Thread: Borwn Berets Racist? DD Racist? No way.

Originally Posted by ceyaotl

You are the one using it as your stick to hit the weak.

Feel free to prove that I’ve used the Constitution as a stick to hit the weak.

Originally Posted by ceyaotl

Give me you plan for getting those pesky Latinos back across the border.

It’s very simple. No citizenship to children of illegal aliens, as the framers of the 14th Amendment wanted, no jobs, no welfare, to include medical and education.

Do that and all of the illegal criminals will leave on their own, not just the “Latinos.” Yes, I caught you’re little racist remark.

Originally Posted by ceyaotl

Originally Posted by crazybird

I am by no means perfect but I do know DD is a true Patriot that is true to the Constitution.

Then you and she should fully understand why it is so vital to enforce our laws and protect our borders.

Did you read my post? I am for securing the border now. I am for stopping the employers from exploiting the undocumented and I am for a Guest Worker Program that keeps this economy moving.

The constitution also says we have a right to an opinion. We are not hard lined hard right wingers as you but we are more in line with what the President has said he supports and we support the Republican President we voted for.

Frankly, I am more concerned about stopping "undocumented" (read: illegal) workers from exploiting the American taxpayer.

You'll have to provide me with the article and clause of the Constitution that "says we have a right to an opinion." Now, I'll agree that, generically speaking, everyone has a right to an opinion. It's just that there is nothing to protect you from being jeered or ridiculed if you verbalize a ridiculous opinion in public.

Originally Posted by ceyaotl

Originally Posted by Reciprocity

You were DOA ceyaotl, you started pushing your Ethnic agenda right from the get-go, adio's

You were DOA with your anti-ethnic agenda. I am proud to be Chicano and I do not dispute that and I am also proud to be an American as I have said you can not separate the two. So, having said that what do you think I am doing? Do you think I am here to disagree or do think I am here to give a different perspective as to what it is I am fighting at my level and to bridge a better understand as to what is out here and what Pro-American Latinos are doing.

You and some others here seem to be resentful of the Fact that I am Chicano and Proud. I am American and Proud. It is not my fault that my culture has been very prevalent in my life and has been passed on to me by my parents, it just is. We are closer to the situation as well. We have family in Mexico and we have ties to that country that will probably never be broken. That does not mean that we do not want to Leftist Politics to spill over to our country and that does not mean that we do not want to see the Pro-Che crap and the Leftist fools running around talking about revolution. In that aspect I am a Revolutionary as I am causing change that is not common to my surroundings. I am placing my life in dangers as I am defamed and slandered as a traitor to my race. Do I care? Hell no, I am here to support this country and I am here to be pro-American. I do not want to see people raising Mexican Flags over government bldgs. I do not want to see Che's image on a Cuban flag at a march in my home town. I am doing all I can to fight my good fight and your inability to see the Chicano side of my fight is your own problem. I am fighting to win back the hearts and minds of a people that have been lead astray by groups that I compare to Hamas and the PLO.


Get off you high horse and remember I need no ones approval to run my war on Anti-Americanism Amigo.

I have no problem with any person clinging to his heritage. I think that the problem that most of us have is with illegal immigrants coming here and demanding that we spend tax dollars to accommodate their culture and language, particularly when that culture includes a lack of respect for the rule of law.

Originally Posted by ceyaotl

Originally Posted by Scubayons

Let me guess ceyaotl.
You are also a member of LuLac

As a matter of fact I am a Council President. I do not however agree with all LULAC speaks out on. I am not very well liked by those that do not like my anti-left stances. I don't really care. I made President for my ability to organize.

Does that mean that we should have forgiven the well-organized officers of the Nazi SS?

In my book, if you are an officer of an organization then you should be held accountable for the stances and policies of that organization.

ceyaotl wrote:
crazybird wrote:
Quote:
I am by no means perfect but I do know DD is a true Patriot that is true to the Constitution.



Then you and she should fully understand why it is so vital to enforce our laws and protect our borders.


Did you read my post? I am for securing the border now. I am for stopping the employers from exploiting the undocumented and I am for a Guest Worker Program that keeps this economy moving.

The constitution also says we have a right to an opinion. We are not hard lined hard right wingers as you but we are more in line with what the President has said he supports and we support the Republican President we voted for.

Employers aren't just exploiting illegal immigrants. Big business has a hand at exploiting everybody either by insourcing or outsourcing for CHEAP labor. Not because we don't have citizens that are willing to do the job because there are PLENTY.....they are doing it for CHEAP labor.

I am not "in line" with Bush. TRUST ME....he'd never and no one ever will get my vote that goes along with open borders, amnesty to illegals or selling us out to big business for an easy buck.

One minute I'm told I'm right wing and the next left wing and even liberal....I don't fit in a box.... so don't try and label me.

Hey, ceyoatl, looks like history does not accord well with your characterization of the Marxist/racist/anarchist Brown Berets, even according to your own advocates:

By 1970, the Brown Berets had developed a 13-point program" and concentrated its organizing in the barrios and colonias. The Berets' "f*** the marrano" (pig) politics attracted the most oppressed sectors of the Mexicano community, and the groups Soon grew into a national organization with 90 chapters and over 5,000 members, making it the largest Chicano Mexicano liberation-oriented organization that has ever existed. The Berets published a national newspaper called La Causa, which supported student walkouts throughout southern California and elsewhere. The Berets were instrumental in organizing the Chicano Moratorium march; one of the dead was a 16-year old Brown Beret named Lynn Ward.

In 1971, the Brown Berets organized a "Marcha de La Reconquista" as a way of raising awareness. In Riverside, Calif., the Berets shot down a police helicopter. Hundreds of demonstrations were organized, from California to Texas by the Brown Berets, many leading to clashes with local cops, resulting in deaths and injuries of many of its members.

-- excerpt from Revolutionary Barrio Organizing Confronts Cops, Electoral Politics, Racism, by Ernesto Aguilar dated Friday, 10 December 2004

Hmmm... "F" the pigs does not sound like the rallying cry of a legitimate organization, but rather the crudely grunted noisemaking of immature malcontents and revolutionaries. Also, I have no use whatsoever for a group that takes pride in having shot down a police helicopter.

You should be ashamed of shilling for such a subversive and misanthropic group, but of course you are not...

Y'know, ceyoatl, I took the liberty of doing a web search and auditing some of the discussions you and DD were involved with at other sites. What's strange is that you alomst appear to "get it" when discussing these issues with your fellow Hispanics. But what you don't seem to get is that much of your rhetoric and many of the organizations you defend are as offensive to the average American as is the revolutionary stuff you and DD appear to decry elsewhere.

Now, that leads to one of two probabilities. The first is that your negative commentary directed at the more radical reconquista types derives from a concern that the greater radicals will discredit your favored lesser radicals. I would view that as a selfish and disingenuous position. The second possibility is that you are so close to the issue and so surrounded by extremists that your somewhat radical position seems to you to be perfectly sensible. You will of course take issue with my characterization of your position, but please allow me to elaborate on the basis for my determination.

America is a nation of laws. As a matter of fact, the founders of this nation took great pride in the notion that they have created a nations of laws, not of men. In other words, no one is meant to be above the law. The law prescribes a process for becoming a citizen of this nation and thereby availing oneself of its bounty. Any person who holds that ANYONE is above our immigration law mocks the rule of law.

Furthermore, this nation's immigration laws are, or at least used to be, predicated on the idea of assimilation. When I use the word assimilation, I want to be clear as to its historical context. Assimilation has ALWAYS historically meant that persons from diverse lands and diverse cultures were free to come here so long as they adopted this nation's language, culture, laws, and morays, not that the nation was expected to bow to the dictates of those asking for asylum within our borders. We have gone from a nation of grateful immigrants eager to learn American values and to pull their own weight to a nation brimming with fairly hostile foreigners whose primary interest is in helping themselves to America's bounty and "freebies" (which of course are not free at all, but rather carry a high price tag borne by the legitimate citizenry) while refusing to modify their own mindset to that of the heterogenous people that crafted this great nation.

A sovereign nation has a sovereign right to determine who may or may not cross its borders and become a citizen. Moreover, such a nation's government has an obligation, not to those who want in, but rather to the existing citizenry, to see to it that any immigrants allowed to apply for citizenship are a benefit and not a detriment to the citizenry. I submit, as would most other reasonable Americans, that in a world in which many, many times the number of people this nation can realistically accept wish to immigrate, the government has an obligation to screen applicants such that we avail ourselves of the best and brightest that the world has to offer, not merely the peasant cast-offs of the so-called Third World. This is not a racist or nativist position, but rather a reasonable and pragmatic one.

Those who favor "open immigration" (in the true sense) fail to consider the horrifically detrimental effect such a policy would have on this nation. If lietrally ANYONE who wished to immigrate to America was allowed to do so, the nation would be floundering in no time. But the fact is that the open immigration types do not truly favor open immigration. They favor selectively open immigration.

I can't tell you how many Hispanics favoring an open immigration policy with Mexico balk when you ask whether al Qaeda members from terrorist states should be allowed to freely immigrate. They fully understand that such a policy would be all but suicidal. Yet they refuse to even begin to consider the detriments that open immigration policy with ANY nation would bring. Specifically, they favor open immigration for those who they wish to see immigrate and a stricter policy for everyone else. This, of course, is the height of hypocrisy.

Those who favor open immigration from Mexico use buzzwords and catch-phrases. They pretend that the immigration of their favored group is somehow "special," which is how they justify their hypocritical views. They codify the hypocrisy by calling immigration from Mexico and Central America "migration" rather than "immigration" so as to supposedly set it apart. But there is no justification for setting the conduct of the people of one nation apart from that of another, and the mere coincidence of proximity is a pathetic excuse for favoritism.

Beyond that, why not look at the laws the Mexicans themselves impose on would-be immigrants. Mexican immigration laws are harsher and more selective by an order of a magnitude than those of the US, so the hypocrisy is magnified.

I suggest to you, ceyoatl, that if you were truly looking at this issue as an American without hyphenation, you could not begin to stomach the hypocrisy and situational ethics that folks like yourself and DD apply to this issue. You fail to see the error of your mindset because you are looking at the issue from under a brown beret that colors everything you see.

Originally Posted by JohnB2012

I think he is just bored. Their web site is about dead.

You're being too kind. They appear to have three posters, one of whom is DD's boyfriend.

So CountFloyd, this is the man-in-waiting we are dealing with.

That's nice to know.

Dixie

I've got a feeling that Joseph won't be back.

Originally Posted by Dixie

So CountFloyd, this is the man-in-waiting we are dealing with.

That's nice to know.

Dixie

No, that's the other one, the lawyer boyfriend. At least he can write a coherent sentence.

This one is an administrator, just like DD.