Thanks Sis, I will, I am learning or trying to how to pace myself, It ain't been easy. :lol: I just sometimes as you well know, get a little overwhelmed!
Printable View
Thanks Sis, I will, I am learning or trying to how to pace myself, It ain't been easy. :lol: I just sometimes as you well know, get a little overwhelmed!
I agree, he would make the perfect first total impeached president of these united states. I don't just went him to be impeached but removed also, what he is doing is much much worst then Andrew johnson. Clinton he signed nafta so he is pretty bad also, but George Bush for getting us into a north american union. Heck he should spend jail time try the rest of his life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockfish
Yes, he deserves to be impeached. I am sure if any of our fore fathers were alive they would agree. I do not think that there is time to impeach and remove him. The most that would happen is start impeachment and keep him busy trying to cover his butt instead of continuing to push full force on his Mexico agenda.Quote:
Rockfish wrote:
DHS is in violation of the constitutional obligation to protect our borders and this STINKING PRESIDENT NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED FOR SITTING BY AND LETTING THIS HAPPEN. Do you still want to debate this, CrocketsGhost?
Matthewcloseborders wrote:
I agree, he would make the perfect first total impeached president of these united states. I don't just went him to be impeached but removed also, what he is doing is much much worst then Andrew johnson. Clinton he signed nafta so he is pretty bad also, but George Bush for getting us into a north american union. Heck he should spend jail time try the rest of his life.
We need to put pressure full force on Congress and keep it on until the idiots listen to the American people. This thing seems totally out of control but if we unite and push they will feel the shove. GOOO ACTIVISTS!!! Lets hit those phones and faxes!http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...heerleader.gif
I don't agree with this at all.Quote:
The most that would happen is start impeachment and keep him busy trying to cover his butt instead of continuing to push full force on his Mexico agenda.
The most serious result that this would bring is that while congress kept US busy with an impeachment circus - they WILL pass the AMNESTY/ NAU LEGISLATION right under our noses.
Having said that, my opinion on impeachment isn't important in this thread........I'm going to request that any talk of impeachment is kept off of this particular thread so that we can stay FOCUSED on this thread's mission which is to get out the information about the DHS'S DECLARATION OF OPEN BORDERS. This is crunch time!
Sis, that is just my personal opinion. I do not think any of us know for sure what impeachent would do or not do ,however, I agree it is crunch time and it is time to put all that anger full force into faxes, emails and phone calls to get this thing turned around.
Thanx, APRIL.Quote:
Originally Posted by April
Like I said, my opinion doesn't matter either within this particular conversation.
I'm fighting to keep my eye on the ball! It's not easy with so much 'stuff' swirling around us but I'm pouring all my strength into it - staying as focused as possible - cutting out the peripherals.
You're welcome Sis! Lets keep our eye on the ball and our phones and faxes hot ! :D
Here's the link to the members of the CFR (and the article posted), boy are there a lot of traders in our country:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/cfr-members.htm
The Council on Foreign Relations and the New World Order
By Charles Overbeck (PSCPirhana) Matrix Editor
The Council on Foreign Relations, housed in the Harold Pratt House on East 68th Street in New York City, was founded in 1921. In 1922, it began publishing a journal called Foreign Affairs. According to Foreign Affairs' web page (http://www.foreignaffairs.org), the CFR was founded when "...several of the American participants in the Paris Peace Conference decided that it was time for more private American Citizens to become familiar with the increasing international responsibilities and obligations of the United States."
The first question that comes to mind is, who gave these people the authority to decide the responsibilities and obligations of the United States, if that power was not granted to them by the Constitution. Furthermore, the CFR's web page doesn't publicize the fact that it was originally conceived as part of a much larger network of power.
According to the CFR's Handbook of 1936, several leading members of the delegations to the Paris Peace Conference met at the Hotel Majestic in Paris on May 30, 1919, "to discuss setting up an international group which would advise their respective governments on international affairs."
The Handbook goes on to say, "At a meeting on June 5, 1919, the planners decided it would be best to have separate organizations cooperating with each other. Consequently, they organized the Council on Foreign Relations, with headquarters in New York, and a sister organization, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, in London, also known as the Chatham House Study Group, to advise the British Government. A subsidiary organization, the Institute of Pacific Relations, was set up to deal exclusively with Far Eastern Affairs. Other organizations were set up in Paris and Hamburg..."
The 3,000 seats of the CFR quickly filled with members of America's elite. Today, CFR members occupy key positions in government, the mass media, financial institutions, multinational corporations, the military, and the national security apparatus.
Since its inception, the CFR has served as an intermediary between high finance, big oil, corporate elitists and the U.S. government. The executive branch changes hands between Republican and Democratic administrations, but cabinet seats are always held by CFR members. It has been said by political commentators on the left and on the right that if you want to know what U.S. foreign policy will be next year, you should read Foreign Affairs this year.
The CFR's claim that "The Council has no affiliation with the U.S. government" is laughable. The justification for that statement is that funding comes from member dues, subscriptions to its Corporate Program, foundation grants, and so forth. All this really means is that the U.S. government does not exert any control over the CFR via the purse strings.
In reality, CFR members are very tightly affiliated with the U.S. government. Since 1940, every U.S. secretary of state (except for Gov. James Byrnes of South Carolina, the sole exception) has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and/or its younger brother, the Trilateral Commission. Also since 1940, every secretary of war and every secretary of defense has been a CFR member. During most of its existence, the Central Intelligence Agency has been headed by CFR members, beginning with CFR founding member Allen Dulles. Virtually every key U.S. national security and foreign policy adviser has been a CFR member for the past seventy years.
Almost all White House cabinet positions are occupied by CFR members. President Clinton, himself a member of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, employs almost one hundred CFR members in his administration. Presidents come and go, but the CFR's power--and agenda--always remains.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFR's Shroud of Secretcy
On its web page, the CFR boasts that its magazine, Foreign Affairs, "is acclaimed for its analysis of recent international developments and for its forecasts of emerging trends." It's not much of a challenge to do so, though, when you play a part in determining what those emerging trends will be.
This point is underscored a paragraph later on their web page: "Perhaps best known for the history-making "X" article by George Kennan, that defined Cold War containment policy, a recent Foreign Affairs article by Harvard's Samuel Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?" has already helped define the post-Cold War debate."
So are they predicting trends or creating them? The answer is fairly obvious to anyone who has earnestly reflected on the matter.
The CFR fancies itself to represent a diverse range cultural and political interests, but its members are predominantly wealthy males, and their policies reflect their elitist biases.
The CFR attempts to maintain the charade of diversity via its Non-Attribution Rule, which allows members to engage in "a free, frank, and open exchange of ideas" without fear of having any of their statements attributed in public. The flip side of this, obviously, is a dark cloud of secrecy which envelopes the CFR's activities.
CFR meetings are usually held in secret and are restricted to members and very select guests. All members are free to express themselves at meetings unrestrained, because the Non-Attribution Rule guarantees that "others will not attribute or characterize their statements in public media forums or knowingly transmit them to persons who will," according to the Council on Foreign Relations' 1992 Annual Report.
The report goes on to forbid any meeting participant "to publish a speaker's statement in attributed form in any newspaper; to repeat it on television or radio, or on a speaker's platform, or in a classroom; or to go beyond a memo of limited circulation."
The end result is that the only information the public has on the CFR is the information they release for public consumption, which should send up red flags for anyone who understands the immense effect that CFR directives have on America's foreign policy. The public knows what the CFR wants the public to know about the CFR, and nothing more.
There is one hole in the fog of secrecy, however: a book entitled Tragedy and Hope, written by an "insider" named Dr. Carroll Quigley, mentor of Bill Clinton.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tragedy and Hope: The Global Elite
Dr. Quigley knew a lot about the behind-the-scenes work of global power because he was a part of that power network for most of his life. In his book, Tragedy and Hope, Quigley states:
"I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversions to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."
The "Hope" in the title of Quigley's book represents the thousand-year reign of a collectivist one-world society which will be created when the "network" achieves its goal of world government. Quigley believed that the "network" is so powerful at this point that resistance by the common people is futile. Hence, those who resist the schemes of the globalist planners represent the "Tragedy." By Dr. Quigley's logic, there is no point in struggling against the noose around our necks, because resistance will merely guarantee strangulation.
Dr. Quigley identified the "network" as the "international bankers," men who were "different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways: they were cosmopolitan and international; they were close to governments and were particularly concerned with questions of government debts...; they were almost exclusively devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence in political life. These bankers came to be called international bankers, and, more particularly, were known as merchant bankers in England, private bankers in France, and investment bankers in the United States."
The core of control, according to Dr. Quigley, resides in the financial dynasties of Europe and America who exercise political control through international financial combines. The primary tactic of control is lending money at high interest to governments and monarchs during times of crisis. An example of this is the current national debt in the U.S., which is at five trillion dollars right now. Every penny of it is owed to the Federal Reserve, a corporation comprised of thirteen private banks.
According to Dr. Quigley, the Council on Foreign Relations is one of several front organizations set up by the network's inner circle to advance its schemes. The ultimate goal: a New World Order.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFR and the New World Order
According to State Department Publication 2349, submitted by secretary of State and CFR member Edward Stettinius, a committee on "post-war problems" was set up before the end of 1939 at the suggestion of the CFR. In other words, two years before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the CFR was planning how to order the world after the war ended.
In 1946, the Rockefeller Foundation spent almost $140,000 to produce a history of how the United States entered World War II. This history was intended to counter "revisionist" historians who argued that the U.S. was "tricked" into the war by the Roosevelt Administration. The Rockefeller family has always taken a lead role in the CFR.
In the 1960s, while American men and women were dying in the jungles of Vietnam and while the military/industrial complex was sucking trillions of dollars out of American taxpayers' wallets, the Rockefeller dynasty was financing Vietnamese oil refineries and aluminum plants. If there had ever been a formal declaration of war, the Rockefellers could be tried for treason. Instead, they reaped dividends.
These are just a few of the abuses of power which demonstrate the results of the power elite's manipulations of our destiny as a society. If you've ever wondered why you don't hear about this network of power, just take a look at the CFR's membership roster (posted online in ParaScope). Many of the chief executives and newspeople at CBS, NBC/RCA, ABC, the Public Broadcast Service, the Associated Press, the New York Times, Time magazine, Newsweek, the Washington Post, and many other key media outlets are CFR members.
Even if these members of the media's elite had the inclination to report on what they saw and heard at CFR meetings, they are prevented from doing so by the Non-Attribution Rule. To put this in perspective: many of the people who are trusted to provide information about national and world politics are deliberately withholding crucial information from the public because of membership in a secretive globalist organization.
This organization has taken it upon itself to participate in the manufacturing of a new vision for humanity, and dissidence will not be tolerated. If you believe the words of Carroll Quigley, all resistance is futile and doomed to failure. If you believe the rhetoric of internationalists in our own government, the current "trend towards isolationism" will result in a loss of American hegemony in the New World Order, leaving the United States a wrecked Third World wasteland.
World government can come in time, piece by piece, arrived at through the full participation and consensus of the human beings who will be affected by the negotiations. But the idea of the world's elite determining what path that the common herd should follow is repulsive to the human spirit. The story of the CFR goes far deeper than this brief report, and is interlocked with several other international power groups.
International power orgs depend on the masses remaining ignorant for their plans to come to fruition. It's up to you to do your own research and draw your own conclusion. But remember: there's a hell of a lot more to the story than Dan Rather will ever tell you. Educate yourself, or remain a passive consumer. The choice is entirely yours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources
Council on Foreign Relations/Foreign Affairs web pages:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/
Nittygritty wrote:
Isn't there an old saying about 'he who controls the language controls the debate'. Sadly, this is right up there with multi-culturalism and its cry for a 'salad bowl' in America vs. a 'melting pot'. Both have insidiously infected our culture and make it all the more difficult to fight for anything. A very few, loud people started these stupid movements in America and I think we have the numbers to undo them.Quote:
I now understand just how insidious political correctness can be and how it has been used in our country to get "us" American citizens ready for our gov. to simply try to plow right over our protest of what they are doing.
But it's time we put an end to both and not be afraid of the name callers. It is time to keep focused and press forward every way we can.
Olivermyboy wrote:
I agree,I think we have the numbers to undo them.I am pressing forward RIGHT NOW with Faxes, emails and phone calls!! PRESSURE ON!!!!!!!Quote:
A very few, loud people started these stupid movements in America and I think we have the numbers to undo them.
But it's time we put an end to both and not be afraid of the name callers. It is time to keep focused and press forward every way we can.
April,
Are you faxing anything other than the memorials today?
Oliver
James Baker and baker institute are the ones carrying the CFR policies into the bowels of the government for action........thereby keeping the CFR out of the physical policy making process.
Here are some links that are useful. They may be out of date. Anyone who is on the CFR or Trilateral Commission list, wont get my vote.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8425/TRI-CFR.HTM
http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/cfr.html
http://www.cfr.org/
I am hitting on everything Amnesty, Homeland Security, Memorials,Quote:
April,
Are you faxing anything other than the memorials today?
Oliver
It is crunch time, so I am not just focusing on one area. IMO they have thrown so much at us we have to focus in more than one area now!!!
The CFR roster list is not complete. For example, McCain is a member but is not listed. Also, Senator Lugar.
For cross-referencing purposes, here's another list-
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/cfrall1.htm
Between the two, we should be able to get a more complete picture!
April wrote:
I'll start calling again.Quote:
I am hitting on everything Amnesty, Homeland Security, Memorials,
It is crunch time, so I am not just focusing on one area. IMO they have thrown so much at us we have to focus in more than one area now!!!
I just called Sen. Feinstein's office and some curt male staffer said "it doesn't mean anything, just ignore it". I said "it DOES mean something, this is an official website of DHS. I am outraged! I want this removed! How can they advertise open borders? When did Congress pass open borders?"
He cut me off and said he was busy answering other calls.
My head is spinning! I feel so overwhelmed by this. Seems they're coming at us from every direction! I try my best to get the word out to people about what's going on but I must admit, it really gets to me sometimes. I can spend hours on the computer educating myself and contacting people, but then I have to step away from it for awhile. For my own mental well being! There should be a therapist on this site as well! Special tips for activists on how to deal with the New World Order! :wink:
Things really seem to be accelerating now. Like they know we are "on" to them so they are speeding things up. Just a thought - it's great that we have this forum to communicate and unite together like this, but what if "they" eventually take this away from us as well? Are there any contingency plans to make sure that we will still be able to work and communicate with one another? If not, maybe this is something to consider?
http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/nw ... _union.htm
New World Order Chieftans Openly Discuss Dismantling US Border and Bringing Us into the Pan-American Union
CNN | June 10, 2005 (SEE THE DATE PEOPLE)
It was reported on Lou Dobbs last night that the traitors to the United States are finally coming out from their positions under the rocks. The
Council on Foreign Relations has published a report which articulates the plan to subvert the Constitution by dissolving our nation in favor of a
continental government. The media has kept a pretty tight lid on this treason until now. The 1986 amnesty, NAFTA, CAFTA have been stepping stones towards the dissolution of our national sovereignty.
Here is the transcript from last night's program -
DOBBS: Border security is arguably the critical issue in this country's fight against radical Islamist terrorism. But our borders remain porous. So porous that three million illegal aliens entered this country last year, nearly all of them from Mexico.
Now, incredibly, a panel sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations wants the United States to focus not on the defense of our own borders, but rather create what effectively would be a common border that includes Mexico and Canada.
Christine Romans has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On Capitol Hill, testimony calling for Americans to start thinking like citizens of North America and treat the U.S., Mexico and Canada like one big country.
ROBERT PASTOR, IND. TASK FORCE ON NORTH AMERICA: The best way to secure the United States today is not at our two borders with Mexico and Canada, but at
the borders of North America as a whole.
ROMANS: That's the view in a report called "Building a North American
Community." It envisions a common border around the U.S., Mexico and Canada
in just five years, a border pass for residents of the three countries, and
a freer flow of goods and people.
Task force member Robert Pastor.
PASTOR: What we hope to accomplish by 2010 is a common external tariff which
will mean that goods can move easily across the border. We want a common
security perimeter around all of North America, so as to ease the travel of people within North America.
ROMANS: Buried in 49 pages of recommendations from the task force, the brief
mention, "We must maintain respect for each other's sovereignty." But security experts say folding Mexico and Canada into the U.S. is a grave breach of that sovereignty.
FRANK GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: That's what would happen if
anybody serious were to embrace this strategy for homogenizing the United
States and its sovereignty with the very different systems existing today in
Canada and Mexico.
ROMANS: Especially considering Mexico's problems with drug trafficking,
human smuggling and poverty. Critics say the country is just too far behind
the U.S. and Canada to be included in a so-called common community. But the
task force wants military and law enforcement cooperation between all three
countries.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Indeed, an exchange of personnel that bring Canadians and
Mexicans into the Department of Homeland Security.
ROMANS: And it wants temporary migrant worker programs expanded with full
mobility of labor between the three countries in the next five years.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: The idea here is to make North America more like the European Union.
Yet, just this week, voters in two major countries in the European Union voted against upgrading -- updating the European constitution. So clearly, this is not the best week to be trying to sell that idea.
DOBBS: Americans must think that our political and academic elites have gone
utterly mad at a time when three-and-a-half years, approaching four years
after September 11, we still don't have border security. And this group of elites is talking about not defending our borders, finally, but rather creating new ones. It's astonishing.
ROMANS: The theory here is that we are stronger together, three countries in
one, rather than alone.
DOBBS: Well, it's a -- it's a mind-boggling concept. Christine Romans, thank you, as always.
There is no greater example than our next story as to why the United States
must maintain its border security with Mexico, and importantly, secure that
border absolutely. The police chief of the violent Mexican border town, Nuevo Laredo, was today executed. It was his first day on the job.
Alejandro Dominguez, seen here at his swearing-in ceremony, was ambushed by
a number of gunmen several hours just after that ceremony as he left his office. The assassins fired more than three dozen rounds that struck Dominguez.
He was the only person who volunteered to become Nuevo Laredo's police
chief. The position has been vacant for weeks after the previous chief of police resigned. The town is at the center of what is a violent war between Mexican drug lords. The State Department has issued two travel warnings for Americans about that area just this year. And amazingly, the Mexican government calls those State Department warnings unnecessary.
Still ahead, the military recruiting crisis is escalating. New questions tonight about the viability of the all-volunteer military. General David Grange is our guest.
And "Living Dangerously," our special report. Rising population growth in
the West, dangerous water shortages, the worst drought arguably ever. We'll
have that report for you next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
RECOGNIZING the contributions of the OAS and other regional and sub-regional
mechanisms to the promotion and consolidation of democracy in the Americas;
RECALLING that the Heads of State and Government of the Americas, gathered
at the Third Summit of the Americas, held from April 20 to 22, 2001 in
Quebec City, adopted a democracy clause which establishes that any
unconstitutional alteration or interruption of the democratic order in a
state of the Hemisphere constitutes an insurmountable obstacle to the
participation of that state's government in the Summits of the Americas
process;
"The terrorist catastrophes in New York and Washington swept away media
comment on other global events taking place on September 11, 2001.
Virtually obscured on that historic agreement reached in Lima, Peru by the
foreign ministers of the Organization of American States (OAS) on the
Inter-American Democratic Charter.
You'd never guess it from the ho-hum reportage of the Establishment press,
but the recently concluded Summit of the Americas in Monterrey, Mexico, was
a revolutionary event of major magnitude. The two-day summit (January 12-13)
attended by President Bush marked another step forward in a long-term agenda
to abolish national borders and merge the countries of the Western Hemisphere into a regional Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The general spin by most of the media analysts is that the conference hosted by Mexican President Vicente Fox did not accomplish much, ending with a harmless declaration but little consensus among the hemispheric leaders.
The truth is far different. The summit's final statement, the Declaration of
Nuevo Leon, commits the 34 nations to courses of action that have little or
nothing to do with increasing trade - the ostensible purpose for creating
the FTAA - but much to do with destroying our borders, soaking U.S.
taxpayers for billions of dollars more in foreign aid, and promoting
socialism throughout the hemisphere. The Declaration, for instance, included
a call for tripling the funding of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
for loans to Latin American businesses. The IDB - like the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund and other multi-lateral lending agencies - has a
horrible record of corruption and of funding statist projects that have
saddled Latin Americans with a crushing debt burden. With a huge infusion of
new IDB bribe money for business and political leaders, the FTAA architects
will be able to overcome much of the current resistance south of the border
to their merger plans.
Mexico and U.S. put “Security Perimeter” on fast-track
Mexidata | May 20, 2005
By José Carreño
Washington, D.C.- Task force groups from the U.S. and Mexico are working together, on a fast-track basis, on in-depth reforms to national security relations between the two countries.
The delegations are working on the creation of a “North American Security Perimeter,” that among other factors includes the identification of targets vulnerable to terrorism along the common border.
Gerónimo Gutiérrez, Mexico’s Undersecretary of Foreign Relations, said that the negotiations are going well, with an initial session for proposals scheduled for June.
The border area security plan is being discussed at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Mexican National Security and Investigation/Research Center (Cisen) levels.
National security officials and analysts noted that authorities in both countries have suggested the possibility of terrorist attacks on tourist destinations frequented by U.S. citizens.
Hang in there cloe!Quote:
Originally Posted by chloe24
It is overwhelming at first. We understand where you are saying. Just take baby steps and you will be running before you know it.
Dixie
I have contacted several of my friend out side of ALIPAC and told them what is happening and can you believe they did not know so I forwarded some info to them and they have agreed to contact their law makers and let them know it is unaccepable to do this ..
I know i am new to to here but I will do what I can to help in this struggle..
Great Fmrjarhead. Thanks! Americans need to know what the REAL agenda is and that it's not just about immigration!
Thanks, fmrJarhead , it is going to take all of us united in this struggle to make the difference that is needed!
Chloe wrote:
Although it is rough on us, it is a good sign that they are speeding up because they know we are on to them. It means they view us as a threat. We just need to keep on it as well. :DQuote:
Things really seem to be accelerating now. Like they know we are "on" to them so they are speeding things up. Just a thought - it's great that we have this forum to communicate and unite together like this, but what if "they" eventually take this away from us as well?
Take breaks Chloe, come back refreshed and do it again. That is what I do and it works. Also, look in the mirror and be proud that you are one of many Americans that care enough to save America. Hang in there, you are not alone. :)
Who said you would have to become "non-American?" The status to which I refer is simply that of every American prior to the passage of Amendment XIV. Are you saying that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and all the other founders plus every other patriot up to the un-Civil War was not an American?Quote:
Originally Posted by WMCMinor
What you appear to be failing to understand is that there are two separate entities, one being the original republic of the several states, the other being the corporate entity in Washington D.C. chartered for the purpose of handling certain limited duties of government. If you read through the Slaughterhouse cases, you will see that the citizens of the federal legislative democracy (the District of Columbia) are not the same as the People of the several states.
World Net daily has now reported on this story after we contacted them yesterday. See this post. Note that DHS did not return calls.
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... 986#309986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate
:) Kate, thanks for the link.
Fax ready, gratis KATE:
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u...penBorders.jpg
Thanks, Kate and Sis! I will send out to everyone again with Kate's awesome fax! :)
Also thanks for the WND link! GOOOO Activists! LETS RIDE!!! KEEP the MOMENTUM GOING!
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...horserider.gif
April, you and Sis rock with all the little Smiley guys! They just crack me up!
Good Question, but we are not allowed to talk about what may have to be done here. :xQuote:
Originally Posted by April
How can a border be both "secure and open"? I'm having a Teddy Kennedy moment! :?
The answer is it cannot be both. This is an oxymoron. There is no way to mesh these two, especially since thousands of people illegally cross the border every day and border patrol only catches a fraction of them. Is "open" going to make us more secure? No way. If "open" was meant to mean "welcoming", they would have used this word. People are so highly sensitized to the term "open borders." So why would they use this language and inflame people further, unless this is the intention? This is part of the SPP/NAU agenda. The SPP open borders agenda is now out in the open - they've been busted - so now they have decided to take a different approach and openly push their agenda. They are putting this stuff right out there under the noses of the public so they can say that their agenda has been above-board.Quote:
How can a border be both "secure and open"? I'm having a Teddy Kennedy moment! Confused
Kate wrote:
Thanks Kate, I am having lots of fun ever since Jean gave me some great tips on smiley posting. Now I am unstoppable! :lol:Quote:
April, you and Sis rock with all the little Smiley guys! They just crack me up!
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...ancingcats.gif
Glad to see you're having so much fun April. You learned quick!
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k1...ppyblueguy.gif
SHARE!!! I'm such a child--I love these smilies...
Just pm'd you.Quote:
Originally Posted by olivermyboy
deleted
To be honest I think all Americans need to get ready for the fight.The gov is commiting treason right in front of our eyes.It sure is getting to the point were we will have to do what we need to do to protect our way of life from our gov.Abraham Lincoln said that Americans have a right to take back our Gov if we choose and thats what we will probably need to do unless they back off.Quote:
Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic
A HEADS UP:
Everyone here knows that talk of violence, civil war or weapons is NOT allowed.
Everyone should understand the reasoning for this important rule.
WE as a group, have put in thousands of hard hours working for the salvation of our country. If anyone knowingly gives the enemy ammunition to use AGAINST US, then they're simply destructive.
We've seen them take our posts, edit them and distribute them across the web attempting to make us look like what we are not......vigilantes & racist.
Furthermore, by posting that type of thing on this public site, you leave us open to all sorts of problems from those watching us.
Please Take that talk somewhere else but keep it off of Alipac.
We're NOT going to let anyone destroy what we've worked so hard to build. To destroy our reputation with our friends in Congress. To let our enemies in Congress use us as a negative example in their fight to end our Constitution.
THINK PEOPLE........there are serious repercussions to this talk.
This is not being PC -- it's being smart within the context of our work!
If this ever comes to a fight, then so be it.
After several very concerned faxes and emails to Senator Salazar, who is pro illegal, about the Open and Secure Borders and what does it mean? He is the only one so far of the many that I have faxed, emailed and called to write me back I thought I would share. :roll:
A message from Senator Ken Salazar
From: Senator_Salazar@salazar.senate.gov
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 14:24:48 -0500
Dear Ms. :
Thank you for contacting me.
I appreciate your efforts to apprise me of developments in this matter. By keeping me informed of important issues, you help me better serve Colorado in the U.S. Senate.
Again, thank you for writing.
Sincerely,
Ken Salazar
United States Senator
Please do not respond to this email. To send another message please visit my website at http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm and fill out the webform for a prompt response. Thank you.