Thread: Rebuking latest crazy Slander from Jim Gilchrist

I just thought I might also add that you can go ahead and ban me. I know stating my opinion on this matter would not be welcomed. I have no interest in being a cheerleader for either you William or Jim. Since I know where the bodies are buried I have no interest in digging them up, we will are see the issues end within the next year anyway. Let's hope it doesn't end in an amnesty.

If you really knew so much ryantheray then you would be aware that Jim Gilchrist was sending out hate emails against people in his own organization during the battles against the amnesty bills in 2006 and 2007.

When he was interviewed by Todd Hartley of Phoenix News, Jim Gilchrist tried to talk as if he had played some major role in the defeat of the legislation but it became very clear in the interview that Jim Gilchrist did not even know what had just happened.

So for you to post about Jim Gilchrist as if he ever was a benefit to defeating amnesty in the past, or for you to post as if he would be any benefit to our cause now that his border operations manager has been charged with the murder of a 9 year old little girl is....

INSANE!

And since you are speaking so insanely, we must raise the high possibility that you are in fact one of Jim Gilchrist's last remaining supporters.

Anyone else around here agree with ryantheray? Speak freely folks, if anyone agrees with him go ahead and speak out.

Sure, some of the 80 groups that signed the letter against Gilchrist have gone on but he is still burnt political toast with every other sane group that knows about him.

W

I have no interest in being a cheerleader for either you William or Jim.

As for me I will cheerleading for the sane, honest one..........which is William Gheen.

W, I fear you have slandered Burnt Toast.

William, you just don’t get it. It’s not about who did what or who’s wrong. Those who are just feeling the affects of this invasion and wanting to become active will see what both of you, you and Gilchrist, are doing and get turned off by the childishness of it. Most people don’t know the history of who did what and to whom, they just want to fight the next amnesty. Look outside of your circle, and see what you’re doing from the eyes of the public at large.

And I know that you and your cheerleaders feel the easiest way to discredit me is to attach me to Gilchrist. Wrong. I am no fan of Jim Gilchrist, never have been. But just because he’s been a fool so often, doesn’t dismiss your actions and childishness in participating in a campaign to discredit anyone you disagree with. It also makes you look like a fool. And it discourages many new people who may want to just get started in the fight against amnesty, but may not want to bother weeding through all the mud slinging and so they just decide to stay away. That’s what I’m reading on other blogs.

There is good propaganda and there is damaging. A wise person knows the difference. There is a time when it may be better to just walk away. Think about it. Chances are we have less than a year and this will all be over. Amnesty may pass, but many of us sure hope not. If that happens, then what will you do William? Tell yourself that the infighting had no effect on the outcome? Wrong, because is it having an effect, a negative effect.

Originally Posted by ryantheray

William, you just don’t get it. It’s not about who did what or who’s wrong. Those who are just feeling the affects of this invasion and wanting to become active will see what both of you, you and Gilchrist, are doing and get turned off by the childishness of it. Most people don’t know the history of who did what and to whom, they just want to fight the next amnesty. Look outside of your circle, and see what you’re doing from the eyes of the public at large.

And I know that you and your cheerleaders feel the easiest way to discredit me is to attach me to Gilchrist. Wrong. I am no fan of Jim Gilchrist, never have been. But just because he’s been a fool so often, doesn’t dismiss your actions and childishness in participating in a campaign to discredit anyone you disagree with. It also makes you look like a fool. And it discourages many new people who may want to just get started in the fight against amnesty, but may not want to bother weeding through all the mud slinging and so they just decide to stay away. That’s what I’m reading on other blogs.

There is good propaganda and there is damaging. A wise person knows the difference. There is a time when it may be better to just walk away. Think about it. Chances are we have less than a year and this will all be over. Amnesty may pass, but many of us sure hope not. If that happens, then what will you do William? Tell yourself that the infighting had no effect on the outcome? Wrong, because is it having an effect, a negative effect.

I think that the point that you are missing is that you can never have a unified group until you identify and root out false supporters, or supporters that by their actions do more harm than good. It's important to let Americans know the differentiation between what ALIPAC stands for and what Jim Gilchrist stands for. And besides the internet is not as politically correct as you want it to be. William has any right to put whatever he wants on his website, if you don't like it then go to one you like or start your own. When you have bad apples you need to point them out so your not guilty by association.

But just because he’s been a fool so often, doesn’t dismiss your actions and childishness in participating in a campaign to discredit anyone you disagree with.

Apparently, ryantheray, your only thought on this thread is to denigrate W and the rest of us "cheerleaders." That would be a very childish assumption on your part and shows a serious lack of understanding of those off the deep end who constantly seem to hang their success in life on other people's accomplishments.
May I ask what flamboyant contributions you have made on behalf of stopping illegal immigration? Or do you just sit behind your computer and believe you are the great mediator between people who disagree, people about whom you know very little?

Originally Posted by ryantheray

Most people don’t know the history of who did what and to whom, they just want to fight the next amnesty.

I must say, I do agree with this.

"And it discourages many new people who may want to just get started in the fight against amnesty, but may not want to bother weeding through all the mud slinging and so they just decide to stay away. That’s what I’m reading on other blogs."


Where are these blogs you speak of? Your blog maybe?

Is this another alias?

Is it just me or is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black?

Furthermore, if Gilchrist hadn't badmouthed ALIPAC (75% of the article) and tried to attach us to the killer he is standing next to, he wouldn't even be discussed on this fourm right now. He's a utter waste of time.

Just more of Jim's games and the author of the blog fell for it, instead of putting the screws to him over his relationship with Forde.

If anyone wants to jump up on a high horse and call people down for infighting, get over there and go after the person who started it by talking crazy to an apparent pro-illegal immigration blogger about ALIPAC and leave us alone for standing up for ourselves and telling Jim to get lost.

"One bad apple can spoil the whole bunch."

Dixie