after this presidential moment.

Click here to read other excerpts from The National Bet and my two nonfiction books, The Clapper Memo and Three Days In August.

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

FLASHBACK 2009: Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for Radicals’ Reviewed

Six years ago today, I shared news about a liberal political strategy that endangers our nation. Today, because many in the conservative universe seem to forget these details as often as they remember them, I’m sharing the news again, pulled from what remains of the BobMcCarty.com archives, and updated as necessary.

Saul Alinsky 'Rules for Radicals' Rule 13

“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” said President Barack Obama, directing his comments at Republican leaders in Congress early during the week of Jan. 26, 2009.  During a 15-minute segment on Fox News Channel’s Fox & Friends program Jan. 29, 2009, Limbaugh responded by saying the 44th president was attempting to employ Rule #13 of the late Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”

Not familiar with Saul Alinski or his socialist “Rules”?  Fear not.

Part of a no-longer-online document, What Every Public Official Should Know About Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals,” Rule #13 reads as follows:


Reread President Obama’s comment above, and you can see that Limbaugh was right: President Obama picked his target (i.e., Limbaugh); he personalized his message; and he turned the conservative radio talk show host into a polarizing figure by telling Republicans they can’t get things done by listening to Limbaugh.

Did President Obama continue to employ Alinsky’s 13 “Rules” during his six years in the Oval Office? Take a look at them below and decide for yourself:

1. Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
2. Never go outside the experience of your people.
3. Whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.
4. Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
5. Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
6. A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.
7. A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
8. Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.
9. The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
10. The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
11. If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.
12. The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

From race-baiting and out-of-control spending to reckless foreign policy and cover-ups of massive proportions, the Obama Administration has not only employed these Rules, but it has employed them in ways once thought unimaginable by all except the most radical politicos. And did I mention executive orders?! Damn!

I encourage you to print these “Rules” and use them as tools via which to keep track of Obama’s actions and the actions of other liberals, democrats and socialists of his ilk as the 2016 election cycle draws near. Then, in 2016, vote as if your life depends on it!

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Bloody Massacres Generate ‘Solutions’ to Muslim Problem

EDITOR’S NOTE: Below is a guest post by Paul R. Hollrah, a resident of Oklahoma who writes from the perspective of a veteran conservative politico whose life experience includes having served two terms as a member of the Electoral College. Even if you disagree with him, this piece will make you think long and hard.

The word balloon of the cartoon that appeared on the cover of the Nov. 3, 2011, issue of Charlie Hebdo -- renamed Charia Hebdo ("Sharia Hebdo") -- reads "100 lashes if you don't die of laughter!"

In French, the word balloon of the cartoon on the cover of the Nov. 3, 2011, issue of Charlie Hebdo — renamed Charia Hebdo (“Sharia Hebdo”) — reads “100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”

The recent bloody massacres at the offices of the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, and at a kosher grocery store in Paris, have spawned a number of solutions to the “Muslim problem,” some totally useless and pointless and others quite draconian.

Typical of the useless and pointless solution was that offered by Pope Francis as he spoke to reporters aboard a recent flight from Sri Lanka to the Philippines. Referencing the atrocities in Paris, he first took both sides of the issue, expressing the belief that, while “freedom of religion and freedom of expression are both fundamental human rights,” if someone says something unkind about your mother the normal reaction is to “punch him in the nose.” He concluded by saying, “You can’t provoke, you can’t insult the faith of others, you can’t make fun of faith.”

In other words, Christians and Jews are not to show disrespect for Islam or Mohammed, but we must accept that Muslims will continue to slaughter Christians and Jews at will. If such atrocities represent what the pope might consider akin to an “unkind comment about one’s mother” by radical Islamists, then what would he suggest as a proper “punch in the nose?”

On the opposite end of the spectrum we have the comments of conservative rock star, Ted Nugent, a board member of the National Rifle Association and an outspoken critic of liberals, Democrats, and Barack Obama. In a Jan. 14, 2015, blog, titled “Save the Planet: Kill the Muslim Third Reich,” Nugent refers to his solution as “anti-rabid dog common sense.”

Setting the stage for his final solution, Nugent tells us, “I personally don’t care if you stand on your head and recite Shakespeare backwards, marry your beagle, stack BBs, French kiss rattlesnakes, or swan dive into a shallow vat of goat urine. If that’s what turns your religious crank, party on. Just do it downwind from me, and don’t bill me for your rehab.” He goes on to say, “But when it comes to the pure demonic evil of murderous savage Islamic terrorists, the line is universally drawn by good people worldwide. We all know instinctively that there is no virtue in slaughtering innocent people. No God smiles or rejoices in this.”

Introducing his solution to the problem, Nugent writes, “I’ll admit I’m not opposed to putting hollow points to the back of the heads of human cockroaches and various other vermin who wish to imprison me with their brain-dead, toxic ‘values.’ Truth is, I want to eliminate them from planet Earth and erase them from the history books of the human race… Everyone knows that there is no cure for rabid dogs except a bullet. The question the free world needs to ask is whether we are going to shoot the rabid dog or have the rabid dog chew our faces off.”

He concludes by saying, “My advice: kill ‘em all and let Satan sort ‘em out… Make no mistake; the world is in a race to the finish with crazed, rabid radical Muslims. The choice is simple: It’s religious freedom or subjugation, persecution or death… No more kicking the can down the road for the next generation. There comes a time for all good men and women to rise up and oppose evil. That time is now. It is our time. Americans must show the world the difference between respecting choices in lifestyle versus bending over and welcoming an evil takeover. This rabid, voodoo threat is very real and right in front of us. We must not shoot just one or two rabid dogs, but to save the human race we must kill them all…”

Clearly, the approach recommended by Pope Francis does nothing more than to postpone the ultimate demise of the civilized world, while the approach suggested by Nugent hardly merits discussion. To think that we could declare open season on Muslims and then proceed to kill more than two million of them is sheer madness. Instead, we must resolve to find a solution that is doable and effective, in spite of the weaknesses of our national leaders.

In their joint press conference Jan. 16, President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron expressed a desire to continue working toward multicultural societies in their respective countries. The Prime Minister expressed a willingness to spend two generations attempting to fully assimilate their Muslim immigrant population. Obama agreed, although he was still unable to use the words “Islamic” and “extremist” in the same sentence.

Neither man was willing to recognize that western nations have been attempting to assimilate Muslims for at least seventy years, more than three generations. Instead, while they continue to speak glowingly about “assimilation,” Muslims view their migration to western nations as “infiltration.”  What Obama and Cameron fail to acknowledge is that they live and work inside security “bubbles.” Unlike their fellow countrymen, they don’t have to worry about the swarthy-complexioned man in the bulky jacket at the shopping mall, or the burqa-clad Muslim woman seated next to them on a bus. They don’t have to wonder whether their clothes are just bulky, or if they conceal a suicide vest capable of killing dozens of people.

Hoping to learn a bit more about the motivation for attacks such as those on Charlie Hebdo and the Jewish grocery store, Daily Beast reporter Dana Kennedy traveled to several Parisian suburbs heavily populated by French-Algerian Muslims. She interviewed a cross section of young men who were convinced that the attacks were a conspiracy by Jews designed to make Muslims look bad. One Muslim told her that the Jews who staged the attacks were not just “regular” Jews, they were “a race of magical Jews, shape-shifting Jews,” who were “master manipulators” and who could be “everywhere at the same time.”

It is fanatics such as these who are motivated, in part, by the promise that they will each receive 72 virgins upon entering Heaven. How does one accommodate such ignorance? The answer is, we can’t.

If we are to find a middle road between what Pope Francis and Nugent suggest, our first goal must be to reach consensus on who and what the enemy is. Unlike the opinion of apologists for radical and moderate Muslims, Islam is not a religion as we understand the term. Rather it is a complete political, legal, economic, military, and cultural system with a religious component. Its adherents refuse to assimilate into host-country cultures, insisting that they be allowed to exist as an independent entity, not subject to the laws of their host countries. In order to accomplish their ends, they regularly preach the overthrow of their host nations, by violence if necessary.

Accordingly, western democracies must resolve that Islam is incompatible with cultures built on Judeo-Christian principles. In the United States, we must resolve that, “What is sauce for the (Communist) goose is sauce for the (Islamic) gander.” In order to neutralize and reverse Islam’s cultural infestation, a good starting point would be to tailor the language of Section 2 of the Communist Control Act of 1954… a law that has not been struck down by the courts and which is still on the books… to read as follows:

The American people are determined to eliminate from their midst organizations which, purporting to be ‘religious,’ in the accepted sense of that term, are conspirators dedicated to the destruction of our form of government by force and violence…

“The Congress hereby finds and declares that Islam, although purportedly a religious sect, is in fact an instrumentality of a foreign conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. It constitutes an authoritarian dictatorship within a republic, demanding for itself the rights and privileges accorded to individuals of other religious denominations, but denying to all others the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution…

“As a segment of the U.S. population, Islam is relatively small, numerically, and gives scant indication of its capacity ever to attain its ends by lawful means. The peril inherent in the existence of Islam arises not from its numbers, but from its failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of its activities, and its dedication to the proposition that the present system of government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence. Holding that doctrine, its role as the agency of a hostile foreign ideology renders its existence a clear and present danger to the security of the United States. It is the means whereby individuals are seduced into the service of Islam, trained to do its bidding, and directed and controlled in the conspiratorial performance of their revolutionary services. Therefore, the organization known as Islam shall be outlawed in the United States.”

With that statute on the books, making the practice or the promotion of Islam illegal, we can make it very uncomfortable for radical Islamists. We can make their presence in our country so unpleasant that they will long for a return to whatever hellhole they and their predecessors crawled out of; they will self-repatriate in increasingly large numbers. With eyes and ears planted in every mosque and every Muslim cultural center in America, radical Imams such as the late Anwar al-Awlaki could be readily identified and FBI agents could quickly make arrests.

According to the story of the Tower of Babel, beginning in Genesis 11:6 (NKJV), God was displeased by efforts of a Hebrew tribe to build a tower that would reach the heavens, God looked down upon the Earth, and said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city.

Inasmuch as radicalized Muslims have let it be known that all non-Muslims must either submit to them or die, and so-called “moderate” Muslims have refused to restrain their murderous brethren, perhaps it is time we reenacted the story of Babel, quarantining all Muslims to a portion of the Earth in which all of the competing tribes of Islam can settle their differences… peacefully or violently.

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Another Malaysia-Owned Jetliner Reported Missing!

News broke late Saturday night about another Malaysia-owned jetliner disappearing over water, and I couldn’t help but recall what I had shared in a status update on my Facebook page Friday afternoon.

In a Facebook status update Friday, I expressed concern upon reading an Examiner.com article.

In a Facebook status update Friday, I expressed concern upon reading an Examiner.com article.

First, the news:  The New York Times reported late Saturday an Airbus A320-200 jetliner owned by AirAsia was carrying six crew and 155 passengers, including 16 children and one infant, when ground control lost contact with the aircraft shortly after takeoff from Indonesia’s Surabaya Airport en route to Singapore. NBC News reported the aircraft involved was designated Flight QZ8501.

Logically, my first thoughts after hearing the news revolved around whether there might be a connection between this aircraft incident and the one that took place March 8 when Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-370 disappeared while en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. My second thought, however, centered upon what I had written in my aforementioned Facebook status update Friday after reading an Examiner.com article about President Barack Obama’s latest golf partner, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Along with a link to the Examiner.com article, I shared the words below:

To date, I have not attempted to make a connection between President Obama and the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH-370 more than nine months ago. And then I read this article.

Of course, evidence to suggest any connection between today’s aircraft incident and the men involved in the golf outing has yet to surface and, indeed, may never surface. Does such evidence exist? That’s a question for the ages.

Stay tuned for updates!

UPDATE 12/28/2014 at 8:19 a.m. Central: Some news outlets, such as BBC, are reporting there were 162 souls on board instead of 161.

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.