Thread: If This Is Civil War II, Then Let Lincoln Be Our Guide

http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?page_id=1689

By Zief Schulden
(the author can be contacted through Immigration Watchdog.com)
July 4, 2006

A Problem?

If American history teaches us one thing, it’s that some wars are easier to spot than others. The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and the United States Congress declared war. That was a “no brainer” for most Americans. The fact that the US committed troops to counter communist tyranny in Korea and Vietnam, without declaring war, shows the “war” nature of each “conflict” was different than WWII. The Civil War had to be fought without granting legitimacy to the Confederacy; President Lincoln did not call for a formal declaration of war. September 11, 2001 introduced America to a new kind of war that is ideological and defies borders: war on terror. It is getting more difficult to spot wars because, due to America’s military superiority, the enemies of the republic will declare war in increasingly subversive forms, with overt and obvious Pearl Harbor “no brainers” unlikely.

On May 1, 2006 millions marched in the streets of America demanding amnesty for illegal immigrants. The vast majority of marchers were either illegals from Mexico or supporters from various Latino communities. Of 365 possible dates, was it significant that May Day, a communist holiday, was selected? Was the march, on the day selected, tantamount to a declaration of war? Does this date mark the beginning of another round of terrorism on American soil?

I understand why some may view such questions as an overreaction. Nothing as overt as Pearl Harbor occurred. Weeks later, suicide/homicide bombs have not killed or maimed innocent civilians. Though police protection and intervention have been called to the scene on several occasions, clashes between anti-illegal protestors and communist-backed counter protestors have been relatively small. In most parts of America, people are going about their normal routines; it is easy to overlook or ignore the rumblings of discord which lie nervously under the surface.

The days just before the Civil War teach us that looks can be deceiving. The First Battle of Bull Run’s picnic atmosphere (literally!) shows the degree of “denial” the people of America were living with at that time. The Civil War Handkerchief is the most vivid object lesson for pre-civil war “denial.” Just prior to the Civil War Politicians and military leaders were fond of saying that the total amount of blood spilled in a possible war could be wiped up with a handkerchief. (See endnote 1.) The Civil War caused over one million casualties and took more than 620,000 lives. Assuredly, more than one handkerchief was needed to absorb all the blood, along with tears. Would a more realistic prediction of bloodshed have helped to prevent the carnage?

This sobering illustration is not intended to foster paranoia. Overstating the significance of millions marching (for still more millions of illegal immigrants) will not help to resolve our nation’s tensions. On the other hand, a vigilant society never ignores warning signs of impending war or enemies within the gates. Perhaps the pre-Civil War days affirm the saying: “Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean something bad won’t happen.” So, let’s back up a bit and put the present into the context of the past.

Just as World War II was the result of the unresolved issues of World War I, the remnants of the Mexican-American War (1846-184 further complicate current tension over illegal immigration within the US. Since that time some Mexicans have dreamt of winning back disputed territory. All the illegal immigrant discussions of 2006 (and beyond) must be understood within the broad picture of 1846 as the focal point.

In some contemporary Mexicans’ point of view, 1846 America is painted as war mongering, uncompromising, and racist. Ideas such as these bring about wars and there was, no doubt, enough of the same to go around from both sides. However, lest we allow a one-sided historical point of view to influence current US policy, it is crucial to remember that for the US 1846 was not only a year of war with Mexico, but also a year of peace with Great Britain. Through compromise the US averted war over the Canadian border despite the pro-war rhetoric that elected President Polk: “Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!” (i.e., the border coordinates demanded by the US). The overall war mongering charge some avow lacks substantiation.

Relative to the Mexican-American War some might challenge the significance of the 1846 treaty with Great Britain by asking: “Wasn’t it (so-called) white American racism that chose peace with white Canada so that war with brown Mexico could be waged?” Not so fast. White America had serious scores to settle with white Canada. Despite the ongoing bad blood from the Revolutionary War, and the War of 1812, the “Treaty of Oregon” yielded territory to Canada that was clearly purchased by the US from France in the Louisiana Purchase. If the US was an uncompromising war mongering nation, then the treaty would never have been signed; or if signed, it surely would have been broken by now (especially if in 1846 the US was merely trying to avoid a two-front war). Despite the skeletons in the closets of these two sets of white forefathers, the 49th Parallel has peacefully held as the undisputed border since 1846.

Far from being the white racists portrayed by some Mexicans today, the US had been allied with Mexico prior to 1846. After Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821, the US boosted Mexico’s legitimacy by recognizing the new country. In 1823 Mexico enjoyed the protection, like the rest of Latin America, of the Monroe Doctrine wherein the US told European powers, including white Great Britain and France: “Hands off the Americas!” Despite the unfortunate 1846-1848 war with Mexico, after being untied from the crippling constraints of the American Civil War, the US was able to invoke the Monroe Doctrine — in practice! — on behalf of Mexico. Once again the US sided with Mexico against a foreign power; this time against the white French. Since that time the US has fought against the ultimate white supremacist regime, Nazi Germany, and helped to end the racial inequality of apartheid in South Africa.

Despite amiable relations between Mexico and the US, there are some Mexicans who want to re-fight the Mexican-American war. After all these years one can understand the Mexican perspective, but no side in any war is ever 100% just and without blame. This is why the US did not practice the dictum, “to the victor go the spoils,” but rather paid Mexico for land in both “The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo” (which ended the Mexican-American War, 184 and “The Gadsden Purchase” (1853). (See endnote 2.)

One has to wonder who is uncompromising and racist when some Mexicans want to end over 150 years of peace in the name of “La Raza.” This is Spanish for “The Race” with connotations that vary. For some, this term simply promotes self-esteem. In its moderate application, the term serves as a call for the withdrawal of brown people from the colorful diversity that has made America great. Extreme “La Raza” groups call for nothing less than complete removal of all non-Latinos from America’s Pacific Southwest. Yes, that means millions and millions of black, white and yellow people expelled from their homes. In short, “La Raza” has become a loaded term, and it can rightfully be perceived as a threat to anybody who isn’t “bronze,” that is, black, white or yellow. (See endnote 3.)

As the racial demographics of the US’s Southwest become more Mexican, voices of mutual respect and independence (enjoyed with the departure of the French in 1867) have given way to clamoring voices filled with ugly political threats. These voices were exceptionally shrill when, in 1994, Californians tried to protect their economy from the cost of providing social services to millions of illegal aliens who were not paying taxes in support of these same services. While the cost of supporting non-contributing illegal immigrants was the issue of Proposition 187 (which can be seen in the 50+ hospital closures in California since then), brown “La Raza” racists disingenuously and repeatedly misrepresented race as the issue.

Fabian Nunez, based upon his current position as Speaker of the California State Assembly, provides the most distorted and hypocritical comment in the anti-Proposition 187 campaign. After speaking about of “revolutionary completeness,” he continues:

…we’re no longer going to tolerate the racism against our community…. Luckily, we don’t have to give our lives. We’re not at that point… those rednecks … will think twice before they push forward anti-immigrant [sic: read “anti-illegal”] legislation against our [Mexican-American] community.” (See endnote 4.)

A similar tactic was exploited when in 1996 the same voters tried to end the unfair race-centered practice of affirmative action with Proposition 209. Proposition 187 won with a supermajority (66%) vote while Proposition 209 passed by a narrower margin (54%). The judicial system overturned both propositions and the will of the people of California, including many people of color. (See endnote 5.)

In the 1990s the speeches of “La Raza” extremist leaders unmistakably and unapologetically said that they are in a state of “war” or “civil war.” They bemoaned being “a hunted people” and asserted “giving [of] lives” may be needed. There was talk of “browning of America” wherein “Latinos are now becoming the majority” and whites “ought to go back to Europe.” They claimed to be drawing from the illegals themselves to classify “new citizens,” and controlling “elections, whether it’s by violence or nonviolence.” (See endnote 6.)

The May Day, 2006 marches of communist-backed illegal aliens and their sympathizers must be studied in view of the civil war and terrorist rhetoric of recent years. As masters of seditious activity, the communists will not launch a conventional war the US government could easily win (currently). Therefore, it is important to take note of their activity NOW. Since May 1st, the communists (who have operated subversively in the US for many years) are becoming more visible and bolder champions of illegal aliens. A few communists agitating on street corners on behalf of illegal aliens might be ignored; arousing millions of illegal aliens to undo the treaty that ended the Mexican-American War must NOT be ignored. The US would be foolish to disregard the omens and wait to take action until overt actions occur (like suicide or homicide bombings, a Latino supported secession of California from the Union, or an attack like Pearl Harbor backed by Mexico). For example, the signs are getting increasingly ominous when border incidents occur; the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps reported their fence in Arizona was recently “vandalized.” (See endnote 7.) Is this only the beginning of this type of attack?

The Solution

If communist-backed “La Raza” rhetoric has put this country on the brink of Civil War II, then President Bush’s drama is comparable to that of President Lincoln’s Civil War I. Like no other President since Lincoln, Bush has the good fortune of being able to draw from Lincoln’s Civil War legacy. In this brewing national crisis, at his disposal is an incredible arsenal of penned masterpieces that can be quoted almost verbatim.

Take for example Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address. One can almost hear a resurrected Lincoln respond to radical “La Raza” racists groups who talk of civil war:

In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to “preserve, protect, and defend it.”

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Let’s use Lincoln’s language to address present day concerns.

The issue of civil war is in the hands of radical communist-backed “La Raza” revolutionaries who talk of war. Lincoln had no choice but to stand up to the treason and sedition of his day; President Bush has no choice but to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution upon which this republic stands or falls. In no way, shape, or form is treason or sedition protected under the First Amendment. (See footnote 8.)

The millions of illegal aliens that marched in America have not been “assailed” or “hunted” as some claim. The American courts have granted to illegal aliens free food, housing, education, and medical care. Without contributing to the system, they freely apply for and receive welfare, choke our health care system, and crowd our classrooms. They stand openly, in the light of day, looking for work. (See endnote 9.) Signs in Spanish that cater to them are clearly seen just about everywhere. (See endnote 10.)

Only the failed communist economic system has an “oath registered” to destroy the American Government. (See endnote 11.) This is not a “heavenly” oath, mind you, as “religion is” to them “the opiate of the masses.” Nevertheless, this oath is the most lethal oath ever sworn against America. Communists are the catalyst that have been giving organization and resolve to brown “La Raza” racism. (See endnote 12.)

Especially in the face of the communist threat, President Bush must reassure Mexican-Americans that “we are not enemies, but friends.” Mexico and the US in the 21st Century cannot afford to severe friendship over 19th Century differences. Neither country will truly win a modern day war that cannot undo the inequities perpetuated on both sides of the Mexican-American War. (See endnote 13.) A peaceful future is dependent upon remembering that we have been allies twice in ventures such as driving out European powers (Spain and France). While Americans are divided on giving entitlements to illegals, certainly the billions of taxpayer dollars spent on social services for them thus far should be considered a friendly gesture.

“We must not be enemies!” The communists would enslave all, including the Latino community, as no other political movement can. The US tried to free Cuba. In Latin America the US has fought against communist oppression for many years. America’s global fight against communism is perhaps more a fight for Latino freedoms than for any other group.

President Bush must remind Latinos that Americans of all colors lie side by side in graveyards around the world as patriot brothers. Certainly the “strains” of the current illegal immigration debate cannot undo this mutual struggle for freedom and shared sacrifice. The “better angels of our nature” is the cure for communism on the left, and racism on the right.

Sadly, the reassurances given in Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address did not avert Civil War I. However, his magnanimous approach and bravery should inspire President Bush, the Congress, and all Americans in the face of Civil War II. Hopefully President Bush will be wise enough to see the parallels between Lincoln’s day and ours, and be bold enough to give the reassurances and reminders that flow from Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address. If he fails, the next deterrent will be for President Bush to assert some of Lincoln’s historical precedents.

To some, Lincoln’s response to treason and sedition may seem like extreme measures, but to preserve the Union such steps are preferable to living under communism or racist “La Raza” extremes. Lincoln wisely saw that at times even a constitutional republic must, in times of war or extreme crisis, adopt the Roman dictum: Inter Arma Silent Leges (in times of war the laws are silent). This means that at times “martial law” must be declared to preserve law and order, and Inter Arma Silent Leges is the nation-wide version. Lincoln knew that without these measures the republic’s laws would be moot if the republic was overthrown. Let’s review some of Lincoln’s actions and relate them to today’s situation.

Lincoln faced the high probability that Maryland would secede from the Union immediately after his inauguration, and this provided him with a challenge unlike the other seceding southern states. If this state directly north of Washington D.C. seceded, the Union would have had to deal with the irony of its capital being surrounded by the Confederacy. This would have changed the entire dynamic of the war effort, especially if it was fought from a capital-in-exile. If Maryland was allowed to secede from the Union, perhaps the war that emancipated millions of slaves would never have been fought and America would be less free today for people of all races. While hypocritically criticized by liberals today, to keep Maryland from seceding from the Union, Lincoln detained Maryland’s secessionist state legislators (by suspending the writ of habeas corpus) before they could vote on secession.

President Bush must emulate Lincoln-style measures before he leaves office. Only swift action will ensure that the republic is saved before communists and socialists (mostly Democrats) are given a chance in 2008 to allow treason and sedition to grow any more than they already have. What follow are the types of things I believe President Lincoln would do if he recognized that a state of war existed today. Note that the current illegal immigrant population itself is not the focus until Step Five.

Step One. President Bush must seal the border no matter how many reserve – or regular — troops it takes.

Step Two. President Bush must ask for a declaration of war from Congress against those that have exploited the illegal immigration quandary as a platform for treason or sedition against the US Constitution. This declaration of war needs to be worded in this way so that the root agitation from communists will end through imprisonments or deportations. Also, treasonous co-conspirators at all levels of government – in the House, Senate and state legislatures – would then be dealt with under war time powers. President Bush must start with Border States, like California, where the treason and sedition are the most prevalent. These measures, like those of Lincoln, would be temporary in order to save the republic. (See endnote 14.)

Step Three. President Bush and Congress should set out to correct the imbalance of power as found in the abuses of the Judicial Branch. An expeditious mechanism must be put in place to allow the people to counteract judges that thwart the will of the people and undercut the Constitution. One of the strengths of the US Constitution is the understanding that governments are imperfect and balance is needed. Lincoln had to deal with treason within the Legislative Branch. Under Nixon the Executive Branch ran amuck. Today the Judicial Branch needs to be reigned in more than at any other time in US history. “Legislating from the bench” is a violation of the “separation of powers” and equivalent to judicial dictatorship.

Step Four. President Bush must to purge our schools at all levels. There should be no toleration for communists or “La Raza” racists. This means outlawing organizations like MEChA, which promotes: “For the [Latino] race, everything; for those outside the race, nothing.” Official statements from MEChA (and other groups) deny this, but their rallies are attended, supported, and promoted by communists. (See endnotes 15.)

Step Five. With the exception of emergency medical care, Congress must end ALL entitlements for illegal aliens. This includes public education for illegal aliens. (If illegals want their children educated, let them return to their homeland for the same.) Those that have been relying on welfare and other entitlements would be allowed to leave the country peacefully. This would be part of a comprehensive reform wherein Congress would also reexamine entitlements for all Americans so that welfare as a way of life would end in America. Charitable organizations should replace government agencies as the primary source of benevolence in our society.

Step Six. Once the root problem of communist agitation is eliminated, the imbalance of the courts is corrected, and entitlements ended, Congress can address what to do about illegal immigrants within US borders. Mexicans, and others, who have taken it upon themselves to usurp the place of immigrants from other countries would be deported. Companies that have violated immigration laws would be heavily fined.

Step Seven. After putting legal immigrants first in line, the goal would be to allow people to immigrate to America who have a love for freedom and the American way of life. One test of loyalty would be the renunciation of dual citizenship. What is needed is a plan that would allow immigrants from all nations to assimilate and become true beneficiaries of American capitalism and contributors within our society.

Conclusion

This paper provided historical context for millions marching on May Day, 2006 in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants. While opinions may vary on whether to consider this phenomenon a seditious act of war — or a treasonous beginning of Civil War II – at the very least, it should be a wake up call for the US to end and reverse unchecked illegal immigration. Thankfully, President Lincoln can be our guide in preventing (and, if it comes to it, dealing with) millions of marchers picking up arms against the US. Hopefully, through pre-emptive action now, Civil War II will not be as bloody and senseless as Civil War I.

In the first Civil War, white men died to free black men. Why? Lincoln and the Union believed that the endeavor would make men and women of all races, creeds, and colors more free. There will always be room for improvement in race relations, but we cannot move forward by allowing communists and racists of any color to stoke up the flames of Civil War II. Certainly no racial group will benefit from brown “La Raza” racism replacing white racism, and Civil War II will be fought to stop it (one way or another).

No matter how many Civil War Handkerchiefs are needed in Civil War II (See endnote 16), what will be needed in fighting it is not only commitment from President Bush and Congress, but also a call to every American to be loyal and brave. Once again, the words of Lincoln (spoken, for effect, in the third person) on the eve of Civil War I ring true:

As a private citizen the Executive [Lincoln himself] could not have consented that these institutions shall perish; much less could he in betrayal of so vast and so sacred a trust as these free people had confided to him. He felt that he had no moral right to shrink, nor even to count the chances of his own life, in what might follow. In full view of his great responsibility he has, so far, done what he has deemed his duty. You will now, according to your own judgment, perform yours. He sincerely hopes that your views and your action may so accord with his as to assure all faithful citizens who have been disturbed in their rights of a certain and speedy restoration to them, under the Constitution and the laws.

And having thus chosen our course, without guile and with pure purpose, let us renew our trust in God, and go forward without fear and with manly hearts. (A Speech before the Congress, July 4, 1861. The emphasis is mine.)

The fate of the republic is in the hands of President Bush and Congress. What will history write of the metal of these men and women entrusted with such a high and sacred duty? One can only hope that they’ll heed the voices and pleading of faithful Americans of all races.

In the end, history will also ask what “we the people” did in this hour. The days have past wherein the average citizen can be content to look for valor in our troops overseas alone. American soil is at risk from within. As people of all races stand together bravely in this hour, with or without Congress, we will not only have the opportunity to dissuade illegal immigration, but ensure as all races unite, “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” (See endnote 17.)

Postscript

Some of the proposed solutions in this paper may seem harsh, but only if we are not on the brink of a bloody civil war. Since I believe strong actions are necessary, my final appeal is to the conciliatory words of Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address. These words will be needed when Civil War II is over.

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations. (The emphasis is mine.)

____________________

Endnotes
1. See http://www.northcarolinahistory.org/...edia/52/entry: “Answering the charge that disunion meant war, secession supporter A. W. Venable (1799-1876) of Granville County declared that he would ‘wipe up every drop of blood shed in the war with this handkerchief of mine’; this may have been the most memorable statement of the convention campaign.” Also, http://docsouth.unc.edu/true/chapter...chp06-01.html: “Recruiting officers predicted that they would be able to wipe up with a silk pocket handkerchief all the blood that would be shed” (Powell, North Carolina through Four Centuries 350).” Not only is a handkerchief small, but silk is not very absorbent; not many people prior to the Civil War felt there would be much bloodshed.

2. If the US desired to capture more land, it most certainly would have claimed the land it conquered as far south as Mexico City. The US was content to claim land wherein both brown and white settlers preferred US citizenship. If 1846 America was as racist as some Mexicans claim, then there is the strange irony of Mexicans who fought against Mexican rule in places like Texas and California. In short, either the “racist” assertion either doesn’t hold water, or if we grant that 1846 America was racist, then Mexicans preferring US citizenship is a stinging indictment against the Mexican government of that era.

3. One erroneous claim of “La Raza” racists is that Mexicans are the rightful indigenous owners of “Aztlan” (much of the Pacific Southwest). That is like saying white Americans are the indigenous owners of the rest of North American because some whites married Native Americans. If Aztlan is only for indigenous peoples, then MOST brown people will also have to suffer along with a black, white, and yellow expulsion of “Aztlan” that some outlandishly propose. See http://alamoalliance.org/ao.html that describes the seditious and treasonous “El Plan de Aztlan.”

4. Visit Immigration Watchdog and click on Aztlan Video for such rhetoric. Http://www.ccir.net/AUDIO/TakeoverOfAmericaCD/Menu.html provides text for the video (and some other speeches not on the video). There are many sites that provide a mountain of information and opinions on the illegal immigration issue. This video provides primary source material on racist, subversive and treasonous statements.

5. From personal conversations over the years, especially during discussions surrounding Propositions 187 and 209, much of the discontented Mexican-American reaction is directly a result of their views on the Mexican-American War. Some feel that “Aztlan” is their land and that blacks, whites, and yellows are the illegal aliens. They feel that free reception of entitlements is merely payback of what is rightfully theirs. Unfortunately, this ignores the grim economic realities that no state can maintain an entitlement system wherein there are more takers than contributors, i.e., more illegal aliens taking than citizens contributing. Ironically, many illegal alien supporters cannot see that the scary and phenomenal closure of hospitals around the country has affected the very people that entitlements are meant to help. Is it more heartless to deny services to illegals using emergency rooms as primary health care, or to close down services for ALL critical or emergency patients? While the authors of both propositions probably tried to accomplish too much (like local enforcement of federal immigration laws), I believe passing the basic concepts of both propositions are morally and constitutionally sound. The citizens of California (and others) should attempt to pass similar laws again (which may also mean changing related laws, like local enforcement of federal immigration laws).

6: See references in endnotes 3 and 4.

7. Despite the fact that both Mexicans and American liberals do not like the wall being build by the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (aka, “Minutemen”), what was vandalized was American property on American soil. What Mexicans have done to ATTACK American property on American soil could arguably be called AN ACT OF WAR and it should be recognized as such BY BOTH GOVERNMENTS! On June 23, 2006 I received a “Security Registration Alert!” from the Minutemen: “Fence Attacked by Vandals! The new fence already was vandalized in 19 places over 3/8 of a mile. Local rancher John Ladd tracked the vandals to a section of the US border fence that was torn down and where they ran back to Mexico. John said ‘Someone in Mexico must have known what was going on because groups from Mexico that support open borders were there with cameras taking pictures even before we knew of the damage and they have not been back since.’” For more information, go to: http://www.minutemanhq.com/hq/.

8. Communists are masters at distorting the same Bill of Rights they would deny to America should they ever come to power. The American people must be zealously protective of the Bill of Rights in this hour, especially Second Amendment rights – The Right to Bear Arms. Now is the time for all patriots to learn or review basic gun safety and operation.

9. On the topic of being “assailed,” millions of American taxpayers, who are tired of paying the entitlement bills for ungrateful and arrogant illegals, are getting beyond the point of simply feeling abused; they are increasingly OUTRAGED! Why? Far from being “assailed,” not even illegal aliens who commit crimes in this country can be deported unless they commit the most heinous of crimes. There are many sources and stories that will verify the accuracy of this claim. Julie Meyers, Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (I.C.E.), explained this phenomenon on a segment of Fox and Friends on June 16, 2006.

Visit http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/ and click on “All Movies Page” and then “Migrant Mobile Health Clinic.” Notice how free medical care is being taken to illegal (non-taxpaying) immigrants. Also notice how a legal resident, with a valid insurance card, is not only denied access to the mobile clinic, but he is laughed at, and has door shut in his face. (Notice how the nurse considered the questions from “Watchdog” to be harassment, but not the questions from Univision, a Spanish TV station. Notice how the “unbiased” reporter hugs the Latino attorney before interviewing her. “Watchdog” was shoved, not hugged.)

These sorts of inequities are on the rise against legal, taxpaying citizens – especially whites. A growing number of Americans are contemplating not paying taxes until the illegal alien issue is resolved. If that happens, we will see whom the current government “assails.”

10. Ballots in Spanish that cater to Spanish speaking voters may also assist illegals who fraudulently vote. Ballots should be in English only.

11. The fall of the Soviet Union demonstrates that communism is a failed economic system. In addition, where socialist principles have been overtly and unwisely applied to the US economy, there have been terrible consequences. Fifty hospitals closing in California (as already noted), when population has increased significantly, is further proof of socialism’s failure.

12. Some may feel that the concern regarding communism’s influence in destabilizing the US is overstated. One who spends time viewing the videos found on the web site under endnote 4 will plainly see that communist agitators are goading the illegals along. While the May Day protests were predominantly Latino, some report that non-Latino communists greatly outnumber Latinos in more recent pro-illegals.

13. To get to the heart of many of America’s territorial disputes, one would have to study European history. However, to sort out all past grievances between France, Great Britain, and Spain would not help resolve today’s issues. The history of territorial disputes between Native Americans also adds a layer of complexity that does not help in resolving contemporary issues.

14. Whether President Bush has this resolve, in the light of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership” (SPP) agreement with Canada and Mexico, is the topic of another paper! In short, the trilateral agreement, signed by President Bush as a joint declaration, was not submitted to Congress for review. This is another battle heating up and may be significant in the discussion of Civil War II. Go to http://www.spp.gov/ and http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=50618 for more information.

15. Visit http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/ and watch the video entitled: “Ban MEChA Protest 3-31-06.”

16. See http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/ for reports of attacks from illegal immigrant supporters against patriotic Americans. If it were not for police protection, blood would have already been shed by patriots as of this paper’s date – only two months after the May Day marches.

17. These are, of course, words from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.

I wonder, if that is what it is going to take to wake up our leaders, the shedding of blood? It is going to happen only a matter of time. You can watch the video of the Paul Revere riders being escorted out of Boston by the police with the angry mob of illegals and their supporters behind them. Mob, that is what they are, and it seems at least in that case, the mob ruled! It will happen though, an angry illegal not worried about consquences of their act by the police, will shoot down or beat to death one of our patriots trying to peacefully protest what is happening in thier country, then by God, the fight will be on! I am not inciting a war here or trying to instigate a fight, I am only stating a fact, it is just a matter of time! I have to wonder, because I am not really sure, which side will our government be on? The side of its legal citizens and patriots, or the side of La Roza and its followers?

Our government knows that these people are threatening to take over the country and treating Americans this way but they don't care. THEY DON'T CARE! THEY DON'T CARE! THEY DON'T CARE! NOT ONLY DO THEY NOT CARE BUT THEY ARE IN FAVOR OF GIVING THESE ILELGALS MORE RIGHTS THAN AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE. WE AS CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES HAVE TO LIVE UNDER THE RULE OF LAW, THE ILLEGALS SEEM TO BE ABOVE THE LAW, IF THEY WERE NOT THEY WOULD ALL BE DEPORTED. THIS IS A DECISION OUR GOVERNMENT HAS MADE FOR THEM, THEY ARE NOT EXPECTED TO OBEY THE LAW. WHEN A DRUG SMUGGLER IS HELD UP BY THE GOVERNMENT IN A COURT OF LAW WHILE 2 BORDER PATROL AGENTS FACE 20-LIFE FOR TRYING TO ENFORCE THE LAWS OF THE LAND, THEN IT SEEMS OBVIOUS THE POSITION THAT ALL AMERICANS ARE FACING.

I agree! This is complete anarchy!

We have to vote out all globalist candidates in our government!

November is coming!!!

Grassfire.org has a petition of 30,000 signers and climbing to protest the ruling against the two border patrol agents. Everyone should sign in support of these two American patriots doing their jobs!

Our good ole boy President is looking for warm bodies....lots of warm bodies. Bush wants low-skilled people that he can serve up on a nice silver platter to his fat corporation buddies. Plus, he needs to fill back up those social security coffers for all us baby boomers who will want to retire in 20 years.

The fact that there are so many willing to be part of this banquet, and they're so conveniently located right across our border, only makes it a much nicer deal for Bush.

The drawback? Hard-working middle-class Americans are being sold down the river. And the American culture is being replaced by the Hispanic culture.

But Bush doesn't care. He's rich. He can hide away on his "compound" and live his rich, sheltered life. It won't affect him like it will the rest of us.

I hate Bush.

From my website:
TRAITOR: One who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust; especially one who betrays ones country.

TREASON: Violation of allegiance towards one's country or sovereignty; especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it by consciously and purposely acting to aid it's enemies (sound like anyone you know?)

INVASION: 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an "armed force "(MiddleEast Terrorists & Mexican "ILLEGALS") into a territory to conquer. 2. An intrusion or encroachment.

SENATOR TRAITORS ....TO VOTE OUT IN NOVEMBER, 2006

WHY? THEY VOTED FOR AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS

Senators Whose Term of Service Expire in 2007
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/ref...le/Class_I.htm

Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---62
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Craig (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

Very well said but he left out one thing, American Apathy is the enemies best weapon

Is this anything that can be won in the Polls?

Here in California we passed Proposition 187. We have won in Congress.

Still they do as they please. Unlawfully!

TheWatchdog

The Civil War caused over one million casualties and took more than 620,000 lives.

The U.S. population in 1860 was at about 31,183,582. My grandmother said the loss of life was unlike any war we have fought in modern times. Almost everyone lost family members. Many family members fought each other. Whole families were lost.

31,183,582 divided by 620,000 equals 50.2961

The population estimates and the casualty estimates very wildly from the era but one out of fifty lost is staggering.

Stokey,

My great-great-great grandfather died of war wounds. Two other g-g grandfathers had war wounds and a gg step-grandfather had an injury. These are men in my direct line that I came up with, off the top of my head. I think there are a few more and I have about 4, orphaned as children, ancestors in my line from that era. Soldiers were not the only victims. Civilians were also casualties and some were beaten to death by the army because they didn't enlist so they thought they were traitors or spies. The army would come knocking and you had to fall in or face the consequences. County archives are full of these stories. Also, the Yanks burned every thing in their path. To my knowledge, none of my ancestors were from slave owning families. I'm lucky to be here, considering most of my ancestors are from south of the Mason Dixon Line!

Dixie