"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address:

Sunday, April 30, 2006

Michelle Says, "Rice Is Wrong."

Unlike President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is not upset or offended by hearing the U.S. national anthem sung in Spanish.

Asked about the issue, which has become a topic of outrage on conservative talk radio stations, Rice said she had heard "The Star-Spangled Banner" sung in many different ways.

"I've heard the national anthem done in rap versions, country versions, classical versions. The individualization of the American national anthem is quite under way," she said on the CBS show "Face the Nation."

"From my point of view, people expressing themselves as wanting to be Americans is a good thing," she added. "I think what we need to focus on is an immigration policy that is comprehensive and that recognizes our laws and recognizes our humanity."

On Friday, Bush gave a different response to the same question. "I think the national anthem ought to be sung in English, and I think people who want to be citizens of this country ought to learn English and they ought to learn to sing the national anthem in English," he said.

Her analysis:

Rice, unfortunately, is speaking from pure ignorance on this matter. "Nuestro Himno" is not merely a straight translation of the "Star-Spangled Banner" into Spanish. It's a politicized rewrite for the purposes of galvanizing pro-illegal alien amnesty forces. The song includes improvised rap from Latin pop stars trashing America's immigration laws as "mean." And the chant at the end brags: "We're Latinos, baby!"

Yeah, that bothers me too!

And Now (No Surprise Here) Bolivia, Too!

Well, it's no secret that Castro and Chavez have been cozying up to each other and to Iran (and its flunky, Hezbollah), and that the Tri-Border area (Argentina-Brazil-Paraguay) is a hotbed of Hezbollah activity, but now Bolivia's Evo Morales has made it official (hat tip: Voz de Aztlan):

Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia sign People's Trade Treaty

April 29, 2006

The presidents of Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia have signed the People's Trade Treaty to counter a US-led drive to forge a Pan-American free trade area. Presidents Evo Morales of Bolivia, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and Fidel Castro of Cuba signed the pact in Havana today to streamline commercial ties among the three governments. They are all opposed to US trade policies that they say overwhelmingly favour the United States. Castro described the accord as "an extraordinary document with profound humanitarian, social and economic content. Now, for the first time, there are three of us," Castro said. "I believe that, one day, all of Latin America can be here", Castro added.

Morales said upon arrival in Cuba on Friday: "It will be a great meeting of three generations of revolutionaries, of people representing the three revolutions that we still have to broaden." The Bolivian leader expressed confidence that the treaty would help promote "fair trade, trade that generates jobs, ensures living standards and defends human dignity".

The initiative promoted by Castro and Chavez is an attempt to circumvent US plans for the Free Trade Area of theAmericas (FTAA). The three presidents call the FTAA a US effort to annex Latin America.

Debra Feels Turned Off and Angry, and So Do I

"No kidding," you say. Most of the last blog entries have involved illegal immigration, migration, the Mexican government, and the strong-arm tactics of illegal immigrants, their organizers and backers, "How on earth could we tell that you are angry??"

Debra Saunders titles her essay "The Great American Turnoff. Let's hope that there are millions of other Americans that are similarly turned off and angry by the revelations about immigration during the past few months.

Go ahead and march. After tomorrow I'd love to be able to say to these people, "You blew it by overplaying your hand." The genie is out of the bottle and too many of us know too much to again feel sympathetic.

A Calm Voice in the Immigration Wilderness: "Immigration focus needs to be practical rather than idealistic:"

Who is technically protected by the Fourteenth Amendment? It's NOT who you think. While listening to overheated rhetoric on ALL sides, one can forget that the net winner of the argument must be the American people, not the millions who have surreptitiously crept in or" found themselves" overstaying their visas.

The problem, however, is that, say, equal protection rights -- from the Fourteenth Amendment -- have a constitutional origin. Illegal immigrants, as human beings, are certainly entitled to human rights. But illegal residents are not technically within the jurisdiction of the American political community and are thus not entitled to the protection of certain rights that are, by constitutional design, directed to people within the jurisdiction.

Why would a nation want, or even need, immigrants?

The case for immigration doesn't have to do as much with the Latino vote or civil rights. It should center instead on America's growth, competitiveness and dynamism.

Although some organizers would want us to believe so, the group demonimated "Latinos" is not a monolith; they have a variety of views, backgrounds, and opinions, and among different groups, there are "significant differences" regarding views on illegal immigrants.

Just as important is that Latinos have a variety of views, backgrounds and opinions. When it comes to illegal migrants, for instance, Latinos show significant differences. Another Pew Hispanic Survey found that although there's an overall positive perception about immigrants, different generations have different perceptions about undocumented workers. More foreign-born Latinos than American-born ones believe that illegal immigrants should be allowed to become citizens.
So rallies might give the impression that Latinos have a loud, unique and common voice. The group, however, is too broad and diverse to speak of common views or trends that will translate coherently into votes.

Then there are those who view immigration, and legalizing undocumented workers, as a matter of civil rights. In the immigrant-rights rally in Alabama, the Rev. Lawton Higgs -- a United Methodist minister and activist -- reportedly said that ```we've got to get back in touch with the civil rights movement, because that's what this is about.'' Similarly, when talking at one of the rallies, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., linked the immigration fight to the civil rights movement.

There is a misperception among immigrants and among Americans not thoroughly schooled in the implied applications of the Constitution that rights, such as equal protection given under the Fourteenth Amendment, are the same for citizens and non-citizens. Non-citizens "are not technically 'within the jurisdiction of the American political community and thus are not entitled to the protection of certain rights that are, by constitutional design, directed to people within the jurisdiction.' "
How, then, will migrants or immigrants gain these rights?

To come under the purview of constitutional rights, illegal immigrants would first have to become recognized members of the political community. So the questions are whether and why they should be able to become members; not whether they have the same political rights as members.

Moreover, those reverting to the 1960s civil rights movement are looking to the past, not the future -- which is where immigration belongs.

The influx of immigrants into the United States is a matter of practicality:

To come under the purview of constitutional rights, illegal immigrants would first have to become recognized members of the political community. So the questions are whether and why they should be able to become members; not whether they have the same political rights as members.

Moreover, those reverting to the 1960s civil rights movement are looking to the past, not the future -- which is where immigration belongs... the case for welcoming new guest-workers and regularizing the status of illegal immigrants is compelling. It has to do with growth and competitiveness.

But, and there always is a but! But America must be able to pick and choose from available applicants, and should not be blackmailed, extorted, or threatened into accepting those that have forced themselves onto American soil, especially those that refuse to cooperate.

This country is slowly sliding toward a balkanization that will require partition: hyphenation or emphasis on national origin, ethnicity, or religious identification under the guise of multiculturalism and diversity is to blame. It certainly would be helpful if all citizens of the United States would drop the devisive hyphenated mentality and join the rest. Regarding onesself as Latino American, Mexican American, Black American, Muslim American, of Irish descent, from the British Isles, or any other devisive appelation or derrivation is not helpful.

And one more thing. It would be well for all to remember: marchers, observers, legislators, and citizens, that illegal immigrants can not vote, but the rest of us can and will remember if legislators show that they are more impressed by the rights, needs, and of non-citizens than they are of franchised Americans that put them their present exalted positions.

Could it be that new citizens will be converted into new voters? Perhaps this is why some are so enthusiastic in their pandering.

Readers Weigh In on the Importance of Learning English and Other "Minor" Topics

You've heard enough from me lately. Here are some interesting letters posted over at

While we weren't watching.

The "American Dream"

day by day cartoon

These aren't "American Dreamers": They're colonists, hoping to extend their own culture and country into the territory of the United States.

The American Dream is something you build from a concept created over centuries. No one received the benefits of the American dream without the unpleasantness of struggle and heartache, and in most cases, fear and discrimination.

The American dream is more than hard work and paying taxs. The American dream is not handed over on a silver platter nor picked up off streets paved with gold. It always comes with a price: the recipients must joint the social order and accept the terms of the social contract that past generations of Americans devised for peaceful co-existence among diverse races, creeds, and ethnic groups to form something new.

Those that want to live beyond the pale of this social contract can't live the American dream for what they are doing is bring the pain, suffering, and the corruption of the old order with them, rather than living the dream.

Via: Captain's Quarters

Saturday, April 29, 2006

"Great American Boycott" Revealed

Click on this link case you still have doubts about the goals and objectives of the "colonists." (Note: a .wav file will automatically download.)

That's right, they are not immigrants. An immigrant hopes to join another country or culture to make something new; a colonist brings his country and culture along with him, expecting to expand both culture and country. That's what the "Great American Boycott" is really about.

Finally, people are becoming really concerned.

An 8-Step Plan for America's Downfall

I just received this message from a good friend on my personal account:

Subject: Extremely important in light of the current debate

We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, Mexifornia," explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal" was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The Ameri can Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time.

Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'"

Here is how they do it," Lamm said:

"First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country." History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy." Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.".

Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

Third, "We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: "The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together."

Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high. school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, pea ceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" -- From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus'. Instead of the 'Unum,' we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits; make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In t he last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said,"Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America. deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book.".

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system a nd national cohesiveness. Even barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in. America - take note of California and other states - to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy (REPUBLIC) is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three yea rs, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

Thought provoking?

God be with you.

All things considered, it seems that Governor Lamm's "Plan" is well on its way.

They Want "Their Rights" in the United States -"National Boycott Plans Creating a New Divide"

A "new national divide?" Damn straight! They say they "came to work" and that they "pay their taxes." Were they invited to come? Some were brought here illegally by cynical employers who knew that they and the migrants were now law breakers, others, as my grandmother would say, "volunteered," sneaking across the border or overstaying on a visa. How are they able to pay taxes? By using fake identification and fake social security cards, also a violation of the law. They are their law-breaking employers, especially those that recruited illegal employees directly or through agents, demand amnesty.

They way they "want their rights." What rights. As citizens they have no legal rights other than "human rights." For non-citizens there is nothing else. There is no right to be in the United States. There is no right to employment nor education nor health care at expense of the American taxpayers. Yes, some came to work, others came to exploit the system, to commit violent crimes, to run and sell drugs and human beings.

They demand to be allowed citizenship. How can they make such a demand when they are not willing to assimilate, learn English, jettison un-assimable cultural baggage, divided loyalties to people and forces in the old country, and so on. The reason for the extended citizenship process could be to weed out those that will become true Americans from those that would use citizenship as a convenience for a "better a life."

It is amazing to hear migrants say they come "to make a better life for themselves" as if coming to the United States to do so is a human right. There is no right available for non-citizens to a better life in the United States whether or not one cynically goes into labor with one toe across the border. That mother and that baby will not have a deep abiding love for this country, only a desire to use the resources and taxpayers to improve their lives.

The lawbreakers want to walk free and demonstrate that they have value to the economy. If they are not loyal nor care about improving this society, this culture, and this country rather than earning money to send home as remittance payments to improve their hometowns and uplift their families with loyalties place elsewhere, then they are not demonstrating a desire to become citizens of the United States.

The inappropriate "Nuestro Himno," or Latin version of the "Star-Spangled Banner" states: "Somos latinos, papa." It's "we are Latins," nor "we are Americans." A California junior high student stated when asked whether or not she would participate in the "Great American Boycott" told a reported that "missing one day of school is a small price to pay for a larger cause."

"I want to support my people," said Leon, whose family came to the United States illegally. Notice she didn't say I want to support America and the American people. No, she and most of the other marchers have the same mind set: they are Latinos first and foremost. Someday they may become citizens on paper but, because of their attitudes, will never become Americans.

Malkin- "This Is Our Anthem"

Michelle Malkin answers the Latin Lefties.

Latin America's Turn Left

It's a well-known fact that Americans know just a little about other parts of the world; they really haven't been interested in knowing more. Most know even less about their neighbors to the south. They should become familiar for seems that many of those neighbors are coming here and bring their politics of populism with them. Jorge Casteñada at Foreign Affairs is eager to tell us:


Just over a decade ago, Latin America seemed poised to begin a virtuous cycle of economic progress and improved democratic governance, overseen by a growing number of centrist technocratic governments. In Mexico, President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, buttressed by the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, was ready for his handpicked successor to win the next presidential election. Former Finance Minister Fernando Henrique Cardoso was about to beat out the radical labor leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for the presidency of Brazil. Argentine President Carlos Menem had pegged the peso to the dollar and put his populist Peronist legacy behind him. And at the invitation of President Bill Clinton, Latin American leaders were preparing to gather in Miami for the Summit of the Americas, signaling an almost unprecedented convergence between the southern and northern halves of the Western Hemisphere.

What a difference ten years can make. Although the region has just enjoyed its best two years of economic growth in a long time and real threats to democratic rule are few and far between, the landscape today is transformed. Latin America is swerving left, and distinct backlashes are under way against the predominant trends of the last 15 years: free-market reforms, agreement with the United States on a number of issues, and the consolidation of representative democracy. This reaction is more politics than policy, and more nuanced than it may appear. But it is real.

Starting with Hugo Chávez's victory in Venezuela eight years ago and poised to culminate in the possible election of Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico's July 2 presidential contest, a wave of leaders, parties, and movements generically labeled "leftist" have swept into power in one Latin American country after another. After Chávez, it was Lula and the Workers' Party in Brazil, then Néstor Kirchner in Argentina and Tabaré Vázquez in Uruguay, and then, earlier this year, Evo Morales in Bolivia. If the long shot Ollanta Humala wins the April presidential election in Peru and López Obrador wins in Mexico, it will seem as if a veritable left-wing tsunami has hit the region. Colombia and Central America are the only exceptions, but even in Nicaragua, the possibility of a win by Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega cannot be dismissed.

The rest of the world has begun to take note of this left-wing resurgence, with concern and often more than a little hysteria. But understanding the reasons behind these developments requires recognizing that there is not one Latin American left today; there are two. One is modern, open-minded, reformist, and internationalist, and it springs, paradoxically, from the hard-core left of the past. The other, born of the great tradition of Latin American populism, is nationalist, strident, and close-minded. The first is well aware of its past mistakes (as well as those of its erstwhile role models in Cuba and the Soviet Union) and has changed accordingly. The second, unfortunately, has not.


The reasons for Latin America's turn to the left are not hard to discern. Along with many other commentators and public intellectuals, I started detecting those reasons nearly fifteen years ago, and I recorded them in my book Utopia Unarmed: The Latin American Left After the Cold War, which made several points. The first was that the fall of the Soviet Union would help the Latin American left by removing its geopolitical stigma. Washington would no longer be able to accuse any left-of-center regime in the region of being a "Soviet beachhead" (as it had every such government since it fomented the overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz's administration in Guatemala in 1954); left-wing governments would no longer have to choose between the United States and the Soviet Union, because the latter had simply disappeared.

The second point was that regardless of the success or failure of economic reforms in the 1990s and the discrediting of traditional Latin American economic policies, Latin America's extreme inequality (Latin America is the world's most unequal region), poverty, and concentration of wealth, income, power, and opportunity meant that it would have to be governed from the left of center. The combination of inequality and democracy tends to cause a movement to the left everywhere. This was true in western Europe from the end of the nineteenth century until after World War II; it is true today in Latin America. The impoverished masses vote for the type of policies that, they hope, will make them less poor.

Third, the advent of widespread democratization and the consolidation of democratic elections as the only road to power would, sooner or later, lead to victories for the left -- precisely because of the social, demographic, and ethnic configuration of the region. In other words, even without the other proximate causes, Latin America would almost certainly have tilted left.

Read the rest.

And here's a piece on Mexico's poltical system.

On the Slippery Slope of Corruption

"If you can't 'em, join 'em." The age old chestnut is being played out in front of our eyes. According to Thomas Baffy at The American Thinker, American society is being "Mexicanized." He doesn't mean racially or demographically, but in the way that the rule of law is being set aside in order to pander to the interests of certain segments of society.

He does not refer to the migrants flowing across the border as the problem: the are mere pawns. The flow could be stemmed at will ... if we choose to do so. The flow isn't stemmed because certain segments of American and Mexican society consider the mass migration beneficial. We know already how the Mexican elites benefit from the arrangement. How are Americans of the upper echelons and the middle class induced into ignoring the rule of law over the populism of a foreign country?

We all know that the rules are being ignored for the sake of international competition, for the sake of "cheap labor" and "cheap votes," for the sake of filling the pews of the Catholic Church, for the sake of nannies, maids, and gardeners for middle-class homes so that both parents can work or persue their own interests. We know these things because for over twenty years the harbingers of doom have told us all about them in article after article, book after book, and now the proverbial "chickens have come home to roost."

We are stuck with at least 12 million migrants who have no place to go. The are in fact: colonists. How did this happen? How was the rule of law abrogated?

The concept of equal rights for all Americans also revolves around the idea that our laws are applied equally to all of us.  When governments ignore certain laws, they are in effect repealing them. They have accomplished through fiat what no one could do in the legislatures or the courts. The Constitution is bypassed.

Once this idea becomes accepted, lodged into theory and practice, your rights as an American are subject to the whim of government officials.

By allowing certain law-breaking activities to go unpunished we send a clear message to everyone that it is acceptable to ignore laws that you do not agree with.  Once individual government officials establish the principle of deciding for themselves what laws will (or will not) be enforced, the “culture of corruption” will be established.  It will not matter which political party is in power. 

This creates the environment where government officials can be bought or coerced by “greasing the wheels” with a little influence money.  We will have given up a great, if flawed, tradition of rule of law, replacing it with rule of the strong and rich. It will take bribes and favors to get anything accomplished just as it sometimes does in the governments of some of our southern neighbors. 

The outcome is "a corrupt system that entrenches the wealthy and powerful lead (ing) to economic failure, as it has in Mexico and would in the United States. Our class structure would evolve toward Mexico's, with our middle class shrinking in the process."

According to Baffy, the antidote is to "insist that our government follow the rules and law without exception...Arbitrary or capricious disregard for the laws should be met with expulsion from office in all cases...Our elected official should be forced to go "on the record" if they want to change laws. Then we can register our verdict the next time they run for office."

Is it too late?

On Monday, May 1, 2006, the abrogation of the rule of law will be flaunted as migrants and their supporters will rub into the faces of Middle America the fact that they are here and in charge.

Who are they? They are the organizers of the event. They are the employers that are closing down or looking the other way if their employees decide to demonstrate rather than work. They are the school officials that will permit school skippers to march with the demonstrators. They are businesses, such as fruit and vegetable wholesalers, delivery services, and the like that will refuse service. They are the journalists that, copy-cat style, repeat the same "sensitive" immigrant sob story. And, this is unbelievable, they are members of legislatures that condone, or organize, or even march with the law migrant lawbreakers and support the rights of migrants over those of the citizen constituents. In their hearts, all of these are themselves, breakers of law: the amnesty isn't just for the migrants, its for the employers and the enabling legislators on that slippery slope. They are the voters that keep in office those officials that don't enforce the laws of the land. They are those of us that remain silent on the topic and accept the status quo. We are they and have only ourselves to blame.

Laws are not set in stone and can be changed. There's a lot at stake for America. Obviously with so many law breakers ignoring long-established laws they should be. Shouldn't they?

Friday, April 28, 2006

"Almost Made It"

In case you're not sure whether or not border security is necessary, read about the Guantanamo Detainee caught at the border and some other revealing border stories.

What Are Muslim Schools in the West Teaching?

Here is collecting created by Daniel Pipes. The first two contain internal links.

Subsidizing the Enemy"

What Are Islamic Schools Teaching?

Muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'

Are We Really A Nation of Immigrants?

In my view, "We are a nation of immigrants" is the slogan of haters of America and Anglo culture.

To say that America is a "nation of immigrants" is to imply that there has never been an actual American people apart from immigration. It is to put America out of existence as a historically existing nation that immigrants and their children joined by coming here, a country with its own right to exist and to determine its own sovereign destiny—a right that includes the right to permit immigration or not. No patriot, no decent person who loves this country, as distinct from loving some whacked-out, anti-national, leftist idea of this country, would call it a "nation of immigrants." Any elected official who utters the subversive canard that America is a "nation of immigrants" should, at the least, find his phone lines tied up with calls from irate constituents.

Of course, at first glance it seems indisputable that "we are a nation of immigrants," in the sense that all Americans, even including the American Indians, are either immigrants themselves or descendants of people who came here from other places. Given those facts, it would have been more accurate to say that we are "a nation of descendants of immigrants." But such a mundane assertion would fail to convey the thrilling idea conjured up by the phrase "nation of immigrants"—the idea that all of us, whether or not we are literally immigrants, are somehow "spiritually" immigrants, in the sense that the immigrant experience defines our character as Americans.

This friendly-sounding, inclusive sentiment—like so many others of its kind—turns out to be profoundly exclusive. For one thing, it implies that anyone who is not an immigrant, or who does not identify with immigration as a key aspect of his own being, is not a "real" American. It also suggests that newly arrived immigrants are more American than people whose ancestors have been here for generations. The public television essayist Richard Rodriguez spelled out these assumptions back in the 1990s when he declared, in his enervated, ominous tone: "Those of us who live in this country are not the point of America. The newcomers are the point of America." Certainly the illegal-alien demonstrators in Los Angeles last week agreed with him; America, they kept telling us, belongs to them, not to us.

In reality, we are not—even in a figurative sense—a nation of immigrants or even a nation of descendants of immigrants. As Chilton Williamson pointed out in The Immigration Mystique, the 80,000 mostly English and Scots-Irish settlers of colonial times, the ancestors of America’s historic Anglo-Saxon majority, had not transplanted themselves from one nation to another (which is what defines immigration), but from Britain and its territories to British colonies. They were not immigrants, but colonists. The immigrants of the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries came to an American nation that had already been formed by those colonists and their descendants. Therefore to call America "a nation of immigrants" is to suggest that America, prior to the late nineteenth century wave of European immigration, was not America. It is to imply that George Washington and Ulysses S. Grant (descended from the original colonists) were not "real" Americans, but that Richard Rodriguez (descended from 20th century immigrants) and the anti-American demonstrators last week in Los Angeles, are.  
Apart from its politically correct function of diminishing the Anglo-Saxon Americans of the pre-Ellis Island period and their descendants, the "nation of immigrants" motto is meaningless in practical terms. Except for open-borders utopians (a group that has grown over the years until now it seems to constitute a majority of the Democratic Party), everyone knows that we must have some limits on immigration. The statement, "we are a nation of immigrants," gives us no guidance on what those limits should be. Two hundred thousand immigrants per year? Two million? Why not twenty million—since we’re a nation of immigrants? The slogan also doesn’t tell us, once we have decided on overall numbers, what the criterion of selection shall be among the people who want to come here. Do we choose on the basis of family ties to recent immigrants? Language? Income? Nationality? Race? Victim status? First come first served? Willingness to work for a lower wage than Americans work for? The "nation of immigrants" slogan cannot help us choose among these criteria because it doesn’t state any good that is to be achieved by immigration. It simply produces a blind emotional bias in favor of more immigration rather than less, making rational discussion of the issue impossible.

Read it all.

I suggest that today's immigrants, those that a flooding across the borders at the behest and by the incitement of other governments, think of themselves as new American pioneers, new American colonists coming to supplant the "old order," that's us in case you wonder. It is so obvious. One wonders why other don't get this!!!!

Chip me, please? A Chip in the Shoulder...

A while back I viewed an episode of CSI:Miami with a plot line that included wealthy club girls whose skimpy outfits couldn't accommodate even a credit card. At the time I believed this to be science fiction, chips in the shoulder loaded with financial and personal information to replace money, hard ID cards, and other paper records. It appears I was wrong. "Chip me please," no longer means a trip to the roulette or blackjack tables.

Radio frequency identity tags will be marketed as the “next thing you can’t live without.”

The Nazis used tattoos and paper cards and carried out the holocaust because they were carrr-rrrazy. We’re using the Global Positioning System and radio chips and are doing it to track the spread of bovine diseases and avian flu — not to mention injecting chips into pets so they don’t get lost. Microchipping babies is unthinkable, right?...

Not in Mexico, where a company called Solusat markets the rice-sized VeriChip to parents who fear their children will be abducted. Other uses include using the chip as a credit card or a storage device for medical information.
Proponents of chip-tracking technology like columnist Kirby Snell at the University of Evansville Crescent argue we have nothing to fear from chip technology and that there is nothing inherently wrong with implants that allow people to be tracked anywhere and everywhere at any time. Chips are good, they say.

Yeah, chips are good like a metal shackle around the throat.

First, the tags will be voluntary. The rich and the privileged will get the chips to make it fashionable and acceptable. Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson already has volunteered to get the chip implant.
Employers like surveillance company already have jumped to implement the technology. Some City employees already had chips injected into their arms.

Next the chip will be incorporated into everyday activities such as going to a theme park or shopping. Wannado City theme park in Florida has patrons wear wristbands that allow them to be tracked. Wal-Mart has been tracking consumer habits using radio frequency identity tags implanted into packaging of products like Gillette razors. General Motors’ OnStar system has been tracking drivers’ every moves for a decade.

After chipping people becomes normal, expect the crackdowns on people who refuse to submit. Laws will start being implemented requiring everyone to be chipped by de facto mandate. A chip will be needed to get a driver’s license or passport. Insurance companies can celebrate once again because without a chip, doctors won’t treat you, and insurance won’t cover you. Some aspiring politician will push for laws to require the lowlifes of society, pedophiles and child rapists, to be chipped for, we are told, “our own safety.”

Chips will be marketed as the next thing you can’t live without. For many people, as was the case with cell phones and iPods, the glitz, social pressure and promotions will outweigh the negatives like the loss of privacy and loss of unabated brain waves.

Speaking of brains, the tags act as little brains storing information about their carriers and can be accessed by those with the know-how. The tags act as brain manipulators without ever having to plug into the brain à la “The Matrix.” People with tags will condition themselves never to have a devious thought. The deeper self will be killed by the self...
It’s for your own good, we’re told. Without money, the world would fall into degenerative chaos, we’re told. Without war, there would be no peace. Without medication, we have no true emotions. And without radio frequency identity tags, our sense of personal freedom could never exist. The people and corporations in power tell us a lot of things to make it seem not so bad.

I know better. It’s bad enough to make one fade into the anonymous hillsides of Ireland or secretly travel the United States in a van that runs on vegetable oil. In this fight between savages and the tech-savvy world state, I’d rather be a savage.

I agree.

Peak Oil Panic

Is there really a crisis? What is behind the high prices?

The good news is that the peak oil doomsters are probably wrong that world oil production is about to decline forever. Most analysts believe that world petroleum supplies will meet projected demand at reasonable prices for at least another generation. The bad news is that much of the world’s oil reserves are in the custody of unstable and sometimes hostile regimes. But the oil producing nations would be the ultimate losers if they provoked an “oil crisis,” since that would spur industrialized countries to cut back on imports and develop alternative energy technologies.

To the world's oil producers and refiners: be careful what you wish for.

Read it all.

Hmmmm. How far can you drive on a bushel of corn?

Laissez Faire For Our Oil Companies


The following just came in as a letter to the editor from the Ayn Rand Institute. Understand this very short letter BEFORE the fascists have time to "fix" the oil companies.

If you saw Senator Durbin (D-Ill) on Neil Cavuto's program, 26 April, on Fox News Channel, you saw the fascist mentality in pure culture. Durbin was just drooling to sock it to the oil companies while completely gaffing off the role of incredible state and federal taxes and the fascistic regulatory meddling by government at all levels.

If people like Durbin, Schumer, and many others work their way, we will be in the "hurt locker" worse than you ever could conceive. We remember the gas lines under Nixon and shortages under Carter. The Congress was not so far fascistic then as it is now. Their "cure" will be worse than any disease.

There is no such thing as price gouging by private oil companies.

The term "price gouging" implies that oil companies and gas stations have an ability to forcibly inflict harm on us--but they do not. Any price we pay for a gallon of gasoline, we pay voluntarily, based on its value to us. If we think gasoline is too expensive, we are free to drive less, to buy more fuel-efficient cars, to use carpools or busses, or to travel by bicycle or on foot. Gas station owners cannot force us to buy gasoline; they can only offer us a trade, which we are free to accept or reject.

Since the prevailing price of gasoline is the result of trade, it reflects not the arbitrary "greed" of gas station owners, but the facts of the market: the producers' costs, competition, and what customers are willing to pay.

Oil company "greed" is not "hurting the nation"--it is making oil and gasoline available to all of us who are willing to pay market prices. We should be grateful for that.

Alex Epstein
Ayn Rand Institute

Copyright © 2006 Ayn Rand® Institute. All rights reserved.

Op-eds, press releases and letters to the editor produced by the Ayn Rand Institute are submitted to hundreds of newspapers, radio stations and Web sites across the United States and abroad, and are made possible thanks to voluntary contributions.

The Ayn Rand Institute, 2121 Alton Pkwy, Ste 250, Irvine, CA 92606

Coming to a Neighborhood Near You: "Hezbollah, Illegal Immigration, and the Next 9/11"

Read the whole sobering report that includes many internal hyperlinks.

Radical Islam: Globalization for Losers

The "religion of peace," radical Islam could have learned a lot about peace from the anti-Vietnam "Peace" demostrators. During the era of the radical anti-Vietnam era, a few "peace" demonstrators marched, blew up buildings, and went to live in communes. "Make love, not war" was their motto. But radical Islam has nothing to do with peace, for in Islam, peace means "the absence of enemies."

Some young (and old) Muslims are going through an identity crisis. Instead of meditating, searching their psyches, and committing to non-violence, they are dedicated dedicated to retro-Jihad, going back to the Islam of the founders in which thousands were put to the sword or enslaved. Today they have an opportunity to make peace in Darfur, Sudan. Instead, they are dedicated to slaughtering the region's indigenous Muslim tribes as well as all that is non-Muslim in their global environment.

In the West, we tend to talk about globalization as if it's a euphemism for Americanization. But there are many competing forms of globalization. Even anti-globalization activists favor the "right" kind of globalization, one driven by the U.N. and "progressives" instead of corporations and markets.

Radical Islam is globalization for losers. It appeals to those left out of modernization, industrialization and prosperity, particularly to young men desperate for order, meaning and pride amid the chaos of globalization. Radical Islam provides it, but at a terrible price.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported the sad tale of the demise of Mak Yong, an ancient form of dance and theater in Southeast Asia drawn from pre-Islamic faiths, including Hinduism. But such traditional cultural influences are now considered "un-Islamic."

"Many Southeast Asian Muslims now navigate by guideposts from the Arab world," the Journal reported. "Young men in Indonesia are starting to wear turbans and grow beards. In Malaysia, Malays have adopted the Arab word for prayer, salat, to replace the Malay word, sembahyang, which literally means 'offer homage to the primal ancestor.'"

This is merely an extension of trends that have already transformed the Middle East. As Fareed Zakaria writes in "The Future of Freedom," until the 1970s most Middle Easterners "practiced a kind of village Islam that adapted itself to local cultures and to normal human desires. Pluralistic and tolerant, these villages often worshipped saints, went to shrines, sang religious hymns and cherished art - all technically disallowed in Islam." This indigenous form of Islam was bulldozed by urbanization and radicalization. The Iranian Revolution was a harbinger of the transformation toward a more "universal" Islam that was also more doctrinaire; "Islam of the high church as opposed to Islam of the street fair," Zakaria writes.

Reihan Salam, a co-author of one of the smartest blogs going right now,, is an American of Bengali descent who argues that the death of Mak Yong represents "globalization at its worst." He rightly notes that if the choice is between the globalization of "crass Arabization" and the globalization of "crass Westernization," then it should be no choice at all.

Although Western-style globalization may force certain technological and economic changes on indigenous cultures, it also provides those cultures with the tools and flexibility to keep much of their culture. The hard Islam coming out of Riyadh and Tehran offers no such freedom. Recall that Afghanistan was a Muslim country for centuries, but it wasn't until the jihadi thugs of the Taliban took over that the historic Bamiyan Buddhas were deemed an offense to Islam and destroyed.
Bin Laden's call to kill U.N. peacekeepers is consistent with the Islamist desire to impose a harsh, "one true Islam" across the Muslim world (and, someday, they hope, the non-Muslim world too.)

Too many intellectuals and commentators take the ignorant and condescending view that because jihadism is exotic, it is also "authentic." On the right, this often translates into the view that all strains of Islam are alike - and equally dangerous. And on the left, we get the usual knee-jerk defense of any seemingly "indigenous" foreign movement that casts America as a global villain. The reality is that in the war on terrorism, America is on the side of freedom and diversity. Bin Laden & Co. are the real crusaders.

Gas Prices Shouldn't Surprise Us.

Charles knows why:

1. Demand is up. That shouldn't be a surprise with all the new industries and new cars in garages all over the world.

China has come from nowhere to pass Japan as the number No. 2 oil consumer in the world. China and India -- between them home to eight times the U.S. population -- are industrializing and gobbling huge amounts of energy.

American demand is up because we've lived in a fool's paradise since the mid-1980s. Until then, beginning with the oil shocks in 1973, Americans had changed appliances and cars and habits and achieved astonishing energy conservation. Energy use per dollar of GDP was cut by 30 percent in little over a decade. Oil prices collapsed to about $10 a barrel.

Nothing has changed (since 1996). Except that since then, U.S. crude oil production has dropped an additional 12.3 percent.

2. Supply is down. This is more troubling.

Start with supply disruptions in Nigeria, decreased production in Iraq and the continuing loss of 5 percent of our national refining capacity because of Katrina and Rita damage. Add to that the mischief of idiotic new regulations. Last year's energy bill mandates arbitrary increases in blended ethanol use that so exceed current ethanol production that it is causing gasoline shortages and therefore huge price spikes.

Why don't we import the missing ethanol? Brazil makes a ton of it and very cheaply. Answer: The Iowa caucuses. Iowa grows corn and chooses presidents. So we have a ridiculously high 54-cent ethanol tariff and ethanol shortages.
Other regulation requires specific ("boutique'') gasoline blends for different cities depending on their air quality. Nice idea. But it introduces debilitating rigidities into the gasoline supply system. If Los Angeles runs short, you cannot just move supply in from Denver. You get shortages and more price spikes.

And don't get me started on the missing supply of might-have-been American crude. Arctic and Outer Continental Shelf oil that the politicians kill year after year would have provided us by now with a critical and totally secure supply cushion in times of tight markets.

In March 2000, the price of gas hit $1.80. Scandalized congressional Republicans shamelessly pushed for repeal of Bill Clinton's whopping 4.3-cent gas tax increase. Now that the president is a Republican, what do you think Senate Democrats are proposing? A 60-day suspension of the federal gas tax. It would cost $6 billion and counteract the only good thing that comes with high gas prices -- the incentive to conserve.

George Shultz once said, "Nothing ever gets settled in this town." But even Shultz, who has seen everything, must marvel at the perfect regularity, the utter predictability, of the bottomless cynicism of Washington in the grip of gasoline fever.

There's something wrong with this picture. How can be shown up by...Brazil? Don't we have more technology, a more educated population and "Yankee Ingenuity?"

What's Wrong With Mexico?

Maybe the problem lies in the fact that the elite chooses to feather their own nests rather than create job and programs that will uplift the population, and they would rather that the American taxpayer, the American educational system, the American health system, and employers do the job for them while using the United States as a safety value and a source of income as their migrant millions send home $20 million a year in remittance payments.

Could this be the reason why Delegates to the Mexican Congress express solidarity with their co-nationalists in the United States and why they lay claim to enfranchised Mexican Americans that have already taken the oath citizenship?

America needs immigrants that are hardworking ... and loyal only to her.

And we should be asking: What's wrong with this picture .... in Washington D.C.?

Birds of a Feather ...

If you haven't read David Horowitz's book Unholy Alliance (reviewed here), then get one today and get started. Time's a wastin', and I mean it.

May 1 is about to become Spring Halloween for all sorts of people, not the least of which will be lots of hand-holding vermin. Here is a perfect example, of many, of Horowitz's unholy alliance, and one that is as predictable as night and day. Here come the entitlementas latinos, Muslims, communists, and all of the anti-American rabble that can ambulate or be pushed. It will be like 31 October for all the goblins, ghosts, spirits, skeletons, and the like--only it won't be benign children this time. It will be corporeality of the cesspools of the earth manifesting.

Muslims to join pro-illegals protest in L.A.--
Millions of activists expected to 'close' major cities May 1

© 2006

Mexica Movement activists protest in L.A.

Muslims in Los Angeles and elsewhere are being urged to join millions of Latino protesters in the streets May 1 to demonstrate in favor of leniency toward illegal aliens currently living in the United States unlawfully.

"In solidarity with immigration activists around the country, the Muslim Public Affairs Council as well as the Council on American-Islamic Relations - Los Angeles, the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, the L.A. Latino Muslim Association, the Muslim American Society - Los Angeles, and the Muslim Students Association - West are calling on American Muslims to participate in a day of action on May 1, 2006," says a statement from the Muslim Public Affairs Council. "Islam's message is one of social justice, economic fairness, and fair treatment in the workplace. The Quran urges the proper treatment and respect of workers."

"American Muslim organizations are calling for a comprehensive immigration reform that includes provisions for a pathway to lawful permanent residence for the undocumented currently in the United States, a temporary worker program that matches willing workers with willing employers, and a reduction in the current backlogs in family-based immigration to the United States," said the Muslim Public Affairs Council.

Choosing May 1, the day Communists worldwide celebrate the worker, activists have vowed to "close" major American cities as millions of Latinos, both legal and illegal, mark what some organizers are calling "a day without an immigrant" and others refer to as the "Great American Boycott." They are urging supporters not to go to work, school or spend money on that day.

"It is to show the amount of work, the purchasing power, the contributions that illegal and undocumented workers make on a daily basis," Chris Banks, a volunteer for ANSWER, or Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, told the Desert Dispatch in California...

Jorge Rodriguez is a union official who helped organize earlier pro-illegals rallies. "We want full amnesty, full legalization for anybody who is here (illegally)," Rodriguez told Reuters.

As WorldNetDaily reported, large protests held by pro-illegal-alien activists early this month actually had a negative effect on the demonstrators' cause, a poll found.

Now, why would all of these groups want open borders, amnesty for their illegality, an open door to massive extended families? Of course:

Long live the proletariat! Down with capitalism! Workers unite! All you have to lose is your chains! No wage slavery. We demand complete exemption from Gringo, infidel, and capitalist laws! It is October 1917--Go crazy! Take back our land! Replace the Constitution with shari'a. Revolution!

Michelle Malkin Exclusive - Illegal Alien Planning Day

In "Illegal Alien Planning Day," Michelle gives evidence that Mexican-Americans Are Urged to Arm Themselves in the belief that "European Americans Are Threatening Their Homes."

No kidding. As reported before, the extremist group "La Voz de Aztlan" has all sorts of plans for the United States. This time it appears that they may be suggesting armed rebellion:

From: To: Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:27:37 -0700 Subject: [La Voz de Aztlan] URGENT ALERT: From The Revolutionary Council and Provisional Government of Aztlan

Dear La Voz de Aztlan Subscribers:
We have received the following communique from the
Minister of Information of the Nation of Aztlan. We rarely
receive any communiques from the "Revolutionary Council
and Provisional Government of Aztlan" so we must assume
that it is of upmost importance. We urge that you carefully
consider the information that it contains. Please pass this
to others in your network!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
URGENT ALERT: From The Revolutionary Council and
Provisional Government of Aztlan
April 26, 2006
Estimada Raza de Aztlan and Beyond,
Our Director of Special Intelligence Services has brought
to our attention disturbing information that threatens the
safety of our families. This information requires that we
prepare a defense strategy to protect our communities.
Due to the recent large demonstrations of our people in
major cities in occupied Anahuac, extremist European
invaders are preparing violent actions against us.
They are expected to use physical violence in the upcoming
marches and rallies planned for May 1, 2006 and we must
take steps to protect our families.

The Director of Special Intelligence Services has reliable
information that anti-Mexican forces in Aztlan and in
certain other area of Anahuac, are preparing to utilize
explosives and snipers to kill our people. We urge our
community to arm themselves to protect our families. We
are also urging our soldiers presently serving In Iraq,
Afghanistan and other foreign lands to do everything
possible to return home and fight for your own. The
situation here is critical.

In addition, all political prisoners shall be in constant
alert and ready for action. Also, youth groups in our
barrios shall call truces and direct their energies against
the racist enemy that has vowed to annihilate our families.
Our Prime Minister is instructing every able bodied male to
arm himself to protect the women and children in his home.
We can not depend on local White law enforcement
authorities because in many cases they will join the
criminal elements and participate in the slaughter of our
people. Make sure you have weapons and plenty of
ammunition in your homes at the ready.

Criminal racist elements have already made death threats
against certain "occupation administrators" and they will
not stop at killing our civilians. We hope that the
massacres of Mexicans that the White criminals have vowed
to undertake are just the rantings of cowardly insane minds
but we must take these threats seriously.

Minister of Information
Nation of Aztlan

No one is advocating violence except for them. No one is advocating racist separatism and discrimination except for them. Americans are inviting those that are willing to join the mainstream as exactly that: mainstream Americans. It appears that this movement is not taking the invitation and is actually advocating something much different.

Don't forget to examine the other provocative information provided in this blog article, including the fact that the Mexican government is supporting the strike!

Smearing mainstream-Americans is fun and games for the Mexican media as reported in the article Neonazis van contra hispanos that equates those opposing millions of illegal immigrants as "racists," "white supremists," "Neo-Nazis," and those that "have declared 'open season' of hunting and harassment against immigrants and they attempt to utilize the migratory debate to stir up hate against Hispanics, particularly Mexicans..." Naturally Mexican citizens will believe this tripe...after all, it must be true, it's in the paper!!

No one is against immigrants that want come legally and join the mainstream; it's the racist, bigoted, violent, unassimilated immigrants that we don't want.

Meet Senor, Senora, et al, Entitlementas

May 1 is supposed to be the day when all the illegal aliens inside America emerge to show their strength. Their plan, according to sundry news reports, is to cripple America--well, for one day. They plan to show that they are a force to be reckoned with by not going to work and not buying anything Gringo.

Whatever they intend to show, they will show us the only side of the entitlement personality they can, the dark side. They will wallow in their imagined victimhood and act like baby birds who open their mouths as the adult bird arrives to the nest so that the adult bird can stuff nutrients into their gullets. Only these entitlement birds will not grow up and become independent adults.

Over and over we keep repeating the seemingly immortal words of Dr. Phil McGraw, famed television psychologist: People teach other people how to treat them. To see the difference we are stressing in this article, compare the following: (1.) people struggling to get to America illegally out of desperation, to take any job, to earn any money, to send back home, to support impoverished families in a country so corrupt that it makes a cesspool seem like clean drinking water; (2.) people struggling to get to America illegally because the American government doesn't care and they want to get their rewards, i.e., meet their "expectations."

Actually, both groups are meeting expectations, but they differ for each group.

The first group expects to find earning opportunities that make taking the risk of illegal entry worth taking. Anything else they can come by is pure gravy.

The second group expects to belly up to the welfare bar and be taken care of, at U. S. and state government expenses. This ALWAYS means at taxpayer expense since no government creates anything, thus earns nothing. Parasitizing from the conscripted earnings of productive citizens of a host country is always anathema to honorable men and women. This second group harbors no such scruples.

Listen to them and to their "leaders," and you will hear that this second group has "rights." That is correct: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT RIGHTS. What they mean is Rooseveltian Rights, not the Rights of Man. FDR, Mrs. FDR, and all Lefties then to now, stood for the "four freedoms" and their "logical" rights. For instance, freedom from hunger becomes the right to be fed. The freedom from the elements becomes the right to shelter, clothing, and by extension, on to health care and education. After all, does not the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights say the same thing? Yes, that disgraceful document does. These entitlement personalities are living the UN's UDHR.

Add to this all the decades of "compassionate leftism" and all the "compassionate conservatism," past to present, and you have two political parties, which sadly dominate American politics, giving away the farm. Some even declare this largess to be offered by "right." Our government taught them well, with the support of the government of Mexico.

Just a brief digression here in the interest of clarification. True rights are sanctions of ACTIONS and never the provision of materials and services. Your nature as a human being necessitates rights as freedoms of action to support and further yourself but not at the expense of others. Money, food, health care, education, etc., are items which must be supplied by someone--in this case, taxpayers. These are given by governments after taking money and property from citizens by force. The "four freedoms" of FDR and their derivative "rights" are pure Orwell-Speak. RIGHTS ARE NOT ENTITLEMENTS, AND ENTITLEMENTS ARE NOT RIGHTS.

What these Democrat and Republican policies, with presidential collusions, produced were masses of entitlement personalities, bellying up to your wallet to claim their "rights." Whereas the first group we cited tends to be grateful for opportunities and tries to make the most of them, the second group has no gratitude. The second group becomes petulant, demanding, passive aggressive, and passive dependent. After all, their own government of Mexico has contributed at least as much as the state and federal governments of the United States in cultivating the mass entitlement syndrome.

So, come May 1, expect to see masses of baby birds in the streets, all with mouths open, demanding to have THEIR entitlements stuffed into their gullets. Listen for all the corrupt "RIGHTS" that will be mentioned. And, do not forget what Dr. Phil said: We teach people how to treat us.

As for me, I intend to go shopping and observing. I could go shopping today or over the weekend, but I want to support the Rights of Man and its magnificent derivative, capitalism. And, I want to send a message by my actions to those who deserve my support and those who do not. I will also send a flurry of emails, etc., to the Cowards on the Potomac.


Thursday, April 27, 2006

The Hate-Filled "Lover of Angels:" "Muslims Will Rule The Earth..."

We are all trying to keep up with what is going on in the minds of those who would harm our country. Thanks to Elmer's Brother, there may be a significant "find."

This is the sort of material we see all the time written by those who would destroy our civilization. Normally, it would be just another hate-filled post written by another hate-filled Islamist proselytizing his hate-filled ideology.

I'm showing you this one, however, as a sample that is typical of what this blogger posts all the time. He calls himself "Lover of Angels." The reason it is more important than the average hate-filled junk that these people spew forth is because there appears to be some evidence that this guy may teach at one of our universities - "Lover of Angels" may well be the alter ego of Professor Julio Cesar Pino at Kent State University.

I am a strong proponant of free speech. We must understand what is meant by "free speech," however. It means that the government may NOT PROSECUTE someone simply because his views oppose its own. "Free speech" does NOT, however, mean that the government, via the taxpayer, is obligated to provide him with a podium for such views.

If this man is actually teaching at one of our universities, then that is precisely what is happening - the taxpayers are paying for his podium.

If these are his views, then he has every right to supply his own podium with his own resources and speak of them, free of any worry that he will be thrown in jail for doing so. He can even start his OWN university, and teach his views to people who volunteer to attend it.

THAT is what is meant by "freedom of speech." "Free speech" doesn't place upon us the burden of paying for him to speak.

So, here's a sample of his stuff; what do you think? If this guy is teaching at a tax-supported teaching institution, should he continue there, or should he have to provide his own soapbox?

If you think he should have to pay for his own soapbox, then please sign this petition protesting Dr. Pino's employment is here.

Here are some other sites where you can find writeups and sign the petition:

Conservative Central, A Conservative Realist, Democracy Frontline, Elmer's Brother, Infidel Bloggers Alliance, Moving Out Moving On, NeoCon Command Center and Soccer Mom Unplugged.


Countdown: Islam and the End of History
by "Lover of Angels"

Life on earth will never come to an end except as described in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The end of history will never occur before the emergence of all of the lesser and greater signs of the Hour. One of those signs is that there will be conflict between the people of truth, who are the Muslims, and the people of evil and falsehood, who are all of those who oppose the religion of truth, Islam, and strive to extinguish its light. There are two distinct features of this conflict which will occur before the end of life. The first is a conflict between the Muslims and the people of the cross, as is mentioned in the saheeh ahaadeeth which speak of the battles at the end of time.

The second is the battle between the Muslims at the time of the descent of Jesus (peace be upon him) with the Anti-Christ (Dajjaal) and his followers among the Jews. Then Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj (Gog and Magog-tw warring powers, enemies of Islam) will appear, and they will die as one.

Then the Muslims will rule the earth, then everyone in whose heart is faith equal to a grain of corn will die, when a cold wind blows that will take the souls of the believers. Then the Hour will begin soon after that and it will come upon the most evil of people who are scattered throughout the earth. The universe will not be destroyed when there is still one believer on earth, but when faith is gone it will be destroyed, because belief in Allaah is a reason for life to continue.

The point is that it is not permissible for a Muslim to believe that the end of the world will occur in a manner different to that which is mentioned in the proven texts of the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

May Day - And I Mean It In The Sense of "Emergency"

OK, folks, I know that most of us around here focus primarily on the threat posed by Islam. More and more, however, the threat posed by Islam is associated with the threat posed by our government's "open border" policy. This being the case, I am following both issues.

And if you think that our porous borders with Mexico (and Canada) are where the problem, ends, just take a look at "The UN's 'Borderless' World" by Joseph Klein over at FrontPageMagazine.

Here's the scoop on the plans by the illegals and their supporters for May Day.

First, the original e-mail from our friends at Voz de Aztlan. It is followed by a translantion (with gratitude to a friend) and than an AP article on the whole subject:


"Nada Gringo" el 1 de Mayo El Universal Lunes 24 de abril de 2006 MONTERREY, NL.

La influyente Cámara de Comercio de Monterrey (Canaco) se sumará al boicot que realizarán diversas organizaciones civiles locales en apoyo a la protesta denominada "Un Día sin Latinos". Ésta se llevará a cabo el 1 de mayo en Estados Unidos.El próximo Día del Trabajo, dirigentes hispanos han convocado a un paro nacional, así como a diversas manifestaciones, para apoyar la legalización de los inmigrantes y han llamado a la población mexicana a que se solidarice al boicotear productos y servicios de Estados Unidos."

Unos días antes del 1 de mayo, haremos un llamado a la población para que no viaje a la frontera a comprar en los comercios de Laredo y McAllen", afirmó Jesús Marcos Giacomán, presidente de la Canaco.Según estadísticas de la Oficina de Impuestos de Texas, los mexicanos que compran en los comercios de McAllen y Laredo dejan una derrama de alrededor de 2 mil millones de dólares al año.

Para el presidente de los comerciantes de Monterrey, la salida de capitales que provocan los mexicanos al comprar en los comercios de Estados Unidos le hace un "gran daño" al país. "Por eso vamos a apoyar el boicot", precisó el líder de la Canaco que afilia alrededor de 10 mil negocios.Mencionó que han realizado encuestas entre la clase media de Monterrey, las cuales arrojan que las familias regias de clase media alta gastan entre 3 mil y 5 mil dólares en los comercios de McAllen, Texas."Y eso sucede porque actualmente el dólar es la mercancía más barata que tenemos en el país", subrayó Marcos Giacomán."

Por eso también estamos protestando por el aumento de la franquicia de 300 dólares para importar productos de Estos Unidos", concluyó el presidente de la Canaco.De esa manera el comercio organizado se suma a las agrupaciones civiles que ya están convocando a la población a que el 1 de mayo no realice llamadas, no consuma productos estadounidenses y se abstenga de viajar a ese país.´Clausura´ de supermercado"Ese día vamos a hacer el cierre simbólico de alguna tienda Wal-Mart", afirmó Ignacio Zapata, líder de la Unión de Usuarios de Servicios Públicos y regidor del ayuntamiento de Monterrey.

Ignacio Zapata y otras organizaciones civiles se reunieron recientemente con Ventura Gutiérrez, miembro de la Coalición Internacional 1 de Mayo."La dirección de la Coalición Internacional 1 de Mayo me asignó la tarea de ser el promotor principal del lado mexicano para que la población de este lado se solidarice con la protesta", aseguró Ventura Gutiérrez a los representantes de diversas instituciones.Ventura Gutiérrez es también presidente de la organización Braceroproa, la cual aglutina a 10 mil ex braceros que reclaman un fondo de retiro que nunca les fue devuelto y quienes también se sumarán al boicot contra Estados Unidos."Estamos solicitando a la población mexicana que ese día no hagan una sola llamada a Estados Unidos", precisó Gutiérrez.

Agregó que ese día no compren ningún producto de Estados Unidos y se abstengan de viajar a ese país."Queremos que el 1 de mayo dejen de tomar Coca-Cola y en su lugar consuman agua de horchata y jamaica", añadió el líder social."

Queremos que el 1 de mayo se preparen diversas acciones de protesta para solidarizarse con la que será la marcha más grande en la historia de Estados Unidos", concluyó Ventura Gutiérrez. Ignacio Zapata comentó que ese día también realizarán un mitin de protesta frente al consulado de Estados Unidos en Monterrey.* * * * * * * * * * La Voz de Aztlan

And now, the translation of that e-mail:

"Nothing Gringo on May 1st" "El Universal" Monday 24, April, 2006

Commercial group "Camara de Comerciao de Monterrey" (Canaco) put together a summary of the boycott in which various local civil organizations are creating to support the protest called "A Day Without Latinos." This will take place on May 1st in the United States. The day after the meeting, participating Hispanics created a national work stoppage to be manifested in various ways in order to support the legalization of immigrants, and have requested that the population of Mexico boycott products and services that come from the United States."

A few days before May 1st, we will call on Mexicans to not travel to the border to do business in Laredo or McAllen," affirmed Jesús Marcos Giacomán, president of Canaco. According to statistics from the Tax Office of the State of Texas, Mexicans that do business in McAllen and Laredo spend about $2 million a year there.

The president of this Monterrey commercial group feels that encouraging Mexicans to do business in the United States damages Mexico. "For this reason we are going to support the boycott," said the leader of Canoco, a group that represents 10,000 businesses. He mentioned that polls taken of middle class families of Monterrey have shown that they spend between three to five million dollars in McAllen, Texas, businesses.

According to Marcos Giacomån, "This happens because the dollar is actually the 'cheapest product' we have in the country. For this reason we are also protesting the rise to $300 in the import charge of importing products into the United States," Canaco's president finally stated.

This is the summary of action plan made by Canaco to various civil groups that are mobilizing to support the boycott on May 1st: Don't make phone calls, don't use any products or services from the United States, and don't go there. Shut Down the Super Center. On this day we will make a symbolic gesture by closing all Wal-Marts," said Ignacio Zapata, leader of the Union of Public Services Users and governing body of Monterrey.

Ignacio Zapata and other civil organizations recently met with Ventura Gutiérrez, a member of the "International Coalition of May 1st." "The leaders of of the "Coalition of May Ist" made me the principal promoter on the Mexican side in charge of solidifying the protest in Mexico," Ventura Gutiérrez affirmed when he spoke to the representatives of the various organizations.

Ventura Gutiérrez is also president of "Braceroproa," an organization that joined together about 10 million ex-braceros that are involved in a suit to claim retirement funds that are owed but they never received. The members of this group will also participate in the boycott."We are asking Mexicans not to make a single phone call to the UnitedStates," said Gutiérrez.He added that no one should buy U.S. products nor travel to the UnitedStates."On May 1st, want them not to drink Coca-Cola, but instead, drink products made from " 'horchata,' i.e. almond syrup, and 'jamaica,' i.e. hibiscus flower juice, Gutiérrez added.

"We want May 1st to create solidarity as a prequel for various other protests that will culminate in the biggest march in the history of theUnited States," concluded Ventura Gutiérrez.

Ignacio Zapata commented that on this day there will also be a protest meeting in front of the U.S. Consulate in Monterrey.

And now, the AP article (hat tip: AOW) :

Activists plan one-day boycott of U.S. businesses

MEXICO CITY, Mexico (AP) -- "The Great American Boycott" is spreading south of the border, as activists call for Mexicans to boycott U.S. businesses on May 1.

The protest is timed to coincide with a May 1 boycott of work and shopping in the United States that also has been dubbed "A Day Without Immigrants." The boycott, which grew out of huge pro-migrant marches across the United States, is designed to pressure Congress to legalize millions of undocumented people.

Mexican unions, political and community groups, newspaper columnists and even some Mexican government offices have joined the call in recent days.

"Remember, nothing gringo on May 1," advises one of the many e-mails being circulated among Internet users in Mexico.

"On May 1, people shouldn't buy anything from the interminable list of American businesses in Mexico," reads another. "That means no Dunkin' Donuts, no McDonald's, Burger King, Starbucks, Sears, Krispy Kreme or Wal-Mart." For some it's a way to express anti-U.S. sentiment, while others see it as part of a cross-border, Mexican-power lobby.

In some cases, advocates incorrectly identified firms as American -- Sears stores in Mexico, for example, have been owned by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim since 1997. And ironically, the protest targets the U.S. business community, which is one of the strongest supporters of legalization or guest-worker programs. "At the end of the day, boycotting would only hurt corporations that are backing what people want done in the immigration bill," said Larry Rubin, CEO of the American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico. Rubin is encouraging people to write to their legislators instead of boycotting.

Roberto Vigil of the California-based immigrants rights group Hermandad Mexicana said his group has asked some of Mexico's largest labor unions to back the protest. Elias Bermudez, president of the Phoenix-based Immigrants Without Borders, is actively promoting the boycott in interviews with Mexican radio and television stations.

Mexican groups are responding. Pablo Gonzalez, spokesman for one of Mexico's largest labor unions, the Federation of Revolutionary Workers and Farmers, said his organization will support a boycott against "at least four of the most important U.S. firms, among them Wal-Mart," Mexico's largest retailer. Two other major labor groups -- the telephone workers' and auto workers' unions -- also are expected to join, Vigil said.

Even parts of the Mexican government have signed onto the protest.

"We are not going to be buying any products from the United States on May 1," said Lolita Parkinson, national coordinator for the National Board of State Offices on Attention for Migrants, which represents state government-run migrant aid offices.

For some, the boycott is fueled not just by debate on the immigration bill, but by long-standing resentment over the perceived mistreatment of Mexicans in the United States. "We want to show the power we have as Mexicans," said Carlos Chavez y Pacho, vice president of the chamber of commerce in Piedras Negras, across from Eagle Pass, Texas. Chavez y Pacho is also urging Mexicans not to shop in U.S. border cities on May 1, in part to protest what he calls arrogant behavior by U.S. customs officials and border officers.

Rafael Ruiz Harrell, who writes a column in the Mexico City newspaper Metro, predicted the boycott could give rise to a broader, pan-Latino movement. "If we could get all of Latin America, for one day, to leave the U.S. firms without customers, we would be sending the kind of clear message they seem incapable of understanding," he wrote.

Find this article at:

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

American Soldiers with Sombreros?

It's not so much where you are from,'s your attitude that matters. Divided loyalties matter, a sense of entitlement matters, a desire to undercut to subvert fairness, and to create anarchy matter.

Globalization's New Underclass

In case you haven't noticed, you are probably competing with workers on the other side of the world, workers that are equally or probably better educated and, perhaps, more highly skilled, yet working for a much lower wage. Globalization, outsourcing, and the age of the internet are to blame.

Billed as the great equalizer between the rich and the poor, globalization has been anything but. An increasingly integrated global economy is facing the strains of widening income disparities - within countries and across countries. This has given rise to a new and rapidly expanding underclass that is redefining the political landscape. The growing risks of protectionism are an outgrowth of this ominous trend.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. Globalization has long been portrayed as the rising tide that lifts all boats. The surprise is in the tide - a rapid surge of information-technology-enabled connectivity that has pushed the global labor arbitrage quickly up the value chain. Only the elite at the upper end of the occupational hierarchy have been spared the pressures of an increasingly brutal wage compression. The rich are, indeed, getting richer but the rest of the workforce is not. This spells mounting disparities in the distribution of income - for developed and developing countries, alike.

The United States and China exemplify the full range of pressures bearing down on the income distribution. With per capita incomes of US$38,000 and $1,700, respectively, the US and China are at opposite ends of the global income spectrum. Yet both countries have extreme disparities in the internal mix of their respective income distributions.

This can be seen in their so-called Gini coefficients - a statistical measure of the dispersion of income shares within a country. A Gini index (the Gini coefficient multiplied by 100) of zero represents perfect equality, with each segment of the income distribution accounting for a proportionate share of total income. Conversely, a reading of 100 represents perfect inequality, with the bulk of a nation's overall personal income being concentrated at the upper end of the distribution spectrum. In other words, the higher the Gini index, the more unequal the income distribution. The latest Gini index readings for the US (41) and China (45) are among the highest of all the major economies in the world - pointing to a much greater incidence of inequality than in economies with more homogeneous distributions of income, such as Japan (25), Europe (32), and even India (33).

Read the rest.

US Approves Second Dubai Deal

Uh, oh. Here we go again.

This time for Dubal International Capital to take over the British firm Doncasters, a precision-engineering company that--get this--makes engines for our military aircraft and parts for tanks. Their projects include the Stealth Joint Fight Striker.
In buying Doncasters, the Arab Islamist country, which also does business with Iran, takes possession of operations in nine U.S. locations and manufactures precision parts for defense contractors such as Boeing, Honeywell, Pratt & Whitney and General Electric.

Perhaps, because of worries about a Nuclear Iran, the Battle of Iraq, and high gas prices, that we forgot about these...or perhaps they hoped we wouldn't care:

US to Clear Doncasters for Dubai

Something Rotten in Dubai: The Ports Deal, the President's Bro, Homeland Non-Security & Ice.

U.S. Probes Second UAE Deal

Timeline: United Arab Emirates

Dubai's Formidable New Ruler

Al Qaeda's Gold: Following the Trail to Dubai

Dubai Ports -Strategic Implications


Hey, Gringo!

Well, for sure, the MSM doesn't publish THIS kind of detail. Very interesting, and don't forget, the May 1st activity will be conducted with Muslims living here in a joint effort. No wonder - they have much in common with each other - they don't want to assimilate, they want to take over, and they want to destroy us.

Display your American flag on May 1.

Oh, and by the way, please note the states that are printed on the back of this T-shirt; they include the ones with all that shale oil.

Here's the article:

By Investigative Reporter John Taft
April 25, 2006

“You (gringos) have spilled enough of our blood, now it’s your turn to bleed, you [expletive] sub-human beasts.” So said an editorial in the University of California Irvine’s Hispanic LaVoz Mestiza. Professor Gutierrez, employed by the University of Texas, founder of La Raza said, “We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him."

Now that isn’t very neighborly.

A Chicano organization called MEChA wants to take over much of the US Southwest, an area they call Aztlan said, "For the race everything. For those outside the race, nothing."

Another “D” for a bad attitude.

Other similar groups include: The La Raza Unida Party, Brown Berets de Aztlan, OLA (Organization for the Liberation of Aztlan), and the Nation of Aztlan. These are radical organizations that can be found in many American high schools and most colleges. They hate America and love its enemies. They are brimming over with race hatred, anti-Semitism, and a history of communist leanings and communist support. They have an irrational anger aimed at their stupid benefactors. Recent mass marches have emboldened these people who do pose a real threat to this nation. Many are illegals and profess their allegiance not to the United States where they live, but to the authoritarian corrupt state of Mexico.

Why are these Chicano groups willing to use violence, kill the gringo, and steal his home and land? Here is what Lou Dobbs has to say: “There are some Mexican citizens and some Mexican-Americans who want to see California, New Mexico and other parts of the southwestern United States given over to Mexico. These groups call it the reconquista, Spanish for reconquest.” The word “some” Dobbs uses runs into the hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions judging by the recent filling of streets with anti US Mexican flag wavers. A revolution is taking place while the spectators watch.

The Enemy Within

MEChA has declared war on the United States, the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. So far it has done this with impunity with the help of treacherous senators, congressmen and university officials , along with the enemies of this nation. MEChA is bold and aggressive using this nation’s economy, welfare programs, and its educational system. While filling their bellies and needs at the expense of the American taxpayer, they’re plotting the overthrow of this republic in broad daylight. MEChA is nurtured and protected by the University of California at Irvine. MEChA has spread its venomous rhetoric through an estimated 300 chapters in universities and schools across the United States.

Their plan EL PLAN DE AZTLÁN is available for all to read. It’s full of race hated, threats, and the use of their bodies for war and their youth to commit revolutionary acts of violence against this nation and its people.

MEChA is appealing to all Hispanics to join their so- called revolution. The illegal aliens and lack of national border control are issues that are developing into a life or death struggle determining whether this republic shall endure as we have know it for the past 230 years. This is a threat with a potential that rivals Iran and radical Islam and it’s in our communities and cities across the nation. Our national leaders are turning their backs to this threat while smiling and looking for Hispanic votes. The illegal aliens are the grunts for an army of guerrilla fighters MEChA and other Chicano groups would like to create. Amnesty will make no difference to them, for the beat of their drums will continue. With amnesty, millions more of Mexico’s poor and hungry will attempt to enter the US for a free ride on the backs of US taxpayers.

There are large numbers of Hispanics who are not integrating into this society. They are not learning English as shown by the number of Spanish radio stations, businesses that tell you to push one for Spanish or two for English, and bilingual schools. Whole communities, like Maywood, California, in Los Angeles are nearly 100 percent Hispanic. And their allegiance to a corrupt Mexico, though hard to understand, is obvious. This was demonstrated visually when Hispanics legal and illegals filled American streets with protestors wanting open borders, and amnesty for illegals, while waving Mexican flags. There was a backlash to the Mexican flag waving, so now they wave American flags thinking to fool the watchers, thus making them hypocrites and deceivers.

Demonstrations like this don’t happen in Mexico where Mexican authorities rape, rob, and beat illegals passing through their county as documented in the linked article. Mexico supports illegal aliens leaving Mexico and illegally crossing our border but doesn’t want illegals entering Mexico.

MEChA’s Plan to Seize the southwestern United States

MEChA says in the Plan, “A nation autonomous and free - culturally, socially, economically, and politically- will make its own decisions on the usage of our lands, the taxation of our goods, the utilization of our bodies for war, the determination of justice (reward and punishment), and the profit of our sweat.” The “our lands” is the land owned by American citizens. How does MEChA propose to obtain this land of the southwestern states? Their Plan indicates they will use violence with physical force to remove the gringo from his property. Let’s look at the following statements from the Plan:

“EDUCATION must be relative to our people, i.e., history, culture, bilingual education, contributions, etc. Community control of our schools, our teachers, our administrators, our counselors, and our programs.”

“POLITICAL LIBERATION can only come through independent action on our part, since the two-party system is the same animal with two heads that feed from the same trough. Where we are a majority, we will control; where we are a minority, we will represent a pressure group; nationally, we will represent one party: La Familia de La Raza!”

“El Plan de Aztlán is the plan of liberation! Those institutions which are fattened by our brothers to provide employment and political pork barrels for the gringo will do so only as acts of liberation and for La Causa. For the very young there will no longer be acts of juvenile delinquency, but revolutionary acts.”

“We must insure that our writers, poets, musicians, and artists produce literature and art that is appealing to our people and relates to our revolutionary culture.”

One could reasonably ask why MEChA doesn’t make Mexico an economic powerhouse. The answer is easy; they are having so much success in the US, and they want to steal, like thieves in the night, the wealth of someone else’s hard work. The goose that lays the golden egg is in danger.

There is nothing cheap about illegals.

California taxpayers paid an extra $9 billion in taxes to support illegals according to a 2004 report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington, D.C. organization that endorses stricter immigration policies. Contributing to this expense are education at around $8 thousand per illegal child or those born to illegal parents, medical care, and prison costs. A similar study in 2004 by the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. claimed that illegal aliens cost the federal government $10 billion more than is collected in taxes from them.

That includes $2.2 billion for medical care for uninsured illegal aliens. Another $1.9 billion goes to food assistance programs like food stamps and school lunch programs. Illegal immigrant children cost taxpayers $1.4 billion in aid to schools to help pay their costs. The states’ taxpayers carry the major part of the cost to care for the millions of illegals in this country. When schools ask for more money, ask how many illegals are in the classroom and if the citizenship of the parents and child was checked. The costs mentioned are disputed by others who claim the costs of illegals aliens is much higher.

Illegals and Crime in the United States

Illegals are creating a huge crime wave all across the United States. Here is what Russell Pearce, representing Arizona’s 18th district says on his website, “Perhaps as high as 80% of the violent crime in the Phoenix area involves illegal aliens (according to Phoenix Chief Hurt and Mesa police violent crimes response team). Over 4000 homicide warrants were issued by the Border States to suspects who are believed to have fled south of the border into Mexico. Maricopa County Hospital loses over $2 million weekly on uncompensated care (largely do to illegal aliens). In 2003, 77 border hospitals filed for bankruptcy.”

The US is a big candy land for the uneducated, criminals, and often sick illegal aliens. The illegals aliens have found there is a free lunch, free medical care, free education, and there really is a Santos Claus, a big, stupid, pale-faced gringo. Hispanic Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez at the University of Texas describes the gringo as, “Our Devil with pale skin and blue eyes.” This pale-faced gringo sounds more like a fool than a devil. And guess who the all day sucker is; it’s none other than John Q. Taxpayer. He’s represented in congress by a bunch of enablers called congressmen and senators including Sen. John McCain and company. Jack Abramoff isn’t the only guy that should be behind bars.