Speech by Geert Wilders, a Member of the Dutch Parliament.

In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: "Who lost Europe ?" Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom the Netherlands, at the Four Seasons in New York, introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem ..

Dear friends,
Thank you very much for inviting me.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

First, I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem .

The Europe you know is changing.

You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe . With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam, Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighborhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims.

Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin . The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.

In England Sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels, because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel . I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favor of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.

The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey .

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators 'settlers'. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages - at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz; second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel, they can get everything. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a 'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. In my country, the Netherlands, 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem ....

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe, American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world that we know.

funny (genuine) obituary:

Frederic Arthur (Fred) Clark
Frederic Arthur (Fred) Clark, who had tired of reading obituaries noting other's courageous battles with this or that disease, wanted it known that he lost his battle as a result of an automobile accident on June 18, 2006. True to Fred's personal style, his final hours were spent joking with medical personnel while he whimpered, cussed, begged for narcotics and bargained with God to look over his wife and kids. He loved his family. His heart beat faster when his wife of 37 years Alice Rennie Clark entered the room and saddened a little when she left.

His legacy was the good works performed by his sons, Frederic Arthur Clark III and Andrew Douglas Clark MD, PhD., along with Andy's wife, Sara Morgan Clark. Fred's back straightened and chest puffed out when he heard the Star Spangled Banner and his eyes teared when he heard Amazing Grace. He wouldn't abide self important tight *censored*. Always an interested observer of politics, particularly what the process does to its participants, he was amused by politician's outrage when we lie to them and amazed at what the voters would tolerate. His final wishes were "throw the bums out and don't elect lawyers" (though it seems to make little difference).

During his life he excelled at mediocrity. He loved to hear and tell jokes, especially short ones due to his limited attention span. He had a life long love affair with bacon, butter, cigars and bourbon. You always knew what Fred was thinking much to the dismay of his friend and family. His sons said of Fred, "he was often wrong, but never in doubt". When his family was asked what they remembered about Fred, they fondly recalled how Fred never peed in the shower - on purpose. He died at MCV Hospital and sadly was deprived of his final wish which was to be run over by a beer truck on the way to the liquor store to buy booze for a double date to include his wife, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter to crash an ACLU cocktail party.

In lieu of flowers, Fred asks that you make a sizable purchase at your local ABC store or Virginia winery (please, nothing French - the *censored*) and get rip roaring drunk at home with someone you love or hope to make love to. Word of caution though, don't go out in public to drink because of the alcohol related laws our elected officials have passed due to their inexplicable terror at the sight of a MADD lobbyist and overwhelming compulsion to meddle in our lives. No funeral or service is planned. However, a party will be held to celebrate Fred's life. It will be held in Midlothian, Va. Email fredsmemory@yahoo.com for more information. Fred's ashes will be fired from his favorite cannon at a private party on the Great Wicomico River where he had a home for 25 years. Additionally, all of Fred's friend (sic) will be asked to gather in a phone booth, to be designated in the future, to have a drink and wonder, "Fred who?"






http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/timesdispatch/obituary.aspx?n=frederic-arthur-clark-fred&pid=18382676

the great Dennis Miller

Why The Gun In Civilization?

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

"Chinese Professor" breaks it down for you

WHAT DID LENNON REALLY THINK?

SEEMS HE HAD QUITE A CHANGE OF HEART.


PLAYBOY: What about the suggestion that the four of you put aside your personal feelings and regroup to give a mammoth concert for charity, some sort of giant benefit?



LENNON: I don’t want to have anything to do with benefits. I have been benefited to death. Every one of them was a mess or a rip-off.



PLAYBOY: What about the Bangladesh concert, in which George and other people such as Dylan performed?



LENNON: Bangladesh was caca. It’s all a rip-off. So forget about it. All of you who are reading this, don’t bother sending me all that garbage about, “Just come and save the Indians, come and save the blacks, come and save the war veterans.” Anybody I want to save will be helped through our tithing, which is ten percent of whatever we earn.



PLAYBOY: But that doesn’t compare with what one promoter, Sid Bernstein, said you could raise by giving a world-wide televised concert—playing separately, as individuals, or together, as the Beatles. He estimated you could raise over $200,000,000 in one day. $200,000,000 to a poverty-stricken country in South America.



LENNON: Where do people get off saying the Beatles should give $200,000,000 to South America? You know, America has poured billions into places like that. It doesn’t mean a damn thing. After they’ve eaten that meal, then what? It lasts for only a day. After the $200,000,000 is gone, then what? It goes round and round in circles. You can pour money in forever. After Peru, then Harlem, then Britain. There is no one concert. We would have to dedicate the rest of our lives to one world concert tour, and I’m not ready for it. Not in this lifetime, anyway.

wisdom...

When one becomes a liberal, he or she pretends to advocate tolerance, equality and peace, but hilariously, they're doing so for purely selfish reasons. It's the human equivalent of a puppy dog's face: an evolutionary tool designed to enhance survival, reproductive value and status. In short, liberalism is based on one central desire: to look cool in front of others in order to get love. Preaching tolerance makes you look cooler, than saying something like, “please lower my taxes” -- Greg Gutfeld

In their haste to be wiser and nobler than others, the anointed have misconceived two basic issues. They seem to assume (1) that they have more knowledge than the average member of the benighted and (2) that this is the relevant comparison. The real comparison, however, is not between the knowledge possessed by the average member of the educated elite versus the average member of the general public, but rather the total direct knowledge brought to bear though social processes (the competition of the marketplace, social sorting, etc.), involving millions of people, versus the secondhand knowledge of generalities possessed by a smaller elite group. -- Thomas Sowell

To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil. -- Charles Krauthammer

Michelle Malkin Interviews Mark Steyn

http://moneyrunner.blogspot.com/2010/11/michelle-malkin-interviews-mark-steyn.html

Castro worse than Stalin

Castro--darling of the idiot left--guess what, the numbers show he is worse than Stalin!
.
.
.

This comes from the Republican Study Committee...

Quotes

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty" - Thomas Jefferson

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." --Thomas Jefferson

"A nation of sheep will beget a government
of wolves". - Edward R. Murrow

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not..."
Thomas Jefferson

The penalty for wise men that refuse to concern themselves with the affairs of Government, is to be governed by unwise Men
-- Plato

Prager on American Exceptionalism

Norman Podhoretz, on the legacy of George W. Bush

Cordoba House?

In giving that name to the structure, those seeking to construct an enormous mosque near Ground Zero are engaging in a provocation. Instead of making a gesture of goodwill toward American society, they are celebrating an ancient Muslim incursion into the West, reminding us, for no reason other than that they insist on doing so, of long centuries during which Islam reduced Christianity to subjection, and a major territory of Europe was ruled from the thrones of caliphs. Islam, they wish to demonstrate--for who could conclude otherwise?--is again on the move.

read it all...a little history lesson...
.
.
.

Elton John's choice words for boycotting musicians

By Cathalena E. Burch Arizona Daily Star

Elton John didn't mince words in slamming his fellow musicians for boycotting Arizona over the controversial SB 1070 immigration law. From the stage at his sold-out Tucson Arena concert Thursday night, John savored a few choice, not-so-family-friendly words:

"We are all very pleased to be playing in Arizona. I have read that some of the artists won't come here. They are (expletive)wits! Let's face it: I still play in California, and as a gay man I have no legal rights whatsoever. So what's the (expletive) with these people?"

John has never been one to cave into political pressure from his musical colleagues. He ignored an artist boycott of Israel in June over the flotilla fiasco and played a show in Tel Aviv. He also played Rush Limbaugh's latest wedding reception in early June, which drew the ire of gays and lesbians. Limbaugh is vehemently anti-gay marriage; John is married to his longtime partner David Furnish.

Hitler’s Arab wingman

Hitler’s Arab wingman: Biography brings to light ‘evil’ Mufti of Jerusalem
by dan pine, staff writer

Haj Amin al-Husseini may be the worst S.O.B. you never heard of. But author John F. Rothmann hopes his new biography of al-Husseini -- aka the Mufti of Jerusalem -- will snag him a far more visible perch in history's Hall of Shame.

Often called the George Washington of the Palestinian national movement, the mufti was one of the most influential Arab leaders of the 20th century. In "Icon of Evil," co-written by Rothmann and David G. Dalin, a dark portrait emerges of a bloodthirsty anti-Semite and Nazi collaborator.

Though he died in 1974, the mufti's contributions to world chaos live on, notably his framing of the Arab-Israeli struggle in religious-political terms. He helped create the culture of jihad, urged the extermination of Jews and bequeathed hatred to subsequent generations —starting with his cousin, Yasser Arafat.

"He laid down those conditions in the 1920s and 1930s," said Rothmann in a recent interview. "He rejected any notion of Jewish rights in Palestine. He was indeed an evil man."

Given that the mufti cozied up to top Nazis, met with Hitler and even toured Auschwitz to study mass murder with the experts, pinning the "evil" label on him wasn't all that hard.

Rothmann, a KGO radio talk show host and political consultant, is a veteran cheerleader for Jewish causes. So to inoculate himself and Dalin against charges of self-serving bias, the co-authors conducted meticulous research and provide hundreds of footnotes. "We were precise and careful over every fact and every word," Rothmann said.

The book's origins stretch back 40 years, when the two writers were studying in Jerusalem. At Yad Vashem, a blow-up photo of the mufti meeting with Hitler caught their eye.

"We were intrigued," Rothmann recalled. "We were living in the Arab section of Jerusalem and we got to know the Arab merchants. There was always an undercurrent of disaffection and anger. There was no question it was deep-seated and went far beyond 1948."

Dalin, now the Taube Research Fellow in American History at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (and son of former Congregation Ner Tamid Rabbi William Dalin) worked with Rothmann on the book ever since.

They learned about the powerful al-Husseini clan, how the mufti dropped out of Islamic studies in Cairo yet arrogated to himself the imam's robes, and came to hate Jews.

Back in Jerusalem, the charismatic cleric persuaded the occupying British to declare him mufti. He used his new position to give spellbinding sermons over the radio. In one, he issued the infamous call: "Kill the Jews wherever you find them."

He meant it, too: Al-Husseini engineered multiple murder sprees against Jews during the 1920s and '30s. He further twisted anti-Semitism into a Muslim religious imperative; when Hitler came along, he found an ideological soulmate. With his blondish hair and blue eyes, the mufti was even made an honorary Aryan.

"This is a guy who goes to Berlin in 1941," Rothmann said, "meets with Hitler and dreams of the day when the Final Solution emerges in Palestine. He pushed for it, planned for it. He becomes the godfather of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah."

Had the war gone Hitler's way, the mufti expected not only a Judenrein Palestine, but the defunct caliphate to be re-established, and that he would become caliph, the leader of the Muslim world.

As poisonous as the mufti was, Rothmann insists he does not feel hatred toward his subject. Rather, he strived to present an accurate portrait. "He was a gentle man, soft-spoken, charming, a very nice guy. He was an advocate for his people."

Rothmann quickly added that the mufti also ordered rivals killed. He was close with an Iraqi man who would later be Saddam Hussein's uncle and foster parent. So the mufti obviously taught his lessons well.

Rothmann's fondest wish for the book is not that Jews learn better about their enemies, though he does hope for that. Rather, he wants Arab and Muslim readers to understand they've been fed a diet of anti-Semitic hatred for too long.

"We hope this generation of Palestinian nationals will understand and repudiate the hate which runs through the Muslim world today," he said. "That hatred must be exposed and expunged."

SINATRA'S SECRET

FRANK SINATRA'S LOVE AFFAIR WITH THE JEWS
Francis Albert Sinatra (1915-1998) may have been one of America 's
most famous Italian Catholics, but he kept the Jewish people and the
State of Israel close to his heart, manifesting life-long commitments
to fighting anti-Semitism and to activism on behalf of Israel .
Sinatra stepped forward in the early 1940s, when big names were needed
to rouse America into saving Europe's remaining Jews, and he sang at
an "Action for Palestine " rally (1947). He sat on the board of
trustees of the Simon Wiesenthal Center; and he donated over $1
million to Jerusalem 's Hebrew University, which honored him by
dedicating the Frank Sinatra International Student Center . (The
Center made heartbreaking headlines when terrorists bombed it in 2002,
killing nine people.) As the result of his support for the Jewish
State, his movies and records were banned in some Arab countries
Sinatra helped Teddy Kollek, later the long-serving mayor of Jerusalem
but then a member of the Haganah, by serving as a $1 million
money-runner that helped Israel win the war.

The Copacabana Club, which was very much run and controlled by the
same Luciano-related New York mafia crowd with whom Sinatra had become
enmeshed, happened to be next door to the hotel out of which Haganah
members were operating. In his autobiography, Kollek relates how,
trying in March 1948 to circumvent an arms boycott imposed by
President Harry Truman on the Jewish fighters in Eretz Yisroel, he
needed to smuggle about $1 million in cash to an Irish ship captain
docked in the Port of New York . The young Kollek spotted Sinatra at
the bar and, afraid of being intercepted by federal agents, asked for
help. In the early hours of the morning, the singer went out the back
door with the money in a paper bag and successfully delivered it to
the pier.

The origins of Sinatra's love affair with the Jewish people are not
clear but, for years, the Hollywood icon wore a small mezuzah around
his neck, a gift from Mrs. Golden, an elderly Jewish neighbor who
cared for him during his boyhood in Hoboken, N.J. (years later, he
honored her by purchasing a quarter million dollars' worth of Israel
bonds). He protected his Jewish friends, once responding to an
anti-Semitic remark at a party by simply punching the offender. Time
magazine reported that Sinatra walked out on the christening of his
own son when the priest refused to allow a Jewish friend to be the
godfather. As late as 1979, he raged over the fact that a Palm
Springs cemetery official in California declared that he could not
arrange the burial of a deceased Jewish friend over the Thanksgiving
holiday; Sinatra again -- threatened to punch him in the nose.

Sinatra famously played the role of a Jewish pilot in Cast a Giant
Shadow, the 1966 film filmed in Israel and starring friend Kirk
Douglas as Mickey Marcus, the Jewish-American colonel who fought and
died in Israel's war for independence (Sinatra dive-bombs Egyptian
tanks with seltzer bottles!) He donated his salary for the part to
the Arab-Israeli Youth Center in Nazareth , and he also made a
significant contribution to the making of Genocide, a film about the
Holocaust, and helped raise funds for the film. Less known is Sinatra
in Israel (1962), a short 45-minute featurette he made in which he
sang In the Still of the Night and Without a Song. He also starred in
The House I Live In (1945), a ten-minute short film made to oppose
anti-Semitism at the end of World War II, which received an Honorary
Academy Award and a special Golden Globe award in 1946.
.
.
.

The following was a letter to the editor of the LA Times.

Hector,

I can't believe that a major metropolitan paper like the LA Times would publish drivel like your distortion-laden column I had the misfortune to read today. The citizens of Arizona passed a law that makes it necessary to prove you are in their state LEGALLY. They are tired of paying TWO BILLION taxpayer dollars a year in medical and educational benefits to people in their state ILLEGALLY. They are tired of the Mexican drug traffickers, kidnappings (389 last year), traffic accidents, and crime caused by ILLEGAL immigrants in their state. They are tired of citizens of a foreign country overcrowding and bankrupting their emergency rooms and schools. They have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to defend their state when the federal government fails to do so so just like I have the right to put three hollow-points in the chest of the guy who's trying to kick in my front door when the cops don't show up.

It has been the law in this country since 1940 that foreign nationals be able to produce proof that they are here LEGALLY by way of visa, green card, etc. This "Produce your papers" and the allusions to Nazi Germany is a bunch of dishonest claptrap. If you took time to read the Arizona law (assuming you can read English) you would see that police officers may only inquire as to an individual's immigration status in the course of a "legal contact". The problem with you and Mexicans like you is the fact that you have this sense of entitlement that you can enter OUR COUNTRY as you please. You come from a culture and a country with no respect for the law or the rule of law. The United States is a sovereign nation with the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to decide who does and does not enter our country.

What amuses me the most is the fact that if our illegal immigration problem was due to the influx of SWEDES, you wouldn't have written ONE WORD in the defense of their rights? It is only because they are Hispanics like you that you leap to their defense. I find it ironic that you are truer to your Hispanic roots than you are to your American citizenship, especially since the Hispanic culture is a broke-dick, busted-ass, ignorant-ass, uneducated, going-nowhere culture and has been for the last 500 years, and in all likelihood, will be for the NEXT 500 years.

When I moved to California in 1969, Los Angeles was a clean prosperous city. Now it's broke under the weight of massive entitlements. Now we need concertina wire to protect our freeway signs from Hispano-moron graffiti "artists'. What an enlightened culture you come from that believes that vandalizing another's property is an art form. Over 400 California families have lost loved ones to ILLEGAL immigrant murderers. 40% of the criminals incarcerated in our prisons at CALIFORNIA TAXPAYER EXPENSE, are ILLEGAL immigrants. Thank you so much for our overcrowded ERs, schools and freeways. Thanks also for the gangs and the drive-by shootings. In all fairness though, I like the tacos.

If I want to enter Mexico, France, England, Germany or ANY country on this earth, I need to produce a passport to do so. It's THEIR COUNTRY and I need to ask permission to do so. HOW DARE you and your brethren think that they have some God-given right to flout our laws and come into our country of their own accord? You and people like you are the textbook example of why the fewer Mexicans we have in our country, the better our country will be. We manage to produce a steady supply of home-grown idiots on our own, thank very much (Exhibit A - Obama) good luck with your boycotts and our protests. Just remember amigo, 70% of the people in Arizona and 65% of Americans LOVE this law. Every time you put together thousands of protesters, you piss off MILLIONS of people like me.

Hasta la vista, baby

Tom Edwards

THE GREATEST GENERATION AND INCREDIBLE DOCS

Medics have been my heroes from the first time I saw a "Doc" risk his life to patch up a wounded grunt. They're the bravest of the brave and the noblest of the noble. I've never known a more selfless or dedicated group of humans.

This, from an Army Airborne Ranger doctor, explains why I feel this way:

"As a military doctor I work long hours. One tends to become jaded by the lack of sleep and the endless parade of human suffering passing before you.

"With our large military-retiree population, it's often a nursing-home patient. I've caught myself groaning when the ambulance brought in yet another sick, elderly person. I hadn't stopped to think of what citizens of this age represented.

"I saw 'Saving Private Ryan.' I was touched deeply by the sacrifices of so many. I was touched most by the scene of the elderly survivor (Pvt. Ryan) at the graveside asking his wife if he'd been a good man. I realized that I had seen these same men and women coming through my hospital and hadn't realized what magnificent sacrifices they had made. The things they did for me and everyone else who has lived on this planet since the end of that conflict are priceless.
"Situation permitting, I now try to ask my patients about their experiences.

"They would never bring up the subject without the inquiry. I've been privileged to an amazing array of experiences recounted. These experiences have revealed the incredible individuals I've had the honor of serving in a medical capacity, many on their last admission to the hospital.

"There was a frail, elderly woman who reassured my enlisted medic trying to start an IV line in her arm. She remained calm and poised despite her illness and the multiple needle-sticks into her fragile veins. As the medic made another attempt, I noticed a number tattooed across her forearm. I touched it with one finger and looked into her eyes. She simply said 'Auschwitz.' Many of later generations would have loudly and openly berated the medic in his many attempts. How different was the response from this person who'd seen unspeakable suffering.

"There was a retired colonel who had parachuted from his burning plane over a Pacific island held by the Japanese. Now an octogenarian, his head was cut in a fall at home where he lived alone. His CT scan and suturing had been delayed until after midnight. Still spry for his age, he asked to use the phone to call a taxi to take him home, then realized his ambulance had brought him without his wallet. He asked if he could use the phone to make a long-distance call to his daughter. With great pride we told him that he could not, as he'd done enough for his country and the least we could do was get him a taxi home, even if we paid for it ourselves. My only regret was that my shift wouldn't end for several hours and I couldn't drive him myself.

"And there were the gentleman who served with Merrill's Marauders; the survivors of the Baatan Death March and Omaha Beach; the 101-year-old World War I veteran; the former POW held in North Korea; the former Special Forces medic. I remember these citizens. I may still groan when yet another ambulance comes in, but now I am much more aware of what an honor it is to serve these particular men and women.

"I am angered at the cutbacks -- implemented and proposed -- that will continue to decay their meager retirement benefits. I see a president and Congress who have turned their back on these individuals who've sacrificed so much to protect our liberty. I see later generations who seem to be totally engrossed in abusing these same liberties won with such sacrifice.

"It has become my personal endeavor to make the nurses and enlisted medics aware of these amazing individuals. Their response to these particular citizens has made me think that perhaps all is not lost in the next generation.

"My experiences have solidified my belief that we are losing an incredible generation and that this nation knows not what it is losing.

"We should all remember that we must 'Earn this.'"

Thanks Capt. Stephen Ellison, M.D... Well said.

OBAMA VS. PRESS FREEDOM

By DICK MORRIS



Published on TheHill.com on June 15, 2010





Jon Leibowitz, the chairman of Obama's Federal Trade Commission, is at the epicenter of a quiet movement to subsidize news organizations, a first step toward government control of the media. In our book, 2010: Take Back America -- A Battle Plan, we reported that he had commissioned a study to examine plans for a federal subsidy for news organizations. Among the measures under consideration are special tax treatment, exemption from antitrust laws and changes in copyright laws.



Now Leibowitz has begun to pounce. A May 24 working paper on "reinventing" the media proposes that the government impose fees on websites such as the Drudge Report that link to news websites or that it tax consumer electronics such as iPads, laptops and Kindles. Funds raised by these levies would be redistributed to traditional media outlets.



While Leibowitz distanced himself from the proposals for the taxes, calling them "a terrible idea," his comments appear to be related only to the levies proposed in the working paper. Nobody is commenting on the other part of his proposal -- a subsidy for news organizations.



By now, the Obama MO should be clear to all. As he has done with the banks, AIG and the car companies, he extends his left hand offering subsidies and then proffers his right laden with regulations. Should the government follow through on Leibowitz's ideas and enact special subsidies and tax breaks for news organizations, it will induce a degree of journalistic dependence on the whims of government not seen since the days when the early presidents bestowed government advertising on favored periodicals.



Is it too difficult to imagine that the Democrats might pass laws favoring news organizations, only to question -- as former White House communications director Anita Dunn did -- whether or not Fox News is a news organization or an "arm of the Republican Party"? We can see a future in which news media are reluctant to be too partisan or opinionated for fear that they would endanger their public subsidy.



Once such a subsidy is extended to news organizations, every company in the business must have it. Otherwise, the competitive advantage for the subsidized companies would prove too steep an obstacle to overcome.



In all the attention that has been given to the idea of an Internet tax on news aggregation sites and on tech equipment -- trial balloons that would obviously be shot down -- very little attention has been focused on the expenditure side of the proposal -- the subsidy of news organizations.



But The Wall Street Journal reported six months ago that Leibowitz had commissioned a study to determine "whether the government should aid struggling news organizations which are suffering from a collapse in advertising revenues as the Internet upends their centuries-old business model." Among the steps under consideration are changing "the way the industry is regulated, from making news-gathering companies exempt from antitrust laws to granting them special tax treatment to making changes to copyright laws."



These are exactly the kind of subsidies that could and would trigger government oversight and control.



Look at how radio stations squirm when their licenses are up for renewal before the FCC. We can imagine news organizations pulling their punches in order not to antagonize the hand that feeds them.



The Leibowitz study, and the subsidy proposals that are likely to emerge from it, represent a chilling threat to the First Amendment and to our civil liberties.

New Book That should be part of our School's Curriculum

Title: “A Patriot's History of the United States: From Columbus's Great Discovery to the War on Terror” – available at COSTCO or Wal-Mart.

Synopsis: For the past three decades, many history professors have allowed their biases to distort the way America’s past is taught. These intellectuals have searched for instances of racism, sexism, and bigotry in our history while downplaying the greatness of America’s patriots and the achievements of "dead white men."

As a result, more emphasis is placed on Harriet Tubman than on George Washington; more about the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II than about D-Day or Iwo Jima; more on the dangers we faced from Joseph McCarthy than those we faced from Josef Stalin.

A Patriot’s History of the United States corrects those doctrinaire biases. In this groundbreaking book, America’s discovery, founding, and development are reexamined with an appreciation for the elements of public virtue, personal liberty, and private property that make this nation uniquely successful. This book offers a long-overdue acknowledgment of America’s true and proud history.

Review:

Four Stars: Comments from a College History Professor and former High School Teacher, July 9, 2005


I've been in the history business for over thirty years. Starting as an "educator" at the middle school and high school level. Though in short order I changed my own definition of self, saying I was a history teacher fighting against "educators" who were supremely ignorant when it came to real content knowledge of their subjects. I finally left secondary ed in disgust in the late 1980s, went back full time to grad school, got a Ph.D. in American History and went into the college classroom where at least, at my small private school, I still have intellectual freedom. I've also published a number of books on a national level, and that is how I first met one of the authors of this work when he commented on my latest book.


I think I therefore have a good foundation to comment here and my comment is. . .I wish across the last thirty years I had a book like this to use in my classrooms!


My own education was influenced by Beard and others like him when I was a student, and as a new teacher I taught the myths of a rather leftist perspective of our national epic. But as I matured and learned more I finally abandoned all textbook use in disgust. Anyone conversant on the subject knows my reasons, written by committees, written with a very clear bias to political correctness, outright distortions and numerous factual errors, written at times with a barely concealed disdain for our nation's story. It is made worst by alleged critics and commentators such as Loewen with his tirade "Lies my Teachers Told Me," which is riddled with factual errors and deliberate distortions, and pushes the rhetoric even further to the Left while claiming to be about getting the story right.


This book, however, is like a wind stirring up after a dark storm of bias and ignorance, which tries to set the record straight on so many points. For the first time I have a history book that calls into doubt the wisdom of FDR's New Deal, the myth that he ended the Depression (when in reality the punitive taxes of up to 90% and government interference made it worst), and spawned the real beginnings of run away government.

Their take on the anti war movement in the 1960s is absolutely scathing, and truthful. I was there and personally witnessed several of the events described. . . how the anti-war movement on college campuses was not an "enlightened" desire for peace, but rather a rampage gone wild, adroitly engineered by a small well trained cadre of ultra-leftists, a phenomena that still haunts our higher education system today, and has produced a generation of lies and text book distortions as well.



I could cite a dozen more examples from their book that left me grinning with delight, that the truth was finally out there to read again. My only criticism, some minor factual errors, but relatively few when compared to standard textbooks, and for a monumental work of this length.



I know the author's intent was simply to write an American history for the general public and do not want it type cast as a "textbook," and I go along with that. But, I will nevertheless forcefully recommend it as a textbook. . .and that recommendation comes from a college professor, with years experience in secondary education and for several years, even taught history teacher education (a nightmare experience dealing with the state and federal departments of education that I should write a book about some day. It was like dealing with Orwellian thought police!)


If you are a history teacher, and I choose that term deliberately. . .not an "educator," caught up in the system, but instead see yourself as a History Teacher, who takes pride in our country and wish to guide students to a sharing of that pride. . .this is your textbook.


It will work on the secondary level and most definitely on the higher ed level. But a warning, your colleagues will howl, harass and attack you over it and frankly you better have tenure if you wish to survive when you bring this book out. By the way, within this book you will read why you need that protection.

For home schoolers, this book is your dream. You left the system for so many reasons and this book will explain many of those reasons.


I hope this book is the first of many that will start to take back the ground dominated for too long by the Left, and beyond that an extremist element who actually hate the subject they write about.

If you are a parent with a student trapped in the system, make this book required reading at home and use it to "reeducate" and fight back. And finally, for the general reader, this one is a rousing good read, well written, great footnotes to follow up on (something you find lacking in nearly all textbooks) and worth studying.



America is not about national race, it is about an ideal. Ultimately we are all immigrants, be we born here or arrived just yesterday. All that holds us together is a shared identification with the dreams of our patriot forefathers and a belief in the ideals of the Declaration and Constitution. Disconnect from that dream for but one generation and the dream will die. This book can help to rekindle what nearly all of us know in our hearts, that though we might make mistakes, fundamentally America is, as Lincoln once said, "the last best hope of mankind."

Palestinian kids

http://www.thatsrich.com/propaganda.htm
.
.
.
.

LETTER FROM A RETIRED BORDER PATROL AGENT:

This letter sent to Tennessee Senator Bill Frist from a retired border patrol agent, and it has more common sense than all the bull being spewed from the Senate, with the exception of a few sensible representatives.



Dear Senator Frist:



There is a huge amount of propaganda and myths circulating about illegal aliens, particularly illegal Mexican, Salvadorian, Guatemalan and Honduran aliens.



#1. Illegal aliens generally do NOT want US citizenship. Americans are very vain thinking that everybody in the world wants to be a US citizen. Mexicans, and other nationalities want to remain citizens of their home countries while obtaining the benefits offered by the United States such as employment, medical care, instate tuition, government subsidized housing and free education for their� offspring. Their main attraction is employment and their loyalty usually remains at home. They want benefits earned and subsidized by middle class Americans. What illegal aliens want are benefits of American residence without paying the price.



#2. There are no jobs that Americans won't do. Illegal aliens are doing jobs that Americans can't take and still support their families. Illegal aliens take low wage jobs, live dozens in a single residence home, share expenses and send money to their home country. There are no jobs that Americans won't do for a decent wage.



#3. Every person who illegally entered this nation left a home. They are NOT homeless and they are NOT Americans. Some left jobs in their home countries. They come to send money to their real home as evidenced by the more than 20 billion dollars sent out of the country each year by illegal aliens. These illegal aliens knowingly and willfully entered this nation in violation of the law and therefore assumed the risk of detection and deportation. Those who brought their alien children assumed the responsibility and risk on behalf of their children.



#4. Illegal aliens are NOT critical to the economy. Illegal aliens constitute less than 5% of the workforce. However, they reduce wages and benefits for lawful US residents.



#5. This is NOT an immigrant nation. There are 280 million native born Americans. While it is true that this nation was settled and founded by immigrants (legal immigrants), it is also true that there is not a nation on this planet that was not settled by immigrants at one time or another.



#6. The United States is welcoming to legal immigrants. Illegal aliens are not immigrants by definition. The US accepts more lawful immigrants every year than the rest of the world combined.



#7. There is no such thing as the "Hispanic vote." Hispanics are white, brown, black and every shade in between. Hispanics are Republicans, Democrats, Anarchists, Communists, Marxists and Independents. The so-called "Hispanic vote" is a myth. Pandering to illegal aliens to get the Hispanic vote is a dead end.



#8. Mexico is NOT a friend of the United States. Since 1848 Mexicans have resented the United States. During World War I Mexico allowed German spies to operate freely in Mexico to spy on the US. During World War II Mexico allowed the Axis powers to spy on the US from Mexico. During the Cold War, Mexico allowed spies hostile to the US to freely operate. The attack on the Twin Towers in 2001 was cheered and applauded all across Mexico. Today Mexican school children are taught that the US stole California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. If you don't believe it, check out some Mexican textbooks written for their school children.



#9. Although some illegal aliens enter this country for a better life, there are 6 billion people on this planet. At least 1 billion of those live on less than one dollar a day. If wanting a better life is a valid excuse to break the law and sneak into America, then let's allow those one billion to come to America and we'll turn the USA into a Third World nation overnight. Besides, there are 280 million native born Americans who want a better life. I'll bet Bill Gates and Donald Trump want a better life. When will the USA lifeboat be full? Since when is wanting a better life a good reason to trash another nation?



#10. There is a labor shortage in this country. This is a lie. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of American housewives, senior citizens, students, unemployed and underemployed who would gladly take jobs at a decent wage.



#11. It is racist to want secure borders. What is racist about wanting secure borders and a secure America? What is racist about not wanting people to sneak into America and steal benefits we have set aside for legal aliens, senior citizens, children and other legal residents? What is it about race that entitles people to violate our laws, steal identities, and take the American Dream without paying the price? For about four decades American politicians have refused to secure our borders and look after the welfare of middle class Americans. These politicians have been of both parties. A huge debt to American society has resulted. This debt will be satisfied and the interest will be high. There have already been riots in the streets by illegal aliens and their supporters. There will be more. You, as a politician, have a choice to offend the illegal aliens who have stolen into this country and demanded the rights afforded to US citizens or to offend those of us who are stakeholders in this country. The interest will be steep either way. There will be civil unrest. There will be a reckoning. Do you have the courage to do what is right for America? Or, will you bow to the wants and needs of those who don't even have the right to remain here? There will be a reckoning.



It will come in November of this year, again in 2012 and yet again in 2014. We will not allow America to be stolen by third world agitators and thieves.



David J. Stoddard

US Border Patrol (RET)

Hereford, Arizona

pay attention, comrades!

from http://thepeoplescube.com/

Back on Uncle Sam's plantation

Star Parker - Syndicated Columnist - 2/9/2009 8:00:00 AM

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.



A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.



A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"



Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.



The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.



Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.



I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.



I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.



But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.



Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.



Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."



Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.



There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.



Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.



In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.



"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."



Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."



Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.



Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."



Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.



It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.



Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

Andrew Klavan: Fun With Anti-Semitism

Gallup Poll shows largest Republican lead ever

"November could be a painful month for President Obama and other party leaders."

With five months to go before the general election, a new poll finds that Republicans have opened their widest lead yet when it comes to which party voters prefer this fall. Gallup's generic congressional ballot finds that the number of voters who say they will vote GOP has jumped to 49 percent, compared with 43 percent for Democrats. That's not only the biggest lead Gallup has recorded for the GOP this election cycle, it's the largest lead Republicans have ever had in the poll, which Gallup has run since 1950.



Why are Republicans surging?



According to Gallup, the GOP gained 3 percentage points in the poll over the last week, while Dems fell 4 points. All of this happened as President Obama's approval rating took a hit, especially with his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Gallup puts Obama's approval rating at 46 percent — not exactly in George W. Bush territory, but low for this White House.



No doubt critics will question how much a generic poll really reveals about what might happen in November. After all, it's often better to break down races locally for a more comprehensive picture of how the midterm elections might go. But generic ballots are very good at telling us where voter sentiment is nationally and how enthusiastic people are — or aren't — about the political parties.



One number that Democrats are surely not pleased about is what poll experts call the "enthusiasm" gap. According to Gallup, 39 percent of Republicans are excited about the 2010 elections, compared with just 24 percent of Democrats. That's one of the leading measures of how likely it is that voters will turn out to vote, and if Democrats can't find a way to close that 15-point gap, November could be a painful month for President Obama and other party leaders.

Red Cross aids Afghanistan Taliban

Next time a Taliban pig kills a U.S. soldier, or pulls out a woman's fingernails for wearing nail polish, you can thank the Red Cross - they probably saved his miserable life. That's where your Red Cross donations are going, folks. That's $240 million+ per year from Americans.




"Red Cross aids Afghanistan Taliban," from UPI, May 26 (thanks to Block Ness):

KABUL, Afghanistan, May 26 (UPI) -- The International Committee of the Red Cross says it has provided basic training and first aid kits to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

A spokesman for the international humanitarian organization says about 70 members of the armed opposition were given first aid training last month, the BBC reported Wednesday.

"We treat and train people on the basis of medical necessity as an impartial organization, regardless of race or politics," the spokesman said....



How nice that must have been for the Nazis.





http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/red-cross-aids-taliban.html

no wonder Calif is broke

"...another, perhaps unforeseen, effect of Prop. 13: Over time, it tends to place a greater tax burden on the young and the less wealthy, since the higher tax rates are levied on those with lower incomes and fewer assets.






DUH!



This was obvious to me immediately after that thing passed. Ok, not immediately, but soon after.



no wonder Calif is broke.



in this article you find out billionaires are getting off paying almost nothing:

http://goo.gl/7VoG
.
.
.
.
.

Mexico's immigration laws?

You get these idiots like "Shakira" who is from Columbia whining about Arizona. What happens if you sneak into Mexico? Anyone from South or Central America who dares to cross thru Mexico to get to the USA is extremely likely to be raped and or robbed, and often by Mexican police and military.

Mexico's immigration laws?


Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
• Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32)
• Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34)
• Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37)
• The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.” (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
• Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
• A National Population Registry keeps track of “every single individual who comprises the population of the country,” and verifies each individual’s identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
• A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
• Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
• Foreigners who sign government documents “with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses” are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
• Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
• Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
• Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
• “A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123)
• Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
• Foreigners who “attempt against national sovereignty or security” will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
• A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
• Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)
All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico’s immigration practices versus its American
immigration preachings is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government’s agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States.
Let’s call Mexico’s bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let’s propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico’s own law as a model.
J. Michael Waller, Ph.D., is the Walter and Leonore Annenberg Professor of International Communication at the Institute of World Politics, and is Vice President for Information Operations at the Center for Security Policy. He wrote this paper for the Center for Security Policy.
An authoritative English translation of the Constitution of Mexico, published by the Organization of American States, appears on http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrep… Quotations in this document are from the OAS translation.



or check out this one.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/13118

"I'm really scared for my children."

Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka was on Hannity tonight and bashed President Obama. "I'm really scared for my children."

Human Rights Watch Exposed

BY Daniel Halper
Benjamin Birnbaum has the dirt (and, yes, it's dirt) on Human Rights Watch in the latest issue of The New Republic. Some might recall the outrage directed towards the human rights group when it was discovered that a staffer, who had worked on Israel issues, had a gross obsession with Nazi paraphernalia. But that staffer, Marc Garlasco, turns out to be one of the few good guys on staff at Human Rights Watch, according to Birnbaum. The piece can be found here.

Texas gov. shoots, kills 'wily' coyote during jog

By JIM VERTUNO, Associated Press Writer Jim Vertuno, Associated Press Writer

AUSTIN, Texas – Pistol-packing Texas Gov. Rick Perry has a message for wily coyotes out there: Don't mess with my dog.

Perry told The Associated Press on Tuesday he needed just one shot from the laser-sighted pistol he sometimes carries while jogging to take down a coyote that menaced his puppy during a February run near Austin.

Perry said he will carry his .380 Ruger — loaded with hollow-point bullets — when jogging on trails because he is afraid of snakes. He'd also seen coyotes in the undeveloped area.

When one came out of the brush toward his daughter's Labrador retriever, Perry charged.

"Don't attack my dog or you might get shot ... if you're a coyote," he said Tuesday.

Perry, a Republican running for a third full term against Democrat Bill White, is living in a private house in a hilly area southwest of downtown Austin while the Governor's Mansion is being repaired after a 2008 fire. A concealed handgun permit holder, Perry carries the pistol in a belt.

"I knew there were a lot of predators out there. You'll hear a pack of coyotes. People are losing small cats and dogs all the time out there in that community," Perry said.

"They're very wily creatures."

On this particular morning, Perry said, he was jogging without his security detail shortly after sunrise.

"I'm enjoying the run when something catches my eye and it's this coyote. I know he knows I'm there. He never looks at me, he is laser-locked on that dog," Perry said.

"I holler and the coyote stopped. I holler again. By this time I had taken my weapon out and charged it. It is now staring dead at me. Either me or the dog are in imminent danger. I did the appropriate thing and sent it to where coyotes go," he said.

Perry said the laser-pointer helped make a quick, clean kill.

"It was not in a lot of pain," he said. "It pretty much went down at that particular juncture."

Texas state law allows people to shoot coyotes that are threatening livestock or domestic animals. The dog was unharmed, Perry said.

Perry's security detail was not required to file a report about the governor discharging a weapon, said Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Tela Mange.

"People shoot coyotes all the time, snakes all the time," Mange said. "We don't write reports."

The governor left the coyote where it fell.

"He became mulch," Perry said.

An Open Letter to American Jews

Ben Shapiro
Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Dear American Jews,

I write to you as a charter member of the tribe. I'm not only Jewish, I'm religious. I'm married to an Israeli girl (she'll receive her citizenship next year and she is a proud soon-to-be American). I go to synagogue regularly, keep kosher, keep the Sabbath.

American Jews, I have one request of you: please pull your heads out of your posteriors.

I mean that in all sincerity. Your continued support for Democrats and an administration that is openly anti-Semitic is a disgrace. Your embrace of a party that seeks to hamstring Israel in the name of a wholly fictitious Middle East peace process is contemptible. Your loyalty to a president who consistently sides with Palestinian and Iranian mass murder-supporters is disgusting.

Your backing of a man who has spent his life surrounding himself with the worst anti-Semites America has to offer -- Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi (former Palestinian terrorist spokesman), Louis Farrakhan ("I don't like the way [Jews] leech on us"), Samantha Power, Robert Malley, to name a few -- is nothing short of reprehensible. Rahm Emanuel's presence in the Obama cabinet doesn't ameliorate Obama's anti-Semitism -- it just provides it convenient cover. Al Sharpton wrongly called Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell "house negroes"; Emanuel is a kapo.

Even as you continue to buttress a president who seeks the destruction of your co-religionists, you demonstrate your myopia by rejecting the tea party movement and evangelical Christian Israel-supporters.

The tea party movement is your ally for three important reasons. First, it supports capitalism against the forces of socialism -- and capitalism keeps America strong enough to provide Israel with a hand against its evil adversaries. Second, American Jews are, by far, the highest-earning religious group in the United States -- the tea party fights for your right to keep your money. Third, the tea party stands against government overreach -- and in an era when government overreach promotes anti-religious secularism, Jews must stand with the tea party.

Your rejection of evangelical Christians is even more idiotic. Evangelical Christians are the only major voting bloc preventing President Obama from breaking ties with Israel. When Janet Porter, an evangelical Florida talk show host, heard about Obama's anti-Israel tyranny, she responded by asking her listeners to buy dozens of yellow roses to send to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office as a show of support. The price per dozen: $19.48, in honor of the year of Israel's founding (1948). Over 14,000 flowers were delivered. Meanwhile, Adm. James Jones, Obama's national security adviser and the man who brought Jew-hater Zbigniew Brzezinski into Obama's inner circle, was busy telling anti-Semitic jokes before the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

"But they want to convert us!" many American Jews shout. Not all Christians do. But for the rest -- so what? Would you sacrifice the support of millions of good-hearted Christians because they want to discuss Jesus with you? If your own belief system is so fragile, the weakness is yours, not theirs. While you expend energy whining about Jehovah's Witnesses who show up at your door with a Bible, Obama supports radical Muslims who would show up at your door with a gun -- or, as in the case of Daniel Pearl, a butcher's knife.

Now, I understand, American Jews, that most of you don't care about Israel.

I understand that you're more concerned about a woman's unconditional right to abort her unborn child (which Judaism rejects) than you are about Israel. Fine. Understand that you have removed yourself from the vast river of Jewish history in favor of a chimerical morality that values libertinism over liberty.

I understand that many of you -- all of you above age 70 -- still think FDR is alive. He isn't, but Jimmy Carter is.

I understand that some of you still think that conservatives and Republicans are the same folks they were during the 1950s, when they banned you from country clubs. They aren't.

The simple fact is this: There is only one mainstream political ideology in this country that asks you to check your principles and cultural history at the door in the name of the greater good -- leftism, the same ideology that virtually exterminated Judaism in Russia and Europe. While the left exploits your adherence to bagel-and-lox Judaism by appealing to your watered-down and perverted "tikkun olam" sensibilities, you are enabling your own destruction. The same people who urge you to reach out to terrorists will be the first to sacrifice you to those terrorists' tender mercies. The same people who urge you to worry about same-sex marriage rather than religious freedom will be the first to take your religious freedoms away.

I love you, my brothers and sisters. That's why I'm writing to you. Time is running out; the clock is winding down. Pick a side.
.
.
.
.

Ronald Reagan Commercial From the 50s

The great Lt. Col. Allen West - interview

A New Fight: Lt. Col. Allen West Pursues a House Seat
In an exclusive interview, the candidate in Florida's 22nd Congressional District tells PJM that "you cannot repeal the health care bill as long as Nancy Pelosi is in charge of Congress."


March 22, 2010 - by Alyssa A. Lappen Back in 2003, few Americans had heard of Lt. Col. Allen West, then commanding a battalion of roughly 600 in Iraq.

Attacks on his platoon suddenly spiked, and his intelligence operations got wind of an Iraqi policeman having leaked their maneuvers, in advance, to Islamic terrorists. West got nowhere by interrogating the suspected collaborator for several hours. Ever mindful of his men’s safety — and of a rumored plot to assassinate him and attack the entire battalion — West drew his service revolver and fired near the man’s head. The policeman started talking.

West averted the plot, but also faced a potential court martial, and was called to testify before Congress. “I’d go through hell with a gasoline can” to save his men’s lives, a nonplussed West told Congress.

The Army merely fined West and relieved him of his command, ending his otherwise stellar 22-year Army career.

But to West, every day offers a new opportunity. After briefly teaching in a high school, then serving as a civilian military adviser in Afghanistan, West decided to seek to fulfill his yen for public service from another route. In 2008, he sought the congressional seat in Florida’s 22nd Congressional District, running against incumbent Ron Klein. West garnered 48% of the vote, despite raising only $500,000 against Klein’s millions. And in the tradition of his never-say-die, lower-middle class, Atlanta inner-city parents, the late Herman West Sr. and Elizabeth West, the 48-year-old retired lieutenant colonel is running again — more resolute than ever.

Alyssa A. Lappen: Is it ironic? You were relieved of your military command during a Republican presidency, yet you’re running for Congress as a Republican?

Lt. Col. (ret.) Allen West: No. I don’t see irony. What happened had nothing to do with politics. My running on a Republican ticket is basically due to my conservative politics, and in line with what should be the Republican policy platform.

AAL: Would it have been the same under any administration?

West: I don’t think the administration had anything to do with the decision of my field commander or the advocate general advising him. It was very helpful to have members of Congress and the Senate read out a resolution in support of me and my actions. I stand by what I did. It was based on my men on the ground, not political ramifications or anything like that.

AAL: What was the exact circumstance of this man who was attempting to assassinate you?

West: He was was an Iraqi policeman. We had human intelligence saying he was leaking information to the enemy. We had seen an uptick in ambushes and such things. The word on the street was, I was an enemy target. We were very successful and I was a visible and effective commander.

AAL: If elected, what might you change to affect future commanders facing the same situation?

West: Having been a person on this 21st century battlefield, from Desert Storm, Iraq, and also Afghanistan, I bring a wealth of knowledge from the tactical level that can help us shape our strategic level decisions. I would seek to be on the House Armed Services Committee.

We need to look at current rules of engagement. Are they stymieing the efforts of our men and women on the battlefield? Are they hindering our initiative against this enemy? We should look at things happening with the defense budget. For example, I am really upset about how we continue to put all these non-related amendments on defense appropriation bills. We need to clean that up.

Also, how do we move ahead to taper our force to combat this enemy — a non-state, non-uniformed belligerent on the battlefield? And pay attention to future threats. China continues to build what may be the largest naval force that we will ever know.

AAL: What other principles come from the military?

West: We seek to make a difference. I’m not from a political family or background. We have to reestablish the fact that any American can be a part of the process. In running for office, they have a shot at getting to Congress, and doing the business of being a citizen legislator. Our political system can accommodate people from every walk of life. Let Americans try to guide this thing in the right way.

People need to show it can be done. In 2008, we proved that someone resolute and focused, with a principled message, can get attention. We got 48% of the vote in the 22nd Congressional District of Florida.

This is huge. The key is for people to see this has to be done. Plato said, those who refuse to engage in politics will be governed by their inferiors.

AAL: An organization was started in Texas by Tim Cox, a former process manager at Dell Computers. He’s just fed up with Congress. Probably most Americans are.

West: Now wait, it’s interesting. Every cycle, people say they’re fed up with Congress. Last year, Congress had what then was one of the lowest approval ratings, maybe 20% or 21%. Yet 93% of incumbents were reelected. So people continue to say that. I hope finally the American people will stand up and bring those words to fruition. But let’s face it, there are districts where representatives will not be voted out. Folks are very happy with the person they have. It’ll be interesting to see if people go back with the courage to say Congress is terrible, but our congressman is okay.

AAL: One difficulty is beating incumbents. You have all this gerrymandering. Your home district is a good example — a long skinny north-south stretch through Florida, cutting out big sections of key towns through which it runs. And the House of Representatives maps such districts to protect incumbents.

West: It is very hard to get rid of them. You need a strategic perspective. If Americans want to take the gavel out of Nancy Pelosi’s hand, they have to look across the country and find 40 to 55 seats, maybe even 60, where you can be competitive and make a difference. Congressional District 22 is one of those. And for whatever reason, my district has gotten a lot of national attention.

AAL: Will incumbent Ron Klein run again?

West: Yes, absolutely. I don’t think he expected me to run again — he felt I was a one trick pony. When I was not successful he figured I’d go away. But I am committed to this country, and committed to continuing service to the people. People now know what I stand for. The name recognition has improved. The national level attention, for whatever reason, is humbling. But I think Klein is now in a very tough situation, running against someone like myself, who isn’t a career politician.

AAL: No doubt you’ll get lots of support.

West: And if in two years, West turns out to, you know, suck, then get me out of there. I am [a] guy [who] would understand that. That’s what I tell folks. You are sending me up there to prove myself as a capable legislator, statesman, and political leader. If I fail and let you down … just don’t support me. Just vote me out. That is what we have to do.

AAL: You’ve spoken about the love your parents instilled in you for God, country, and self-sufficiency. What are those principles, and why do you hold them so high?

West: It is important to honor our Judeo-Christian faith tradition — and notice I said faith tradition, I did not say state-sponsored religion. People get very confused about that. You can go back to the founding fathers and see that connection. I have faith and believe in something greater than myself. It comes back around to understanding this great country and service to something greater than yourself. My dad served in WWII. My mother did 25 years of civilian service with the Marine Corps. My older brother served in Vietnam, and now my young nephew is a U.S. Army Captain, following in my footsteps. I think that’s very important. It’s about giving back, about a great country affording you the opportunities to get out and, as the Army once said, be all you can be. It’s about your own internal individual responsibility and accountability, your own internal drive and desire … to be part of what and who we are in this country. That’s why people come to America. They see the opportunities here.

It’s just a shame that government creates victims, and victims become dependent. Government continues to grow because of this dependent entitlement class. That’s not what my parents raised me to believe. Never see anything as an obstacle. Never look at the color of my skin as a crutch. Always know the standards. Understand them. Work not just to achieve them, but to exceed the standards. Those are driving factors in my life, which I learned from parents who taught me faith, love of country, individual responsibility, and accountability.

AAL: Your parents died young.

West: My dad was 66 when he passed from a massive stroke. My mother was 63 when she died of liver cancer. I miss them very much, but each and every day that I go forth, I carry them with me.

AAL: Why was your father, Herman West Sr. from Ozark, Alabama, called “Buck”?

West: Well, it was the strength he exuded. As I said at CPAC, the most important thing was how I ended up on that stage to speak. It traced right back to their dreams, my father, my mother, what they wanted me to be in life.

AAL: I think [your parents] Buck and Elizabeth West would be very proud of you if they were here today.

West: Well, thank you.

AAL: Parenting definitely is important.

West: It is, and one of the problems you have in America is the breakdown of family, especially in the black community. Even Daniel Patrick Moynihan talked about how a lot of these liberal social welfare programs, if you started to pull the man out of the house and to break down the family in the black community, it is not going to be a positive thing. And we see that. In the black community now, you only have 30% to 35% of children being raised in two parent households. That’s appalling.

AAL: Well, yes. And I do not think it’s just in the black community, either. It is all over the place.

West: Yes, it has expanded. It really targeted the inner-city black community and now it has expanded. And you cannot have a strong country without strong families. We do not want to see America be reflected in Detroit, Michigan, or even in California.

AAL: Let’s discuss Tim Cox’ GOOOH (Get Out of Our House) organization. Do you know about it?

West: Yeah, absolutely. I visited their website. He did an interview with South Florida’s WFTL talk show host Joyce Kaufman and I had an opportunity to listen. I think it is a good citizen-based initiative. So I applaud Mr. Cox.

But you already have that system built in. Americans have never really understood, never really participated in this process, and never sat down and evaluated candidates and scrutinized them one-on-one. Not like we are starting to see now.

The great thing is the founding fathers set up our system with powers in the House of Representatives to make them the most powerful branch. So every two years, you get to do something about it. It’s just a matter of Americans educating themselves about the Constitution and understanding you can change this legislative body every two years. Come out and hold people’s feet to the fire.

Will the American people follow through on what they’re saying? Will their respective grassroots organizations follow through? I think when you talk about constitutional fundamentals and principles that make this country great, Americans will rally, and come to support you.

AAL: In current politics, have you read the revised House health care measure? What are your key concerns?

West: I have not read the entire revised measure. I’ve looked at certain pieces. The biggest thing: this is not about focusing on the health care problem in America. And we do have a problem. That is with lowering the costs. If you look at the system that makes costs too high, it drives you to some specific solutions to fix the problem. It’s not about creating 110 more government agencies. It’s not about expanding government health care supervision, or trying to take over one-sixth of our gross national production.

This directly affects us in Florida. It’s about catastrophic litigation. Doctors charge more because they are afraid, so tort reform is a first start. It’s about state insurance agencies and commissions, state by state, that have created monopolies all over the place. The one thing that drives down costs in a free market society is competition.

And it’s not about introducing government into this aspect of competition. Government can run itself in the red [at a loss]. If it wants to produce more capital, government just prints money or borrows money or raises taxes. That would be unfair competition.

It’s about putting Americans in charge of their choices. Now, the insurance companies cannot go jacking up rates because you’d have another company to buy insurance from. That is the great thing about our system. If people see the need, they’ll come into this market and meet the needs of consumers and American citizens [and profit].

Another thing no one talks about is the effect of illegal immigration on health care costs. Down in Miami-Dade, we have Jackson Memorial about to go under because of the rising [costs and expenses] from illegal immigrants. North of us in Martin County you see the same thing.

Health savings accounts are something that no one talks about. Everyone keeps throwing around [numbers]: 30 million, 45 million, 47 million [without insurance]. But it’s really a targeted group of maybe 9 to 10 million citizens that need affordable health insurance. Give them the tax credit.

We have got to transfer the wealth from Washington, D.C., back down to the people so they can take care of their [own] lives and their lifestyles. It’s a lie that increasing taxes increases revenues. At this time, I do not think we need to be creating programs to raise taxes on the American people.

AAL: I could not agree more. Having government control health care would be an unmitigated disaster.

West: The country is upside down. I saw a side by side comparison of public sector and private sector compensation a few weeks ago. At this point, public sector compensations exceed private sector compensations. Here in Broward County, we have city managers making more than the governor.

You cannot have 20% of federal government employees earning six-figure incomes. You can’t continue down the road where government continues to grow. Look, they run the finance industry; they have taken over the automobile industry. They are going after health care. If cap and trade were to go through, they’d control the energy sector. It just squashes out the innovation and ingenuity that comes from the private sector.

This is not efficient. Look at the four standing government medical programs — Medicaid, Medicare, the SCHIP, and the Veterans’ Administration. None of those four programs runs effectively or efficiently.

AAL: What’s SCHIP?

West: The State Children’s Health Insurance Program was started in 1997 to cover children at or below the poverty level. A lot of people didn’t notice last January, one of the first things the Nancy Pelosi crew did. It was signed by President Obama. They raised the age of children covered under SCHIP from 18 to 25, and the poverty level from $32,000 to $83,000 for a family of four.

AAL: $83,000? Oh goodness, we’re poor! (Laughs) That’s unbelievable.

West: Absolutely. So now you are paying free health care for children who are up to 25 years of age, in a household of four with $83,000 income. They are creeping their way to getting what they want. And SCHIP is a huge misnomer; it’s a federal program.

AAL: Assuming health care does pass, can it be repealed by the next Congress? What would that take?

West: The biggest thing — you cannot repeal it as long as Nancy Pelosi is in charge of Congress. So in November 2010, you’d need 40 to 50 seats to flip so she does not have the gavel. She is no longer speaker of the House of Representatives. Even more, you probably need to flip it so at least a two-thirds majority in the House sit on the other side. Then you can override any presidential veto. Americans need to strategically think about those key things if they want to reverse that, and some other dangerous pieces of legislation passed in the first couple of Obama administration years.

AAL: Such as?

West: Some of the spending. We have to get that under control. [We also] have to challenge and get rid of the czar stuff. This is not just from the Obama administration. It went on previously. But it has been exacerbated to epic proportions. Once again, it’s just expansive growth of government, and that’s not constitutional, having people make public policy who aren’t accountable to the people. We need to peel the onion back on all that. We need the checks and balances that the founding fathers established.

AAL: What about the effects of global jihad in the U.S. What concerns you most about domestic policies on this issue?

West: We have become so politically correct and so hung up on multiculturalism that our tolerance has become a one way street leading to cultural suicide. As you evaluate jihad, Islam, or whatever — it’s not about Muslims, not about individuals. It’s about an ideology. We need to study the history, from the 7th century, from Islam’s inception and after. How was it promulgated and disseminated across the world from the 7th century until today? We see that it’s not so much a religion, but more of a totalitarian, theocratic, political ideology.

We need leaders in Washington, D.C., with courage and confidence to stand and say so. So that we are not allowing ourselves to be infiltrated in cultural, educational, political, and economic operating systems by something really antithetical to our constitutional republic. As long as we continue letting people use our freedom to preach against what we are in America and indeed Western civilization — you can look to Europe and see what’s going on — we are hanging ourselves. We have to challenge this ideology, their belief system, to show us that they can be compatible with democracy and freedom, with our principles of individual rights and freedom.

AAL: Yes, but how can you control it? People see Islam as a religion, a faith, and the First Amendment allows freedom of religion.

West: It’s what I said. There will come a point where we cannot see it as religion. This enemy’s reality will have to become our own. It’s a sad truth. I want to coexist with all people. But when you look at it, we are accommodating an ideology that does not accommodate us. How many churches and synagogues are there in Saudi Arabia? A quote, unquote “infidel” cannot go to Mecca. Yet anyone can visit the Vatican. Anyone can go into a church here in the United States. Just yesterday I went to a Jewish temple and spoke to Jewish war veterans. There’s something inherently wrong that a lot of people don’t want to admit; they don’t want to face.

It requires leadership. Leadership has five components: courage, competence, commitment, conviction, and character. You need the type of people in Washington, D.C., willing to stand up and say these things. You may not like what I just said, but it is all true.

AAL: You’re preaching to the choir. I’ve been writing on this since 2000 or 2001.

West: Muammar Ghadafi last summer said something a lot of people missed. He said Islam will overtake Europe without firing a shot. They’ll do it by migration and an explosive birth rate. In a democratic society, the next thing you know, they’ll win by sheer numbers. Then they’ll start to impact domestic policies and programs.

AAL: So does the U.S. limit immigration or ban new mosque construction?

West: No, you challenge the ideology to show that it’s compatible. And if it’s not compatible, then you stem the infiltration. What I’m talking about has nothing to do with Muslims. I’ve been in that part of the world for some time, and helped three of my Afghani interpreters get green cards. But they had to prove to me that they understood the Constitution of the United States and what it meant to be a free people. That’s the onus we have to place on Islam and the Muslim community.

AAL: But even that is tricky because of the taqiyya doctrine. That commands Muslims to be good liars to advance Islam. While it’s horrible to generalize, the ideology allows and encourages such lying.

West: That’s why we have to force a reformation. It’s the same as Judaism, the same as Martin Luther in 1517. We went through a Reformation. The same needs to happen in Islam. After 622 A.D., after Mohammed’s Hejira [migration to Medina], everything became very violent. Until Muslims reject that, and [reinstate] all the abrogated verses from the first 12-year peaceful verses, we absolutely have to pressure them to make that happen.

I am not going to let someone lie to me and say this is a religion of peace. History shows that it is not.

AAL: You are the first person I’ve heard even contending for political office to say anything like this, never mind those already in office. And what is the reaction in the field?

West: People do listen. You only have to tune into the news and see exactly what’s happening. I’m not sitting by myself and preaching some heresy. I’m talking about fact, talking about history and current events. Let’s face it. Jihad Jamie. Jihad Jane. Look at Buffalo, NY. You have a guy on trial for beheading his wife because she wanted a divorce. In Arizona, a guy ran over his daughters because they were becoming too Western. Look at all these things. Fort Hood, Texas. The U.S. soldiers who were shot at a Little Rock recruiting station. We have a serious problem we have to deal with. We can’t continue putting our heads in the sand and saying these very trite terms like “moderate Islam” or “peace-loving Muslims” because we don’t want to confront it. So we have got to challenge them.

AAL: How does the president get away with it?

West: It’s very easy. He’s the president. But people are challenging him because he’s not dealing with this situation forthrightly. Look at his address at the Turkish National Assembly. Look at his address in Cairo, which was just replete with lies and platitudes not based upon fact. It was appeasement.

AAL: I lost a friend over that speech.

West: Understand. There are going to be 30% to 35% of Americans who are not comfortable dealing with this. But the majority of Americans want leaders willing to stand up and speak the truth. They really do.

AAL: How do you arrive at that percentage?

West: You have a third of folks ideologically very much at that far left extreme. There’s an unholy alliance between liberal progressives and this radical Islamic enemy. I don’t understand it. But it is what it is. But 65% to 70% of Americans are composed of the center right. And 65% to 70% of Americans understand the basic set of principles of limited government, security from external and internal threats, individual responsibility and accountability, liberty, free market solutions, leadership based on merit, and traditional values — our borders, our culture, our language, protecting the unborn, and also the sanctity of marriage.

AAL: How would you control these assaults, if elected? How do you convince peers in both parties (and frankly there are many problematic Republicans too)?

West: Look at Lindsey Graham who’s signing onto an amnesty bill. It comes down to leadership — and challenging people. You need an open forum and debate to throw light upon these issues. If legislators are serious about their oath to support and defend the Constitution, they have to do what is right for the American people. Now is a critical time.

Americans are going back to what we said. They’re starting to hold legislators’ feet to the fire; they’re looking for principled leaders, who aren’t self-serving or beholden to special interests or afraid to tackle hard issues. I’d have to sit down with fellow Republicans and educate them on the threats out there. They need to do what’s right and protect the American people.

AAL: Tim Cox’s group wants a law specifying that each new statute can address only one issue. That is, the House and Senate must limit new measures to one law on one issue. That’s it.

West: Absolutely. That’s it. We need people who understand the five basic mandates of the federal government: to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, promote general welfare, provide for the common defense, and secure the blessings of liberty. Also, the House of Representatives operates within the mandates of Article One of the Constitution. If we could get those people, then we’re going to be fine.

It’s not the government’s right or responsibility to start mandating to Americans that they must buy health insurance. That’s a prime example of a government gone totally awry. We have got to get people up there who understand that what’s best for Americans is that they have liberty to pursue happiness. We need people who set the conditions for the success of the American people, not people who try to engineer results and design the outcomes. It’s about making sure that Americans have opportunities for their life, for their liberties, and for their pursuit of happiness. It’s about getting back to fundamentals.

Honor, integrity, and character need to be reestablished in our country’s leadership, and you can do that with people who focus on what’s best for the country and not what’s best for themselves.

AAL: A great many people nationwide pin a lot of hope on you (not to use an overused word) to reform government and rekindle basic American principles in Washington, D.C.. Assuming you win, you’d be a junior congressman. What can supporters realistically expect?

West: They can expect me to go and give that age-old adage — 110%. There’s not a day when I don’t lay my head down without realizing the responsibility upon me — that a lot of people pin a lot of hope on me to turn things around.

I go back to Harry Truman, and what he was able to do. Here was a guy who had not been very successful. He was a haberdasher. Yet he took on the defense industry. And he got recognized. A person who stands resolute can make a difference. People rally around him. That is what you focus on. Not the special interests or the PACs or anything like that.

You focus on who sent you and what they’re looking for. The bigger thing: I will continue to pray for God to strengthen me; I will put together a top notch team to look at all the critical issues. It’s that important to me. I’m not saying I’ll hit a home run every time. But every time I’m at bat, I’ll seek to get on base. I am not going to let people down. And I am not going to be relegated to some back bench, to sit in a corner and just work on being reelected. That’s not why I am going to Washington, D.C.

Understand the kind of person I am and the stubbornness that, if my mother and father were alive, they would tell you about. People say, you gotta compromise and work with people. But I am not going to compromise my principles. When you start to do that, you start on the road to perdition. I will always stand for my principles. I will always stand on the beliefs in what made this country great, from the Declaration, to the Constitution and all the great thinkers and the worries of our founding fathers and framers. That’s the bedrock upon which we stand.

And I am absolutely humbled at the response we’re getting across the nation and beyond. Last week, we were sent a Dutch conservative blog that featured me on the front page.

AAL: That’s not surprising. You support freedom of speech and Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, charged with hate speech in his own country merely for filming and translating passages chanted from the Koran. Some supposedly conservative Americans deride him as a fascist. You, on the other hand, understand he’s fighting for Western civilization itself. Naturally, Dutchmen respect that.

West: It comes back to honor, integrity, and character. They need to be reestablished in the our nation’s leadership. You can do that if you get people to focus on what’s best for the country and not what’s best for themselves. For me, the honor and integrity are the payoff.

There is nothing fancy about me.

It can be taken away any day. That’s what keeps you humble. When you’re in a combat zone, and have a successful firefight and survive that day — you have to go back out the next day too. That keeps you humble. Each and every day is a new fight. What I have done today will not matter tomorrow. You have to stay humble and on focus.

But more than that, it’s how you were raised, those intrinsic characteristics that your parents gave you.