Free Speech is a Bitch

First, BRAVO ZULU to Mr Kristinn Taylor of DC FreeRepublic. He handled himself with his usual aplomb.
O'Reilly was over-bearing and lacking in information. Anyone who understands FreeRepublic knows that what his researchers found were in all likelihood, posts by trolls and were removed as soon as they were dicovered. I'm sorry we can't censor people as quickly as Mr. O'Reilly would like us to. But we do police our own, unlike the left leaning sites.

Full Disclosure: I have been associated with FreeRepublic.com since 1998. I have been an active participant since 2004. I know the owner personally. We have broken bread together. He believes in America and all that she stands for. He is a Veteran and a Patriot.

Statement by the founder of Free Republic
Jim Robinson
Posted on 03/22/2004 6:22:17 PM PST
I posted the following statement to our front page in response to the criticism I'm receiving lately as to not being fair and balanced and perceived mistreatment of trolls and assorted malcontents. Got news for all, I'm NOT fair and balanced. I'm biased toward God, country, family, liberty and freedom and against liberalism, socialism, anarchism, wackoism, global balonyism and any other form of tyranny. Hope this helps:

In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule... /snip

As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
/snip

Opinions expressed on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Free Republic or its operators.
Please enjoy our forum, but also please remember to use common courtesy when posting and refrain from posting personal attacks, profanity, vulgarity, threats, racial or religious bigotry, or any other materials offensive or otherwise inappropriate for a conservative family audience. Free Republic is a noncommerical site. Please do not post advertising, solicitations, spam or any other commercial messages. Do not spam us with links to your own site. No one likes spam.

Free Republic does not advocate violence, rebellion, secession, or an overthrow of the government


FreeRepublic is a privately-owned PUBLIC FORUM setup for the express purpose of exercising our 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of association. It is conservatve in tenor and content.

There is no fee for membership. There are no restictions on who may sign up for posting priveleges. Anyone with a computer and an email address can register to post and reply to comments. If those who disagree with our point of view want to make us look bad, it's easy to do.

When they try, they are exposed and their account is suspended. Any blantantly offensive or threatening posts are removed as soon as they are discovered and in some cases, it can happen quickly.

The difference between FR and DemocraticUnderground is content, method of expression, and philosphy. At any given time, you can find the most foul, despicable langauge coupled with radical ideas and conspiracy theories, you can stomach.

But I wouldn't want it any other way, would you?

Tagged...Just DAMN!!!

OK here goes:
1. When I was 14 I saw Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels, with the Swinging Medallions, at the Mosque (now the Landmark)
2. When I was 15 I saw The Dave Clark 5 and The Trogs (Wild Thing) at the Mosque.
3. When I was 6 I burned down my neighbor's outhouse.
4. I am the oldest of 4 and I have done jail time, it's tradition.
5. I don't like black widow or brown recluse spiders, or wasps.
6. I have welded in water up to my waist.
7. I have jumped out of airplanes
8. My mother is still the coolest person I know.

Now who gets tagged:
Maggie
Fuzzy
Oh yeah..My Buddy
AG Sorry E, they made me do it.
AWTMThis Lady is so nice. I always get her confused with someone else. Very embarrassing for me.
ASPC'mon, humour us..

Foreign Collaborators Of The American “Insurgency”

The Reality Check
by Christopher G. Adamo

America understands that, had Bin Laden been killed or captured on September 12 2001, America would still have faced a protracted war on terror no less extensive than it has since endured. Dealing with the al Qaeda leader is a worthy goal, but hardly the end of the conflict.

Ultimately, September 11 represented neither a superior military capability on the part of the terrorists when assaulting the American homeland, nor immunity to its staunchest defenses. Rather, it was the predictable result of an insidious and plotting enemy who understands that its quarry has, primarily in the spiritual sense grown weak, and over time became vulnerable.

It was not the strength of the Islamists, but frailties within the fabric of the nation, that must be recognized as its primary vulnerability to attack. Mortal enemies of the American ideal have existed since its founding. But not until the current age could they operate as they have in their efforts to destroy the nation while openly demanding sympathy and compliance.

Thus, the ongoing danger to America must be addressed on numerous fronts, not the least of which is within the domestic culture. For it is there that crucial incursions can be made, from which larger and more encompassing attacks can eventually be staged.

Those flaws in the American bulwarks of protection result from flaws in philosophies which have become predominant in this nation during the past four decades of so. And while they exist primarily on the political left, having not been challenged sufficiently, they have, over time, tainted an ever-greater segment of political/social thinking.

Recent events should remind us that the enemy which attacked America on 9-11 is still waiting and watching, and will not hesitate to strike again when any opportunity presents itself. Nor is it alone. Other forces, no less ominous and hostile to everything that is America, likewise seek to widen any cracks that exist in the national defenses.

Just this past week, the Democrat led Senate shot down an attempt to protect Americans from the intimidation of being sued for reporting the suspicious activity of possible terrorists. Thankfully, the proposal has since been restored, though it never should have been in question.

The measure was proposed in direct response to the recent lawsuit filed by the six Imams at Minneapolis Airport who deliberately acted in a manner that could be construed as a terrorist plot and were reported as such. That any member of the Senate would have allowed the lawsuits to proceed is all but unthinkable.

It may seem inflammatory to parallel Congressional Democrats and America’s liberal culture with Islamists, but it is also, unfortunately, entirely fitting. As with the Democrat cheerleading for the expected eventuality of an Al Qaeda victory in Iraq, the militant Islamists benefit greatly from such collaboration.

Yet the possibility of a Muslim offensive is not the only major cultural threat facing the nation. No less an incursion looms on the nation’s southern border, and in this case, Republicans and many who consider themselves on the political “right” are every bit as culpable.

If anything, the threat posed by Mexico may prove to be greater, since it has pressed relentlessly forward. And with none of the drama of the collapsing towers, it is rarely driven back.

In many respects, the entire open borders controversy, the ultimate threat it poses to the nation’s future, and the steps necessary to restore American nationalism, are encapsulated by the horrendous injustice dealt against border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. Currently imprisoned for shooting a known drug smuggler, they epitomize the realities of the illegal debate.

This case is particularly prescient since the two are obviously not of Swedish descent. Were the border controversy merely an expression of anti-Hispanic bigotry, Americans who are accused of holding to such prejudices would be content to let them languish in jail.

But Ramos and Compean are Americans, enforcing the laws they swore an oath to uphold, yet railroaded by a system that apparently sees some higher calling than maintaining this country’s laws for the safety and benefit of its people.

Worse yet, though President Bush clearly took the lead in driving back the encroaching forces of militant Islam, he has not done so against the Mexican insurgency. In fact, he has frequently gone so far as to side with the foreigners and against America’s institutions established to ensure the integrity of our national boundaries.

Just as the six Imams have since used the incident they created to threaten others against reporting possible unfolding terrorist plots. The fate of Ramos and Compean can only be construed as Mexico’s attempt to hamstring America’s border control apparatus, for fear that other members may likewise face prison.

Meanwhile, the malevolent pro-illegal organization known as “La Raza” (The Race) is attempting to capitalize on the liberal ruse of criminalizing any political opposition. In Miami last week, the Mexican insurgency reacted to the recent defeat of the amnesty bill by characterizing it as “a wave of hate.”

As liberals continue to press forward with their notion of “hate crimes,” does anyone doubt that La Raza would eventually seek to add “immigration status” to the list of protected categories?

In all of these situations, the insurgent organizations are utilizing American institutions to extend their reach. Clearly the enemy knows where to most effectively attack us. Thus, to properly confront them, those institutions must first be dealt with.

The Islamists and the Mexican Government would not dare engage in such brazen behavior, were it not for the advent of “political correctness” and its adherents in this country, acting in the role of a geopolitical “AIDS virus,” to destroy America’s immunity against such malignant forces by undermining its morality, its heritage, and ultimately, its common sense.

Consequently, the only avenue to ensuring America’s future is the restoration of such crucial components of the national fabric.

Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer and staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He lives in southeastern Wyoming. He has been active in local and state politics for many years. His contact information and archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com

The Retreat And Defeat Bill For Iraq

By: Jeremiah Puder

Last week, H.R. 2956, the so-called "Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act" passed in the House of Representatives to the delight of Nancy Pelosi and the anti-Iraq War crowd. That any Americans, let alone our supposed leaders, could relish in what is essentially a national humiliation, declaration of defeat and likely national security disaster is incomprehensible and unacceptable.

There is no doubt that Iraq is a mess. But in their blind hatred of George W. Bush, the Democratic Party and the wider left has come to view the Iraq War as indistinguishable and indivisible from the persona and legacy of the president. In their view, failure, humiliation, and defeat in Iraq will be regarded as essentially and primarily a defeat and reprobation for Bush and all he represents and therefore a good thing for Democratic and liberal political and ideological purposes.

To justify their agenda, the anti-war partisans have maintained that the war was ill conceived, illegal, initiated under intentionally false pretenses and terribly mismanaged. They claim that Iraq had, and has, absolutely nothing to do with the Global War on Terror and that oil was the primary motivation for invasion and occupation.

Even if all of these suppositions and accusations are true, it doesn't matter at this point. These issues and arguments are purely abstract and utterly counterproductive to addressing the issues in front of us right now.

The reality is that Islamic extremism has chosen Iraq as the primary battlefront in its war against the United States. While the anti-war left may not want to acknowledge that Iraq is now the primary battleground in the Global War on Terror, the level of carnage and death there somberly attests to this inconvenient truth.

But if the anti-war left opposes fighting the terrorists in Iraq, where do they propose we fight them? Would it be preferable to fight the terrorists in the cities, suburbs, malls and schools of the United States?

Whether intentional or not, the ongoing benefit of the Iraq War is that the terrorists have decided to direct their primary efforts against our military forces in Iraq and not against our defenseless civilians.

Those in favor of exit strategies in lieu of attaining success and victory in Iraq are blindly committing the age-old sin of naively projecting their own hopes, values, and assumptions onto the enemy. For supporters of H.R. 2956, the plan to "responsibly redeploy" out of Iraq seems eminently rational and responsible. In their view the pullout is not an indication of defeat but simply a means of extrication from a doomed and irresolvable situation.

However, the radical Islamic world will undoubtedly not view the "responsible redeployment" as the armchair generals on Capitol Hill have attempted to spin it.

For a forecast of what is potentially in store if the anti-war left has its way, the Israeli "redeployments" out of Lebanon and Gaza provide ample warning. In both Israeli cases, Hezbollah, Hamas and the wider Islamic world triumphantly hailed what seemed to be positive, constructive steps toward peace as a victory and vindication of terrorism and violence.

More tangibly, through their perception of Israel's apparent weakness, Hezbollah and Hamas were sufficiently emboldened to initiate much wider and ambitious conflicts with Israel last summer.

Is there any reason to believe that the implementation of H.R. 2956 will have a different effect on the radical militant Islamic elements and insurgency in Iraq? If the U.S. ignominiously pulls out of Iraq, won't these elements likely claim victory over the U.S.?

But so what if the terrorists claim victory Iraq? If we are gone from Iraq, the Islamic fanatics will no longer have a reason to hate us.

Many anti-war partisans in Congress and elsewhere would have us believe that Iraq is the causus belli for radical Islam's jihad against America. They would have us forget the previous four decades worth of Arab and Muslim terrorism and the 9/11 attacks, which were launched well before the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

But once America is voluntarily chased out of Iraq, what will prevent the victorious insurgents and terrorists from directing their blood lust and hatred onto American soil?

Withdrawing our military from Iraq from a position of weakness will only serve to offer the enemy a triumphant victory and would release hundreds, if not thousands, of hardened, experienced, fanatical, bloodthirsty Islamic terrorists to strike the United States homeland and American interests elsewhere around the world.

At least when U.S. politicians gave up on Vietnam, Americans did not have to worry about the possibility of Viet Cong homicide bombers slipping into the country to blow up Americans on American soil once we evacuated that Southeast Asia.

The bottom line is that despite the legitimate questions regarding the management of the Iraq conflict - and whether one accepts or rejects our reasons for being there or the justifications that were initially provided - it is the United States of America, not George W. Bush, that will ultimately suffer the consequences of defeat.

Bush will be back on the ranch in less than two years, well protected by the Secret Service. But beyond the impact to his legacy, the disastrous consequences of disgracefully and prematurely cutting and running from Iraq will likely be borne by the rest of us - and perhaps by our children as well.

H.R. 2956 and the anti-war agenda it represents could possibly be the most shortsighted and self-destructive political initiative in American history. The consequences of H.R. 2956 to national security far outweigh the left's insatiable hunger for wreaking vengeance on Bush and putting a Democrat in the White House.

Jeremiah Puder is a veteran of the U.S. Navy and a graduate of the American Military University specializing in intelligence, military and foreign affairs.

Evil of Islamo-fascism evident in U.S., Israel

From OneNewsNow

A prominent pro-Israel activist says "elites" in America are afraid to confront what he calls "the gathering storm of Islamo-fascism." And the evil behind Islamo-fascism, says Gary Bauer, is nearly incomprehensible.

American Values president Gary Bauer has told the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in Washington, DC, that freedom of religion and freedom of speech are under attack from a "sick" and "evil" philosophy that is behind the terror campaign currently being waged against Israel.

Bauer, who was greeted with a 20-second standing ovation after being introduced, said a certain group in America wants to make excuses for Islamo-fascism.

"If a bunch of Iraqi children are blown up because they're accepting candy from a U.S. soldier, these elites blame George Bush," Bauer shared. "If rockets are pouring into northern Israel from Hezbollah, these elites blame Israel. They come up with a thousand excuses -- 'well, it's social injustice; it's poverty' -- all sorts of things to explain away what's happening."

The former presidential candidate characterized the fight against Islamic terrorism as "a great battle between good and evil." In addition, he said, the fruits of the Islamo-fascist ideology are evident in the terror campaign being unleashed against Israel.

"[W]e've all seen the photos and the pictures of mothers in Gaza leaping with joy at the news that their son [or daughter] has blown himself up, as long as they're assured that he killed Jews in the process," Bauer pointed out. "Every mother, I believe, has been imbued by God with the impulse to protect their young. But this philosophy is so evil it can even make a mother shed that normal motherly emotion."

CUFI's Second Annual Israel/Washington DC Summit continues through Thursday, July 19.

We Fight for Victory

The latest book by Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson (U.S. Air Force-Ret.) is called War Crimes: The Left's Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror. In the book, he claims that two anti-war groups -- "United for Peace & Justice" and "CODEPINK: Women for Peace" -- literally gave aid and comfort to terrorists when they delivered $600,000 in cash and supplies they claim was humanitarian aid to civilians.

Code Pink info here and here
United for Peace & Justice here

To my friends in the Move America Forward family,

I wanted to make sure you've heard the big news - Move America Forward is going to lead a giant, patriotic, pro-troop caravan across the nation, just at the time when Congress will be deciding whether to cut off all support for our troops in Iraq. It's called the "Fight For Victory Tour" and it will take place September 3rd through September 15th.

As a 20-year veteran in the U.S. Air Force, including service as President Clinton's top military aide, I've seen personally how irresponsible and ego-centric politicians can exact a toll on America's military and our national security. I clearly see it happening again!

I want to tell you why it is so very important for you to join us in this effort. The men and women who wear the uniform of the United States military do so with pride and honor. Our troops fighting the war against Islamic jihadists across the globe do so with courage, dignity and compassion despite enduring the harshest of conditions. They are doing an outstanding job, and most importantly, THEY ARE WINNING! ITS UP TO US TO WIN THE HOME FRONT!


This morning you might have found yourself irritated about the flow of traffic or annoyed at the stubbornness of a co-worker. Well, today there are thousands of our troops, wearing more than 50+ pounds of body armor in 110+ degree heat, with wind-driven sand clogging their lungs, mouths, eyes and nostrils. These men and women know that at any moment Islamic jihadists might shoot at them or that they might be ripped apart by the explosion from an Improvised Explosive Device - "IED."

Contrast this selfless service and sacrifice to the recent conduct of some of our "elected representatives" in Congress. While American fighting men and women stand in harm's way fighting in a war we sent them to, we have a number of politicians placing their careers above their nation. They lack the moral authority and courage to do what is right instead of what is politically expedient.

This has nothing to do with political party either - we've seen our troops betrayed by individuals across the political spectrum.

We are a nation at war with a threat from Islamic jihadists that will not go away if we surrender and withdraw from Iraq; no, that threat will only grow in intensity and brutality. Iraq will become "killing fields" rife with sectarian violence and Al Qaeda will have the opportunity to seize control of the country and its oil fields, greatly enhancing their ability to launch coordinated terror strikes against America and our allies, in pursuit of their "Grand Caliphate".

Victory is our only option. Our troops know that, you know that and I know that. The members of the United States Congress, however, stand poised to force surrender upon our troops, defeat for our nation and undermine the security of the people they were elected to represent.

We cannot let that happen.

I don't care how negative the media gets in their reporting. I don't care how bad the polls might look on a given day. Wars aren't won on the basis of polls.

We must stand up and step forward to do what is right, and to make our voices heard, just as our troops are compelled to understand their duties in fighting hostile enemy forces - at the risk of losing their own lives.

It's time all of us who understand the stakes of this war declare that we will not give up or give in, no matter how hard the news media and anti-military politicians try to discourage us.

I ask you to stand by my side this September 3rd through 15th in Move America Forward's "Fight For Victory Tour" that will traverse this nation and end up at Washington, D.C. on the doorsteps of Congress.



If we don't make the effort to win the war for hearts and minds here at home, then how can we expect our troops to win the war against tyranny and terror overseas?

Gen. Pace: Iraq undergoes "sea change" in security

via Rush:

General Peter Pace says Iraq has undergone a "sea change" in security. The National Intelligence Estimate says the nation is safer and we're having success against Al-Qaeda across the globe and in Iraq.

What's the Democrat reaction to positive news?
An all-night stunt in the Senate to call for a vote on surrender and bash Bush.

A Rasmussen poll shows 51% say we should let the surge go through September as planned. Congressional approval will continue to plummet as Americans watch Democrats in their latest bit of political theater.

You should watch some of this tonight, and record it for your kids and grandkids so they know what a worthless bunch of Democrats we had in the United States Senate in the summer of 2007. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen Here).

Pro-Troop Supporters Announce Major September Push

Move America Forward is planning a second cross country caravan from California to Washington DC in support of General David Petraeous and his Report to Congress on the Progress of the Surge on 15 September.

Anyone who has read anything on this site knows my stand.

DC Protest Warrior requests that all like-minded citizens join us in Washington DC on 15 September as we take a stand against the cut and run defeat at all costs surrender monkeys.
More info and links can be found here.

Ron Paul warns of staged terror attack

Politico.com has the story.

Republican presidential candidate, Rep. Ron Paul, said the country is in "great danger" of the U.S. government staging a terrorist attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation, as the war in Iraq continues to deteriorate.

The Texas congressman offered no specifics nor mentioned President Bush by name, but he clearly insinuated that the administration would not be above staging an incident to revive flagging support.

"We're in danger in many ways," Paul said on the Alex Jones radio show. "The attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense."

Paul was asked to respond to comments by anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan that the U.S. is in danger of a staged terror attack or a provocation of an enemy similar to the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 before the Vietnam War.

During the radio interview, Paul said the government was conducting "an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq."

Of course he ignores this column by Senator Joe Lieberman, published just a week ago.

"Earlier this week, the U.S. military made public new and disturbing information about the proxy war that Iran is waging against American soldiers and our allies in Iraq.
According to Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, the U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, the Iranian government has been using the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah to train and organize Iraqi extremists, who are responsible in turn for the murder of American service members. "

Has anyone noticed how repressed we are? The Bush administration has suspended the Bill of Rights and instituted martial law. I see armed troops in the streets, roadblocks, checkpoints. "Your papers please"..WTF!?!?!?
Oh wait, that was a movie...Sorry.

Ron Paul may just have torpedoed his own campaign. He certainly has lost all credibility with me. Regardless of what you think, sometimes you just need to STFU and keep it to yourself.

Democrats’ Fear of Iraq Surge Success Grows

Personal message to Dingy Harry:
It takes a real man to hide behind the title of Majority Leader and deride and insult the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Try that shit on the street, and someone will be kicking your sniveling cowardly ass up and down Pennsylvania Avenue.
You're a disgrace to this country, to the Constitution and to every decent American who has ever worn the uniform or stood up against an enemy. You should be ashamed, but you have no shame. You have no decency. You're a tool and a lackey of the extremist left. You're a useful idiot and you should be tried for sedition and treason.

Disclaimer - The above is the express opinion of a God fearin, USA lovin, military supportin, gun totin, conservative leanin, camo wearin, country listenin, nascar watchin, pickup truck drivin, blue collar, monogamous, heterosexual, former Marine, redneck, male.
No one says you have to agree.

Democrats’ Fear of Iraq Surge Success Grows
by Sher Zieve

NewMediaAlliance

On Monday, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) told reporters that he and other Democrats were not willing to wait for evaluated reports on the troop surge in Iraq. Reid advised that he and his colleagues are moving at virtual breakneck speed to formulate and pass an anti-war bill. While al-Qaeda continues to practice all manner of depravities and perversions—the latest reported corruption being the terrorist organization’s penchant for the profane via literally (not figuratively) baking the children of those it wishes to intimidate and then "serving" said cooked progeny to their parents—most of their debaucheries still go unreported by the terrorist-enabling leftist worldwide press. Most certainly Harry Reid and other Democrat and RINO leaders committed to surrender won’t mention the actual performance and true scope of the Islamists’ goals. Instead, Reid and other appeasers are unwilling to wait for any and all reports from those actually functioning in the Iraq battle theatre. As reports from the front suggest the surge (AKA Operation Arrowhead Ripper) actually is working, the leftist and overwhelmingly Democrat US mainstream media continues their attempts to bury the story.

Note: This same battle surge, being waged by our extraordinary and inordinately courageous US soldiers, must be spun and manipulated by the mainstream media and their Democrat leaders in order for them to achieve their objective of reseizing and then retaining (forever we assume) power. The illusion of power has long been their god.

Because Senator Reid and other Democrats are now the official water carriers for MoveOn.org and other leftist money groups, traditional pro-American Democrats have long since been forced out of leadership positions—if not the Democrat Party. Displaying his submission to anything-for-a-buck-and-a-big-piece-of-the-power-pie, Reid and other Democrat Party members talk daily with MoveOn.org and the Las Vegas Sun reports: "Every morning at 10:30, staff from the Democratic leadership offices is on the line with representatives of nearly a dozen groups, including powerful moveon.org, that make up the Americans Against Escalation in Iraq." One suspects that this is when the Democrats receive their daily marching orders. To emphasize his alliance with the far-Left, Reid has now even taken to demeaning US military leaders who disagree with his constant bogus statement "the [Iraq] war is lost." Recently, Reid referred to Gen. Peter Pace as "incompetent" and said that Pace "had not done a very good job... I told him that to his face!" Wow! How "brave" of a senator to verbally slap a General in his face. This is the same senator who has the mainstream press in his pocket, so that his unethical land escapades are seldom—if ever—reported.

Of interest, on Wednesday’s Bill Bennett Morning in America Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-OK) spoke of his recent trip to Iraq. Inhofe commented on the troop surge in Iraq’s success. As the mainstream media and their Democrat masters continue to tell us that the US surge isn’t working, Inhofe—who actually visits Iraq—tells a different story. In May, Sen. Inhofe said: "The Iraqis have now taken over; they have the numbers and the capacity and they've taken over the battle space in Fallujah. In other words, they're providing their own security. It's a success story in Fallujah, one of the most difficult areas to deal with." Hmmm. After reading "reports" from the NY Times and other far-Left publications, I‘d thought the Iraqis weren’t stepping up to the plate at all. Didn’t you?

Sen. Inhofe went on to say: "The troop surge has given us the troop numbers to push al Qaeda out of most of the area in the Anbar province and allowed governance to hold onto their own destiny. This is a major change. This is my seventh time in this area, and the Sunni tribes now see the need to work together with us against al Qaeda." Then, on Bill Bennett’s radio program, Inhofe advised that due to the success of the surge, there have been "no anti-American messages since April" preached in Iraqi mosques. This is a very different story than that which our press and Democrat senators are telling us. And it is another example of liberal and leftist leaders—from both US political parties—lying to the public in order to gain funding from anti-war/anti-American groups and credence with news sources. Corruption is, apparently, a most seductive mistress.

The Democrat Party is telling we-the-people that it will continue to force the US out of Iraq and, presumably, the Middle East as a whole. It is also telling al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations: "We’ve got your back, guys, and if we can seize all three branches of government—we’ll give you Iraq and you’ll be home free!" That is precisely what is intended and what will occur if this country is forced into a total leftist mindset. And force is what leftists—and Islamist terrorists—require to complete their missions. If the Iraq war is actually won by the West, US Democrats will have a much harder chance of winning elections—and winning elections (AKA power and money) are the only items left that seem to be of any import to Congressional electees. Reid and others already appear to have damned the USA and have begun stronger and stronger campaigns against our own military men and women. The Democrats’ fear is that if we don’t lose this war—they won’t be reelected. The term "sicko" should actually refer to the anti-USA contingent entrenched in Congress.

Again, I ask the question is this any way to run a country? Unfortunately, the answer is still the same: "No. But, it is a real way to end it."

Events of Note

Soldiers Angels can always use some help. I have pledged $25 a month.
Whatcha got?

The National FreedomWalk will be held in Washington DC on 9 September 2007. You can pre-register (highly recommended) here.

On 14 September as many people as possible should be in Washington DC.
7200 Georgia Ave NW at 1800 hours.
Here's why.

On 15 September, moonbats of every socialist persuasion will descend upon our Nation's Capital to protest the report of General David Patreaus to Congress on the progress of the surge. They will be there with their signs calling for impeachment, stop the war, stop killing terrorists, stop killing babies, save the planet, bush is war criminal yada yada yada.
I wish these people would come up with something original.

As an added bonus, if given the chance they will spit on a soldier, and call him a baby killer.
Oh and they'll have signs that say "we support the troops when they kill their officers".
If you're curious there is a link. and here.
Here is the best source.

The weekend of 4 and 5 October in Washington DC Americans for Prosperity will hold its national Defending the American Dream summit.
You can read about it here

So Now We See Their TRUE COLORS

From GOPUSA

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters Monday that Democrats won't wait for the reports and will move forward with anti-war legislation. By week's end, the Senate will vote on a proposal by Sens. Jim Webb, D-Va., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., that would require that troops spend as much time at home as they do in combat. Another proposal, by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., would order troop withdrawals in 120 days.
''The surge (in troops) was supposed to provide Iraq political leaders the space to make the compromises necessary to unite this nation. It hasn't happened, despite the bravery of our troops,'' said Reid, D-Nev.

So Dingy Harry isn't going to wait for the report he asked for. Why does that not surprise me. He already said it was a failure.
His years of teaching strategy at the War College apparently is what he is basing his claim on. He must be a military genuis, how else would he know the surge isn't working?

OMFG!!! Will these lying scumbags ever stop? Will they just sit back and wait for the trucks and cars to start exploding in Americas' streets before they finally realize we're better off fighting the islamist extremists in Iraq than here?
It'll be to late then.

Dingy Harry needs to STFU and go back to doing what he knows best.............
hmmm...what exactly is that, again?

Seal the Borders

,,,SEAL THE BORDERS!!! (in case the guy in the back didn't hear me)

Folks out here in the ether need some definitive positions from Senator Thompson.

Specifically:
how will he seal the border?
Thats the single biggest issue..followed closely by the GWOT, taxes, and Bill of Rights issues...

I think I know where Senator Thompson stands on the last three...

Constitution:
he's a Federalist, a strict interpretation of the Constitution...as written..it means exactly what it says, the Founders got it right the first time, we can't second guess them, or make-up new meanings for the word "individual".

GWOT
He understands the evil driving the islamist extremists and I believe he will take appropriate measures to defeat it.
Not appease it, not negotiate with it, DEFEAT IT; STOP IT; END IT.

I believe Senator Thompson is our best hope to eliminate the IRS, repeal the 16th Amendment, and initiate a tax system that is fair to everyone, no matter how much money you make.

The border is our Achilles Heel. It will be the downfall of Western Civilization if we do not do something, and do it soon.

I know the technology exists that will essentially close the border. I've seen video of our helicopters taking out terrorists at distances of up to 1/2 mile, and probably further.
Put this technology on the border.

Two Blackhawks every 25 miles, with barracks and towers, a 500 yard no-mans land, double fencing, dedicated satellites in geo-stationary orbits. Use of deadly force authorized.

It's called a PERIMETER folks. It's the first thing the enemy has to defeat. It's the one place we KNOW to look. The more difficult we make it for the enemy to defeat our perimeter, the easier it will be to defeat the ememy.

We can seal Groome Lake from ordinary citizens, I know we can seal the border.
DISCLAIMER: The above is the express opinion of a God-fearin', America lovin', military supportin', NASCAR watchin', gun-totin', camo-wearin', pick-up truck drivin', country music listenin', heterosexual, monogamous, former Marine redneck male.
No one says you have to agree.

From El Rushbo

For those of you with a secret Rushbo Decoder Ring, please enter the text into the transmorgasfier to receive your orders for the week.
Correction, this weeks secret message requires the use of the Halliburton/EIB Series 2008
decoder.
Please disregard any secret message revealed using the Rushbo Decoder Ring.

The Drive-By Media chat shows were buzzing with talk of America's Anchorman over the weekend. The Man Who Runs America impacted the Scooter Libby commutation, the amnesty debate -- and was even compassionate about Algore's son! (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen Here).

Democrats are trying to destroy the president's ability to function over the next year and half by subpoenaing Bush administration officials and forcing the president to invoke executive privilege. They're also trying to bring about American defeat in Iraq, and the Republicans in Washington are caving. Americans would put up with the Iraq war, where the surge is working, but the politicians in Washington don't seem to have the stomach for it. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen Here).

The truth about Iraq is just not getting out. Al-Qaeda is committing unspeakable atrocities over there. They're baking young children and serving them to their parents. The Drive-By Media - and sadly, the White House - won't tell you about this, or show you photos of Al-Qaeda atrocities. We're in a battle with a barbaric enemy which has sworn to kill us unless we kill them first, but the West turns a blind eye, and blames our culture for their evil. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen Here).

Algore's Live Earth concert bombed, as predicted by El Rushbo. NBC ratings were terrible and a Rasmussen poll shows that 75% of the country didn't pay any attention to it at all. The whole global warming movement has jumped the shark and is dying a slow death. A plane even flew over Giants Stadium with a banner: "Don't Believe Al Gore!" Meanwhile, Democrats are proposing a carbon tax! Rush finds a great article on Live Earth which highlights how the envirowackos don't want Africa to develop because another developed continent will pollute. They favor "development by dung." No joke, folks. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen Here).

Bush Derangement Syndrome: The Democrat base is more livid than ever. They think Dick Cheney is Richard Nixon, and Mother Sheehan says she will run against Pelosi if the impeachment of Bush isn't given a vote.

A Drive-By reporterette writes a fascinating story on the depth of Mrs. Clinton's negatives. White female voters are guilty because they just can't seem to like her. It's White Gal Guilt.
A caller asks Rush where all the statesmen have gone in the Republican Party. All the statesmen are on talk radio today, with a couple of exceptions. One of those is Senator Jeff Sessions (R- AL) who will be the subject of the next Limbaugh Letter interview.

The Breck Girl announces a "poverty tour." The theme is "Rewarding Work." What a great idea! They could call this reward a "paycheck."

Chuck Hagel says that he won't run for president as an independent. Yawn.

New York magazine destroys Katie Couric in their latest issue. It's curious for the Drive-By Media to attack its own like this. It could be some jealousy at work out there, combined with some disgruntled people inside CBS.

A new "green" federal building in San Francisco is a disaster. It has limited AC and the elevator only stops at every third floor to save energy! It's also attracting homeless who want to sleep there.

A 70-year-old woman is jailed for not watering her lawn.

Madonna simulated sex with a guitar at Live Earth. Is global warming not important enough for Madonna to go all the way and do the real thing?

A caller ends the show by telling El Rushbo he makes her feel safe.

All this and much more will be at RushLimbaugh.com tonight when we update the site.

From Patriot Post 7-28 Brief

F O R T H E R E C O R D

“An editorial in The New York Observer, often called the paper of the liberal elite, described Mr. Clinton as ‘an untrustworthy lowlife who used people for his own purposes and then discarded them. How could they have been fooled so badly?’
...[M]illions of Americans, including political hacks, media toadies, and grass-roots dupes, were unflinchingly loyal to Clinton throughout a scandal-drenched eight years, during which it was credibly charged or proven that he:
seduced a 21-year-old White House intern, groped a visitor in the Oval Office, paid his way out of a pants-dropping charge, was credibly accused of rape, organized a White House hit team to assassinate the reputation of his accusers; took money from Chinese communist donors; entertained known criminals, drug dealers and arms smugglers at private White House gatherings; hid subpoenaed documents in the living quarters of the White House; rented out the Lincoln bedroom; sold seats on Air Force One; violated the War Powers Act; bombed an aspirin factory in Sudan; never uttered a word of regret for the 19 innocent babies and children who were burned to death at Waco; used the IRS and the FBI to attack political enemies; used taxpayer-paid lawyers and aides to defend himself against charges of sexual misconduct; lied under oath; lied when not under oath; shredded documents; suborned perjury; tampered with witnesses and obstructed justice...
I remain hopeful that in time, the legacy of the Clinton presidency will be that its classic wretchedness awakened the American people from a soul-numbing, moral stupor.” —Linda Bowles

RCT-6 Has Some Stuff Thats Interesting

RCT-6 has a blog with some good stories on whats going on in the sandbox.

While you're there, drop 'em a line and tell 'em how much you appreciate their sacrifices.

You can always pack up a box with some goodies, and I have it on good authority that the soldiers LOVE beef jerky; they also need WetOnes (those moist towel thingies), Burts Beeswax lip balm, Gold Bond Powder, and snacks..LOTS OF SNACKS;
or you can click here and you will be magically transferred to a site that will help you support our soldiers and Marines, and you won't even have to leave the house.

Is this a great country or what?

A New House Guest; Who Should We Invite?

by Paul Hollrah

Time Magazine writer, Joe Klein, the “anonymous” author of Primary Colors, has suggested that selecting a president is much like inviting a house guest into our home for an extended stay. In other words, which of the current crop of candidates would we most like, or least like, to have as a house guest for four years… or maybe even eight years? It’s an interesting question.

In his acting career Ronald Reagan appeared in more than 130 feature films and television programs, and when he ran for Governor of California in 1966 the people felt they already knew him… and trusted him. That trust and those feelings of good will followed him through all of his years in Sacramento and through all of his years in the White House.

His successor, George H.W. Bush, was said to be a very nice man. Writer Gail Sheehy explored Bush’s “niceness” in an October 1986 Vanity Fair article titled, “Is George Bush Too Nice to be President?” While interviewing some forty of his closest friends, aides, and family members she asked each of them, “Exactly what is it that George Bush feels passionately about?”

Nearly everyone she questioned, including his wife, Barbara, was stuck for an answer. Most responded with lame generalizations such as, “peace,” “justice,” and “fairness.” Bush’s lack of passion was evident and after just four years in office the people invited him to leave.

Bush was succeeded by Bill Clinton. However, it didn’t take long for people to realize that they had invited a real “low-life” into their house, so they impeached him and his colleagues took away his license to follow his chosen profession. But Clinton had one major advantage: he was the voyeur’s favorite president.

As teenagers, my friends and I occasionally roamed the streets of downtown St. Louis, drawn by the numerous strip joints that flourished on the seedier side of the downtown area. But since we weren’t allowed inside we stood on the sidewalks, our noses pressed against grimy windows, watching the strippers do their thing. Watching the Clinton presidency was a lot like that.

Clinton was followed into the White House by George W. Bush, probably someone we’d all like to have as a friend or a golfing buddy, but not the kind of man we’d look for when the times demand strong and assertive leadership. Like his father, Bush seemed driven to hold high public office, even though, like his father, he was far from being an inspirational leader. The people tired of him after one term, but the Democrats tried to replace him with a traitorous ex-Navy officer and he won a second term… setting himself up as the house guest who is scheduled to leave, but not soon enough to satisfy his host and hostess.

But now it’s time to invite someone else into our house. Who will it be? On the Republican side, it appears that we will choose between Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Senator Fred Thompson.

Giuliani is a likeable guy and a strong and decisive leader. But, like most New Yorkers, he thinks and speaks about twice as fast as most of us are capable of listening. After four years of Giuliani, most people would be physically and emotionally exhausted.

Of the two, Thompson seems to be the guy we’d most like to have as a long term house guest. He’s everybody’s favorite uncle. He has real gravitas, he has a wonderful sense of humor, and he gives the impression that, no matter what the circumstance, we could always trust him to do the right thing.

On the Democrat side, the race appears to be between Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Senator Barrack Hussein Obama, and former Senator John Edwards.

Most divorced men will understand when I say that, having Hillary Clinton as a long term house guest would be very much like having a vindictive ex-wife show up at the front door, asking if she could move in and stay for a while. Not!

Former Senator John Edwards? Is it possible to imagine having a super-slick trial lawyer living with us every day for four years? Imagine making his breakfast coffee every day… worrying all the while that he might spill it into his lap, scald his private parts, and sue us for negligence. And how could we be sure he wouldn’t steal our silverware? After four years of that we’d all be nervous wrecks.

And Barrack Obama? Of the three, he’d probably be the easiest on our nerves over a long period of time, but as young and inexperienced as he is would he be any more competent as leader of the free world than, say, Paris Hilton? On the positive side, he’d probably make an excellent playmate for our children and grandchildren.

All things considered, it looks like we’d best invite Uncle Fred to stay for a while.

Iran's Proxy War

Tehran is on the offensive against us throughout the Middle East.
Will Congress respond?

BY JOSEPH LIEBERMAN
Friday, July 6, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Earlier this week, the U.S. military made public new and disturbing information about the proxy war that Iran is waging against American soldiers and our allies in Iraq.

According to Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, the U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, the Iranian government has been using the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah to train and organize Iraqi extremists, who are responsible in turn for the murder of American service members.

Gen. Bergner also revealed that the Quds Force--a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps whose mission is to finance, arm and equip foreign Islamist terrorist movements--has taken groups of up to 60 Iraqi insurgents at a time and brought them to three camps near Tehran, where they have received instruction in the use of mortars, rockets, improvised explosive devices and other deadly tools of guerrilla warfare that they use against our troops.

Iran has also funded its Iraqi proxies generously, to the tune of $3 million a month.

Based on the interrogation of captured extremist leaders--including a 24-year veteran of Hezbollah, apparently dispatched to Iraq by his patrons in Tehran--Gen. Bergner also reported on Monday that the U.S. military has concluded that "the senior leadership" in Iran is aware of these terrorist activities. He said it is "hard to imagine" Ayatollah Ali Khamenei--Iran's supreme leader--does not know of them.

Iran is acting aggressively and consistently to undermine moderate regimes in the Middle East, establish itself as the dominant regional power and reshape the region in its own ideological image. The involvement of Hezbollah in Iraq, just revealed by Gen. Bergner, illustrates precisely how interconnected are the different threats and challenges we face in the region. The fanatical government of Iran is the common denominator that links them together.

No responsible leader in Washington desires conflict with Iran. But every leader has a responsibility to acknowledge the evidence that the U.S. military has now put before us: The Iranian government, by its actions, has all but declared war on us and our allies in the Middle East.

America now has a solemn responsibility to utilize the instruments of our national power to convince Tehran to change its behavior, including the immediate cessation of its training and equipping extremists who are killing our troops.

Read more here: OpinionJournal

Why We Fight

Mark Alexander has put together some essays from prvious editions of the Patriot Post.

Here's a sample:
Reid and his cohorts, who cannot or will not see the connection between the war in Iraq and the global war on Islamic fascism, reinforce and are reinforced by Americans who insist we are engaged in a "war for oil."
9/11 Scholars for Truth, a group of pseudo-academic conspiracy theorists, claim that the Bush administration itself (after eight whole months on the job) orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.
Indeed, the movement has grown to such an extent that it has produced the Journal of 9/11 Studies under a veneer of scholarly respectability.


You should go read the whole thing, subscribe to the Patriot Post and send them money.

US exit from Iraq would be a 'mess': general

Maggie has some background on Major General Rick Lynch.
and some great video here

Terri at A Soldiers Mind has some more insight on this same article.

An abrupt exit of US troops from Iraq would trigger a bloody "mess" just as the military is taking the fight to insurgents, a top general warned Friday as pressure mounted in Congress for a withdrawal.
Major General Rick Lynch, commander of coalition forces in central Iraq, said the addition of thousands more "surge" troops in recent weeks had enabled him to clear 70 percent of his territory south of Baghdad of insurgents.
"Those surge forces have given us the capability that we have now to take the fight to the enemy," he told Pentagon reporters via satellite from Baghdad.
"If those surge forces go away, that capability goes away and the Iraqi security forces aren't ready yet to do that," Lynch said.
In the troops' absence, insurgents would regain ground and be free to carry out roadside-bomb attacks in Baghdad, "and the violence would escalate."
"It would be a mess," the commander said, days before a new debate over withdrawing troops is to start in the Democratic-controlled Congress.
On Thursday another veteran Republican senator, New Mexico's Pete Domenici, joined the ranks of those opposed to George W. Bush's Iraq policy, raising the pressure on the US president ahead of the congressional debate.
Last week, respected Republican Senator Richard Lugar sent shock waves through Washington by taking to the floor of the Senate to argue that the "surge" was unlikely to work.
"I don't worry about the political clock," Lynch insisted, as US commanders prepare to report back in September on the impact of Bush's deployment of about 30,000 extra troops into Iraq, which peaked in mid-June.
"I'm focussed on killing or capturing the enemy in our battlespace, I'm focussed on helping the Iraqi people to get some kind of sustained security presence. And it's going to take a while," the major general said.
On Tuesday, Bush warned that his surge strategy should be given a chance to succeed.
"If we were to quit Iraq before the job is done, the terrorists we are fighting would not declare victory and lay down their arms," he told Air National Guard troops in West Virginia.
"They would follow us here, home. However difficult the fight is in Iraq, we must win it," Bush said.
Domenici, however, signaled support for a bill introduced in the Senate that would implement the findings late last year of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.
The panel of formerly high-ranking grandees recommended getting most US combat troops out of Iraq, with a target date for withdrawal of March 2008.
It said some US troops should remain in Iraq to train its new armed forces, protect US installations and conduct special forces missions against terrorists.
Lynch said that Iraqi army divisions were shouldering more of the security burden in the provinces under his control, such as Najaf and Karbala, but that police forces have been largely non-existent, "not competent or corrupt."
Under the surge, Lynch said his forces had killed about 50 insurgents and detained about 200 more, including "high value" ones, while uncovering more than 40 weapons caches.
"Intensive combat operations are still necessary," he said, while underlining that US forces are also stepping up reconstruction work and economic development to take the heat out of the insurgency.
"What I sense is a growing discontent (against insurgents) amongst the local communities, the tribes and their leaders, and we're benefiting from this discontent," the general added.
"What I believe is that Al-Qaeda has worn out its welcome."
Lynch also reiterated US accusations that Iran is providing weaponry and training to Shiite extremists, which he said was "a great cause for concern."

Group pushing for release of two imprisoned former Border Patrol agents

Free Campean, Ramos, and Hernandez NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Grassfire.org is pushing for the release of Campean and Ramos, the two Border Patrol Agents imprisioned for attempting to stop the flow of illegal drugs into this country. (They shot a known drug smuggler in the ass as he was attempting to shoot them.)

A grassroots border-security organization is calling on the government to release two former Border Patrol agents who are serving long sentences for their actions in the non-lethal shooting of Mexican drug smuggler. A substantial number of people believe the men were only doing their jobs.

Grassfire.org has spoken with the wife of former agent Ignacio Ramos, who is being held in solitary confinement at a federal detention facility in Yazoo City, Mississippi, after being beaten up by other inmates at that prison. Spokesman Ron De Jong says Mrs. Ramos confirms that her husband is not in good health. And neither Ramos nor his fellow former agent Jose Compean, he adds, is able to have much contact with their family.


The media has virtually ignored this story, choosing instead to focus on the plight of Paris Hilton, a spoiled little rich bitch, who had to spend all of 23 days in California jail for violating the terms of her probation. Larry King spent an hour listening this whiny little tramp lie about everything.

Presient Bush did the right thing when he commuted Scooter Libby's sentence, although he should have just told the Special Prosecuter to pound sand and wiped Mr. Libby's record clean.

Now let's see if the President has any decency and does the same for Campean, Ramos, and Texas Deputy Sheriff Hernandez.

This is the story from March of this year:

Two illegal aliens are now suing imprisoned Texas Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez for injuries from shell fragments that struck them as the officer shot at the tires of a van in which they escaped from a routine traffic stop.

Hernandez was sentenced last week to one-year plus one-day in federal prison for criminally violating the civil rights of the illegal aliens who were in a van that attempted to run over Hernandez after a traffic stop April 14, 2005, in Rocksprings, Texas. As WND reported, the federal government had recommended a seven-year prison term.

The lawyer for Deputy Hernandez said...Homeland Security "puts undue pressure on the border law enforcement officers, telling them that they are our nation's frontline of defense against another terrorist attack in New York or Washington." "But if you make one single mistake, you may be prosecuted, sent to federal prison, and bankrupt in a civil suit," he said.

A deputy sheriff is convicted of criminally violating the "civil rights" of two "ILLEGAL ALIENS".

If the government keeps locking up the Border Agents and LEO's for doing their job, pretty soon they'll stop doing their job. Why go to prison for doing what you've been trained to do?

Son of the South

With former Virginia Sen. George Allen losing his reelection, ex-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.) opting to skip the White House contest and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee not picking up much traction, Thompson could emerge as the preferred candidate of the region that unanimously powered George W. Bush to the presidency twice.

"If he enters the race, Fred Thompson should immediately become the front-runner in South Carolina and in most of the other Southern Republican primaries," observed Emory University professor Merle Black, an authority on Southern politics. "As a conservative native Southerner, he would be viewed by many Republican primary voters in the region as one of their own."

"The party is looking for a guy on a white horse," observed GOP strategist Tucker Eskew, a top Bush adviser in 2000 and a native South Carolinian. "Sen. Thompson rides into South Carolina from a good starting point.

But, Eskew pointed out, "the party's impatient and unhappy," and "bedrock Southern Republicans want their fears soothed and their hopes lifted -- a tall order."

Thompson seemed to catch the scent of that malaise in the humid summer air here.

"We've got a lot of work to do as a country," Thompson said. "We've got to start moving from the wrong direction to the right direction. We've got to turn this battleship around, one foot at a time."

While careful not to directly criticize Bush to an audience that still holds plenty of good will toward its commander in chief, Thompson focused much of his remarks on issues that the party faithful here think have gotten the GOP off course: immigration, spending and corruption.

MRAPS and John (They killed civilians in cold blood) Murtha

The new MineResistantAmbushProtected (MRAP) vehicle (The Buffalo), looks like a good idea. The Marines seem to like the ones already in-country. You can see one by clicking on the MNF-West (II-MEU) link in the sidebar, and clicking on the Anbar Report.

Along comes John Murtha, that brilliant military tactician, defender of the principles of innocent until proven guilty, supporter of Marines and soldiers everywhere, and tells the entire world that building and shipping these life-saving vehicles to Iraq would be a waste and take too long.

But he still supports the troops. As long as they are in Okinawa.
I'd hate to see what he wouldn't do if he didn't like soldiers and Marines.

FoxNews has the story here.

Evil Is Definable

Anyone still entertaining doubts as to the degree of pure evil we are dealing with should look no farther than London's nightclub district.

Not only did the fanatics build and plant two fuel/air devices, they inculded the added bonus of galvanized roofing nails to spice things up.

There is no doubt that one device was targeted at young people; it's the second one that defines the level of evil.

The other device was designed to take out the first responders who were going to be faced with the most extreme injuries imaginable. After shaking off the initial shock of the devastation, professional EMT's would go to work, helping the first ones they came to, catching young club goers walking around in a daze, faces bleeding, burned, following the screams...

it will be then that the second device is detonated. The first responders, no doubt using oxygen on some of the victims, would be caught off-guard, flaming nails punching holes in emergency vehicles, propane bottles exploding, gasoline adding to the inferno, and then the O2 bottles exploding, accelerating the fireball and spreading shrapnel.

Here's s bit of irony; I would venture to estimate that 90% of the young people who would have been directly affected had that fuel/air device been detonated, would be the ones who side with the "Give Peace A Chance" crowd. They would be the first to decry the War on Terror as a right wing plot, and probably 50% of those believe 9/11 was an inside job.

The Fairness (NOT) Doctrine

When the Soviet Union was at its pinnacle, one might think that the greatest fear among its leaders was the nuclear capabilities of the United States. But this was not the case. While the Soviets recognized the formidable war-making abilities of the Americans as an obstacle to be overcome, they feared, and thus diligently hunted and eliminated the presence of something much more threatening to their existence... the printing press.

For the biggest danger to their continued facade of power and success lay in the possibility that some little person, needing neither the horrific power of an atom bomb nor the massive resources to develop and deliver it, could nonetheless shine the light of truth on them and thereby prove to be their undoing.

Empires of oppression and intimidation, built upon real threats and empty promises, simply cannot endure the scrutiny of an informed public.

Thus, the only means by which they can hope to preserve their hold on power is to maintain a monopoly of information. And while their effort at maintaining this monopoly is formidable and imposing, that very fact indicates its ultimate fragility. Hence, the paranoia of the Soviets, lest the people became informed by any source other than the state "news" agency known as "Tass."
For most of the latter half of the twentieth century, American leftists fared better than their counterparts inside the Kremlin. A veritable monopoly of information evolved through the growth and expansion of the "big three" networks, CBS, NBC, and ABC. Over time, the networks developed a decidedly liberal bias, dominating the perspective through which they and their audiences viewed the world.

Quite apart from any governmental oversight, the networks were constitutionally guaranteed unrestrained freedom to present the "news" as they saw fit, which eventually meant a leftist interpretation to virtually every event they covered. Sadly, this remains unchanged to the present.

Had technology and society remained completely stagnant, their stranglehold on the dissemination of information would have been absolute. But of course that was not the case.
Primarily during the past decade and a half, a veritable communications explosion has permitted engaged Americans access to numerous alternative information sources other than the archaic and predictable mouthpieces on the nightly news and in the major newspapers. Of course the key players from the old media were not happy about the competition.

Moreover, during that same time, Washington liberals were rudely awakened to the fact that the American people could not be gathered and herded like sheep into their socialist "utopia." Beginning with Hillary's "healthcare" scheme in the early 1990s, D.C. insiders were suddenly faced with the stark prospect of accountability to the public, and they did not like it.

By then, Rush Limbaugh had established an alternative-media empire utilizing talk-radio, which had been largely left unguarded by the left since it was considered comparatively antiquated among those with access to the TV networks.

Shortly after the demise of "Hillary Care," murmurs of reviving the "Fairness Doctrine," a past means of stifling free speech on the radio, were being voiced inside the Beltway.

Such an obvious effort to put this "genie" back into its bottle, once liberals realized the threat he and his kind posed, were quickly identified and reported to Limbaugh's enormous audience who reacted loudly and fiercely. The mere mention of the "Fairness Doctrine" caused an immediate firestorm of calls and letters to Capitol Hill, whereupon its advocates scattered. Since that time, they have done little more than grumble and whine.

But, last week's vote against amnesty for the illegals, and the bizarre path it cut across political lines, made those on the left believe that they might have a chance to reinstitute the "Fairness Doctrine" with the help of now-receptive Republicans.

Liberals sought to "channel" the anger among the elites from both parties, generated by the strident public opposition to the amnesty bill, in hopes that such unsolicited public meddling with their political agenda could be permanently shut down.

Ultimately, this very manner of response to the situation tells much about what the liberals know they need in order to resume their unquestioned dominance of the American political process.

Conversely, the nature of their comments, intended to take advantage of the tensions between D.C. and the Heartland over the amnesty bill, demonstrate a despicable willingness to forcibly suppress political discourse that does not abet their interests.

Once again, liberals are spouting their disinformation that the obvious dominance of conservatives on the radio somehow prevents citizens from access to the truth. And once again, such propaganda must be countered with the truth.

Liberals dominate, almost to the point of exclusivity, every other form of broadcast and print media. It is not the absence of liberal viewpoints on radio, but the presence of truth, either on the radio or anywhere for that matter, which the liberal agenda cannot tolerate.

Overwhelming dominance of the information market simply is not good enough for the left. For their propaganda campaign to succeed, its proponents must possess nothing less than total control of information being force-fed to the public.

Senator Diane Feinstein (D.-CA) asserted that the fairness doctrine would return America to "much more serious and correct reporting to the people." Similarly, Senator John Kerry (D.-MA) claimed that it would fix the "imbalance in the public eye." Kerry further went on to endorse something he called the "Equal time doctrine."

Needless to say, Feinstein and Kerry were not alone. Their alarming comments merely represented the undercurrents among the Washington elite who want their political empire returned to its unaccountable glory. Far from maintaining a level playing field, the real goal of those who advocate the "Fairness Doctrine" is to completely suppress any point of view that might vary from their orthodoxy.

Never mentioned when invoking innocuous terms like "correctness," "balance," or "fairness" in reporting is the inescapable conclusion that, for such standards to be defined and upheld, some hideous force must be empowered to ensure compliance. On the day "Big Brother" oversees and controls political discourse on the airwaves or anywhere else, free speech has ended.
----------
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer and staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He lives in southeastern Wyoming. He has been active in local and state politics for many years. His contact information and archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com

Another Favorite Site

Some great video, good source of information for Marine Corps efforts in Iraq.

Fred to School

The former Tennessee senator could set himself apart from the other Republicans running for president on education.

By Carrie Lukas

Conservatives enamored with Senator Fred Thompson are desperate for evidence that he really is Ronald Reagan’s heir. After six years of disappointments, conservatives want to hear more than just a recitation of support for low taxes, less regulations, and federalism. We’ve heard that line before. Thompson needs to show that he knows the difference between limited government conservatism and Bush’s brand of big-government Republicanism, which seeks to use the government beast for conservative aims instead of tame it.

The upcoming debate on Capitol Hill over the future of the No Child Left Behind law presents Sen. Thompson — and other GOP candidates — with such an opportunity. President Bush continues to tout No Child Left Behind as one of his signature domestic initiatives. But conservatives are increasingly skeptical. As the Washington Post recently reported, a number of former Bush administration officials and loyalist have broken with the White House and are opposing extending No Child Left Behind.

/snip

Sen. Thompson, who also voted for the legislation in 2001, hasn’t been pressed on his current position regarding No Child Left Behind, but he has been the strongest champion of federalism among the field. In an April commentary on National Review Online, Thompson wrote: “Republicans have struggled in recent years, because they have strayed from basic principles. Federalism is one of those principles. It is something we all give lip service to and then proceed to ignore when it serves our purposes.”

Thompson can distinguish himself from the rest of the pack by describing how he would put this principle to work in federal education policy and reforming No Child Left Behind. It might not capture the attention of the mainstream media like a statement on Iraq, the Middle East, or a controversial social issue. But by demonstrating a true commitment to limited government, Sen. Thompson can give his would-be conservative supporters much needed reassurance.—

Carrie Lukas is the vice president for policy at the Independent Women’s Forum and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism.

Methinks they doth protest too loudly

"George Bush has commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby and wiped away two and a half years of prison time with the stroke of his pen. President Bush is willfully ignoring Libby’s felony conviction, ignoring the jury’s guilty verdict, and ignoring the rule of law. Our nation deserves better.
"Tell George Bush: ‘I’m appalled by your actions. No man is above the law.’”
Schumer adds, "We need to show Bush his actions just aren’t acceptable.”
"We expect more from our president,” laments the senator. "We expect honor and integrity, we expect moral leadership. We expect our president and his staff to be held to a higher standard.”
Schumer concludes, "It’s at times like these that I realize just how important a strong Democratic Senate is to our nation. Democrats are fighting the Republican’s abuse of power but we can’t do it without your help.”

You mean like the honor, integrity and moral leadership displayed by your butt monkey buddy billy clinton?
Is that the honor and integrity you're referring to, Chuckie Boy?

You mean the abuse of power demonstrated by the clintoon clowns when they fired the travel staff, looked through confidential FBI files, and burned 86 men, women and children to death in Waco, Texas? That kind of abuse of power, Chuckles?

You're a raging hypocrite, an enabler of the worst sort, and the sooner you are sent back to New York, the safer this Nation will be.

DISCLAIMER:The above is the express opinion of a God-fearin, USA-lovin', gun-totin', camo-wearin, NASCAR watchin', country music listenin', pick-up truck drivin', heterosexual, monagamous, redeneck, former-Marine male.
No one says you have to agree.

Anonymous Comments

ALL anonymous comments will be rejected out of hand.
If you ain't got the cajones to id yourself, your opinions ain't worth squat.

Scoring the War

Scoring The War
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Monday, June 25, 2007 4:20 PM PT

War And The Media:
Day after day, Americans are treated to a never-ending, mind-numbing parade of statistics about the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. But what about the terrorists?

One way the media distort Americans' view of the ongoing war against terrorists is by focusing on just one side in the conflict: ours. Whether it's the daily body count or alleged abuses at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, the public could be forgiven for thinking the U.S. is not only losing the war, but behaving badly in doing so.

But neither is true.
This year, for instance, the U.S. has killed roughly 650 terrorists a month, according to published reports and Defense Department estimates. That compares with about 37 U.S. combat deaths per month, through May.

The ratio, thus, is about 18 terrorists killed in combat for every allied soldier killed. And that doesn't include the current offensive in Diayala Province, Operation Arrowhead Ripper, which dispatched 159 enemy combatants in just the first five days.

Since the war began, we've lost about 70 troops a month. This compares with 526 a month in Vietnam, more than 900 a month in Korea and 6,639 a month during World War II.
In other words, by any meaningful metric employed, the U.S. is winning this war. But it will never be reported that way.

This is nothing new. Go back to Vietnam. Remember the "five o'clock follies," when the press routinely ridiculed Pentagon casualty reports? The Vietnam syndrome continues to this day.
Only now it's the media misreporting the numbers. Just weeks into the war in 2003, we started hearing the now-oft-repeated canard that Iraq was worse off with the U.S. than with Saddam. This is so plainly wrong that it must be called what it is: a lie.

And yet, it's repeated to this day. Here again, the numbers tell the tale. In his 24 years as Iraq's Stalinist supreme leader, Saddam Hussein killed at least 2 million people. That averages out to about 6,944 a month for the better part of three decades.

Most responsible estimates show that, at most, 60,000 or so civilians have been killed since the war started, about 1,200 a month.

Moreover, no one doubts that Saddam was responsible for all 2 million of his deaths. In the case of the U.S., most of the civilian deaths come from al-Qaida and other terrorists, not U.S. troops.
We got to thinking about this as a result of Operation Arrowhead Ripper, which began a week ago. It involves some 10,000 U.S. troops trying to rid Diyala Province of al-Qaida terrorists. It's one of the biggest, if not the biggest, operations since the war began.

And yet, when we looked for news of how this huge effort in the war on terror was going, the focus was all on American fatalities.

Since Vietnam, the media have approached each military conflict with the same template: "U.S. Wrong, Foe Right." And they've reported accordingly. That's why wanton murderers of women and children are generously called "fighters" by our own media, while errors by our own troops are tarred as war crimes.

So, in a sense, we are losing a war — the war for Americans' hearts and minds, fought daily on America's TV screens and front pages. But in the real war, our troops are fighting bravely and well — and it's about time someone started keeping score.

USMC "Esprit de Corps"

Ask a Marine what's so special about the Marines and the answer would be"Esprit de Corps", an unhelpful French phrase that means exactly what itlooks like - the spirit of the Corps, but what is that spirit, and where does it come from?
The Marine Corps is the only branch of the U.S. Armed Forces that recruits people specifically to fight.
The Army emphasizes personal development (an Army of One), the Navy promises fun (let the journey begin), the Air Force offers security (its a great way of life).
Missing from all the advertisements is the hard fact that a soldier'slot is to suffer and perhaps to die for his people, and take lives at the risk of his/her own.
Even the thematic music of the services reflects this evasion.
The Army's Caisson Song describes a pleasant country outing.
Over hill and dale, lacking only a picnic basket.
Anchors Aweigh, the Navy's celebration of the joys of sailing, could have been penned by Jimmy Buffet.
The Air Force song is a lyric poem of blue skies and engine thrust.
All is joyful, invigorating, and safe.

There are no land mines in the dales nor snipers behind the hills, no submarines or cruise missiles threaten the ocean jaunt, no bandits are lurking in the wild blue yonder.

The Marines Hymn, by contrast, is all-combat. We fight our Country's battles, First to fight for right and freedom, we have fought in every clime and place where we could take a gun, in many a strife we have fought for life and never lost our nerve.
The choice is made clear. You may join the Army to go to adventure training, or join the Navy to go to Bangkok, or join the Air Force to go to computer school. You join the Marine Corps to go to War!
But the mere act of signing the enlistment contract confers no status in the Corps.
The Army recruit is told from his first minute in uniform that "you're in the Army now", soldier. The Navy and Air Force enlistees are sailors or airmen as soon as they get off bus at the training center.
The new arrival at Marine Corps boot camp is called a recruit, or worse, but never a MARINE. Not yet, maybe never. He or she must earn the right to claim the title of UNITED STATES MARINE, and failure returns you to civilian life without hesitation or ceremony.
Recruit Platoon 2210 at San Diego, California trained from October through December of 1968. In Viet Nam the Marines were taking two hundred casualties a week, and the major rainy season operation Meade River, had not even begun. Yet Drill Instructors had no qualms about winnowing out almost a quarter of their 112 recruits, graduating eighty-one. Note that this was post - enlistment attrition; every one of those who were dropped had been passed by the recruiters as fit for service. But they failed the test of Boot Camp, and not necessarily for physical reasons; at least two were outstanding high school athletes for whom the calisthenics and running were child's play.
The cause of their failure was not in the biceps nor the legs, but in the spirit. They had lacked the will to endure the mental and emotional strain, so they would not be Marines. Heavy commitments and high casualties not withstanding, the Corps reserves the right to pick and choose.
History classes in boot camp? Stop a soldier on the street and ask him to name a battle of World War One. Pick a sailor at random to describe the epic fight of the Bon Homme Richard. Everyone has heard of McGuireAir Force Base. So ask any airman who Major Thomes McGuire was, and why he is so commemorated.
I am not carping, and there is no sneer in this criticism. All of the services have glorious traditions, but no one teaches the young soldier, sailor or airman what his uniform means and why he should be proud of it. But ask a Marine about World War One, and you will hear of the wheat field at Belleau Wood and the courage of the Fourth Marine Brigade, fifth and sixth regiments.
Faced with an enemy of superior numbers entrenched in tangled forest undergrowth, the Marines received an order to attack that even the charitable cannot call ill - advised. It was insane. Artillery support was absent and air support had not yet been invented, so the Brigade charged German machine guns with only bayonets, grenades, and indomitable fighting spirit.

A bandy-legged little barrel of a gunnery-sergeant, Daniel J. Daly, rallied his company with a shout, "Come on you sons a bitches, do you want to live forever"?

He took out three machine guns himself, and they would give him the Medal of Honor except for a technicality: he already had two of them.

French liaison officers, hardened though they were by four years of trench bound slaughter, were shocked as the Marines charged across theopen wheat field under a blazing sun directly into the teeth of enemy fire. Their action was anachronistic on the twentieth-century battlefield; so much so that they might as well have been swinging cutlasses. But the enemy was only human; they could not stand up to this. So the Marines took Belleau Wood. The Germans called them "Dogs from the Devil."

Every Marine knows this story and dozens more. We are taught them in boot camp as a regular part of the curriculum. Every Marine will always be taught them!
You can learn to don a gas mask anytime, even on the plane in route to the war zone, but before you can wear the Eagle Globe & Anchor and claim the title you must know about the Marines who made that emblem and title meaningful. So long as you can march and shoot and revere the legacy of the Corps, you can take your place in line. And that line is as unified in spirit as in purpose.
A soldier wears branch of service insignia on his collar, metal shoulder pins and cloth sleeve patches to identify his unit. Sailors wear a rating badge that identifies what they do for the Navy; Marines wear only the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor, together with personal ribbons and their CHERISHED marksmanship badges.
There is nothing on aMarine's uniform to indicate what he or she does, nor what unit the Marine belongs to. You cannot tell by looking at a Marine whether you are seeing a truck driver, a computer programmer, or a machine gunner.
The Corps explains this as a security measure to conceal the identity and location of units, but the Marines' penchant for publicity makes that the least likely of explanations.
No, the Marine is amorphous, even anonymous, by conscious design.
Every Marine is a rifleman first and foremost, a Marine first, last and always! You may serve a four-year enlistment or even a twenty plus year career without seeing action, but if the word is given you'll charge across that Wheatfield! Whether a Marine has been schooled in automated supply, automotive mechanics, or aviation electronics, is immaterial. Those things are secondary - the Corps does them because it must.
The modern battlefield requires the technical appliances, and since the enemy has them, so do we, but no Marine boasts mastery of them. Our pride is in our marksmanship, our discipline, and our membership in a fraternity of courage and sacrifice.

" For the honor of the fallen, for the glory of the dead", Edar Guest wrote of Belleau Wood," the living line of courage kept the faith and moved ahead."

They are all gone now, those Marines who made a French farmer's little Wheatfield into one of the most enduring of Marine Corps legends. Many of them did not survive the day, and eight long decades have claimed the rest. But their actions are immortal. The Corps remembers them andhonors what they did, and so they live forever.
Dan Daly's shouted challenge takes on its true meaning - if you lie in the trenches you may survive for now, but someday you will die and no one will care. If you charge the guns you may die in the next two minutes, but you will be one of the immortals.
All Marines die; some in the red flash of battle, some in the white cold of the nursing home. In the vigor of youth or the infirmity of age, all will eventually die. But the Marine Corps lives on. Every Marine whoever lived is living still - in the Marines who claim the title today. It is that sense of belonging to something that will outlive your own mortality, which gives people a light to live by and a flame to mark their passing.

Passed on to a Marine from another Marine!

Iraqi civilian deaths down 36 percent

News you won't hear from the "enemedia".

BAGHDAD - Iraqi civilian deaths dropped to their lowest level since the start of the Baghdad security operation, government figures showed Sunday, suggesting signs of progress in tamping down violence in the capital.

But American casualties are running high as U.S. forces step up pressure on Sunni and Shiite extremists in and around Baghdad.

At least 1,227 Iraqi civilians were killed in June along with 190 policemen and 31 soldiers, an officer at the Iraqi Interior Ministry's operations room said. The officer spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the figures.
That represented a 36 percent drop from the ministry's May figures — 1,949 civilian deaths along with 127 policemen and 47 soldiers. June's figures were the lowest monthly tally this year.

In January, President Bush ordered nearly 30,000 soldiers, Marines and airmen to Iraq in a major push to stabilize the capital so that Iraq's leaders can hammer out power-sharing agreements for a lasting peace.

The Baghdad security operation was launched in mid-February, although the last of the American reinforcements arrived in Iraq only last month.
The accuracy of civilian death figures in Iraq has been in doubt since the start of the conflict and may reflect only a portion of the casualties nationwide.

Still, the figures suggest a downward trend, which may be due to U.S. military pressure on insurgents in Baghdad and the surrounding areas.

The commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Fil, Jr., told reporters on Friday that American and Iraqi security forces now control nearly half of the 474 neighborhoods in Baghdad — up from 19 percent in April.

At least 50 Iraqis were killed or found dead Sunday in politically motivated violence, according to police reports compiled by The Associated Press. That figure was well below the daily death tolls recorded last winter.

A U.S. military spokesman said the decrease was encouraging but that it was too early to attribute it to the crackdown. "The synchronized effort only began two weeks ago. It's too early to declare a trend," said Lt. Col. Christopher Garver.

But Iraqi officials hailed the decline as a sign that the security crackdown was working.

"This is one of the results of the implementation of the security plan and the deployment of extra Iraqi and U.S. forces," Brig. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi said. "Such figures show that the security operations are going in the right direction and they are working as planned."

While Iraqi civilian casualties are down, U.S. military losses are still running high. June ended the deadliest quarter for U.S. troops in Iraq since the war began in March 2003 — 330 deaths.

That surpasses the 316 soldiers killed during November 2004 to January 2005.
U.S. officials say American losses are rising because the U.S. military is taking the fight to the extremists, seeking to push Sunni and Shiite militants from strongholds in and around the capital where they have operated for years.

On June 15, U.S. troops launched two large offensives, one in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad, the other in regions south of the capital. The goal is to deny insurgents sanctuaries from where they can smuggle car bombs and other deadly explosives into the capital.
Commanders in Diyala have claimed successes in dislodging insurgents, but they acknowledge three-quarters of the senior militant leaders escaped.

An Islamist Web site posted a video late Sunday of what it said was a field commander of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic State of Iraq in Diyala.

The masked man, sitting on the floor of a room with a Kalashnikov rifle by his side, said Diyala had become "a volcano under the feet of the crusaders," meaning the Americans, and that "martyr brigades" of suicide attackers were awaiting orders to strike.

On Sunday, the country's largest Sunni Arab political group, the Iraqi Islamic Party, said more than 350 people have been killed in western Baqouba, capital of Diyala province, since the offensive began there last month.

The statement, which said that some 150 homes have been destroyed, called "the Iraqi government and occupation forces to stop this massacre and differentiate between gunmen and innocent civilians."

U.S. officials have been pressing the Iraqis to meet several goals to promote national reconciliation, including enacting laws to share the country's oil wealth, open up the political system to Sunni Arabs and install new local governments.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki pledged that provincial elections will be held before the end of the year. The last provincial elections were held on Jan. 30, 2005, and were largely boycotted by the Sunni minority, resulting in a Shiite sweep even in areas with substantial Sunni populations.

In other developments, a suicide bomber Sunday detonated a dump truck packed with explosives on a major bridge across the Euphrates River north of Ramadi, injuring two people and damaging a large section of the bridge, the U.S. Marines said.

Another suicide bomber detonated an explosives-packed truck at a checkpoint at the entrance of the city of Fallujah, west of Baghdad, killing five policemen, an Iraqi officer in Fallujah said. U.S. officials said one policeman was killed and four injured.

In eastern Baghdad, a roadside bomb exploded near policemen, killing two. After the blast, gunmen sped by in a car, spraying machine gun fire, wounding three policemen and three civilians in the capital's Zayouna neighborhood, a police officer said. Both officers spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to media.

Elsewhere in the capital, gunmen in a vehicle opened fire on a minibus carrying Shiite day laborers in the mixed district of Saydiyah, killing one passenger and wounding four, police said.
Also Sunday, the bullet-riddled body of a senior police commander was discovered in Basra, Iraq's second-largest city about 560 kilometers (340 miles) southeast of Baghdad, police said.
Col. Nasser Hamoud, who was in charge of the city's prisons, had been kidnapped along with three of his guards the day before, another officer said on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. The guards were released a few hours later, he said.

Hamoud's hands and legs were bound, and his body showed signs of torture, the officer said.
He was a member of the Shiite Fadhila party, which controls Basra's provincial government.