|
Chipster's Journal
Posted by Chipster in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Thu Jun 21st 2007, 01:50 AM Unlikely Alliance: Put The Impeachment Movement on Steroids - Join with the Conservatives on Illegal Immigration
Treason has been on my mind lately, ever since I read that the US is now arming Iraqi insurgents. And it came to mind again again, as I watched ABCNews report that al Qaeda and the Taliban had a 'Graduation' for their terrorist attack teams bound for United States, Canada, Great Britain and Germany. The tape shows Taliban military commander Mansoor Dadullah, whose brother was killed by the U.S. last month, introducing and congratulating each team as they stood. I'm alarmed, I think understandably, that US intelligence officials commented that it was "an aggressive and sophisticated propaganda campaign" in view of the fact that there were numerous pre-911 warnings that were ignored by the Bush administration. So naturally, I have to wonder if warnings are again being ignored as the Homeland Security's Advisory System hasn't budged. History does have a way of repeating itself, as it did last week when Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) reached a deal with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) allowing the Senate to take another kick at the immigration can, a piece of domestic legislation that Bush desperately wants to sign – while demanding that it be "comprehensive." (Never mind that the deal that Reid made was that he would place the bill back on the schedule if senators would limit the number of their amendments thereby impeding coordinated comprehensiveness to an arbitrary figure - wouldn't want that comprehensiveness to be too thoughtfully considered and refined. Don't send Harry to dicker for a used car.) If fact, one of the central problems with the "comprehensive" immigration bill is that it's a patchwork of provisions that aren't well-calculated, well-coordinated or thoughtfully designed to address the actual issues, so the ramifications are often unanticipated and difficult to enforce, with undesirable outcomes. No matter how much lipstick you put on a pig, it's still a pig (with all due respect to that little fashionista Ms. Piggy), and we're going to be subjected to a whole new round of make-up which is carefully contrived to avoid the most expedient, practical way to solve the problem: vigorously enforce the existing laws – especially against employers. When the government makes hiring illegals expensive, troublesome and embarrassing for corporations, the illegals will head home. Of course, corporate interests have, and continue to pay, their dues to the Bush administration, and are now demanding that the supply of cheap labor continue so they can maximize their profits on the labors of illegals. We all get that. But what is less apparent is the very real danger our nation is facing because of Bush's laissez-faire, and I suggest, treasonous, non-enforcement of our nation's existing immigration laws. In March, 2006, FBI Director Robert Mueller told a House Appropriations subcommittee that "...Hezbollah operatives were assisting others with some association with Hezbollah in coming to the United States," and admitted "Hezbollah had succeeded in smuggling some of its operatives across the border." That wasn't an isolated instance. Before the U.S.-led coalition attacked Iraq, the U.S. State Department offered congressional testimony that both al-Qaida and the Shiite terrorist group Hezbollah were taking firm hold in "America's backyard." Islam is gaining adherents rapidly in Mexico and South America, and the head of the Attorney General Office's special terrorism investigation unit, Gen. Jorge Serrano, said that his office is investigating alleged terrorist activities being carried out by Mexicans. And US federal law enforcement agencies know that linkages between illegal immigration, expanded trade, Mexican narcotics organizations and terrorist groups are growing, according to DEA documents. Terrorist groups are aligning with drug cartels to fund terrorism. We saw "home-grown" terrorists in Britain, and the Bush administration recently made a startling revelation that could well mean that we can expect "home-grown" terrorists on our soil, too. On May 7, 2007, six foreign-born Muslims were intercepted in a terror plot to attack Ft. Dix solders. "Authorities said there was no direct evidence connecting the men to any international terror organizations such as al-Qaida. But several of them said they were ready to kill and die "in the name of Allah," according to court papers...Four of the men were born in the former Yugoslavia, one was born in Jordan and one came from Turkey, authorities said. All had lived in the United States for years. Three were in the United States illegally; two had green cards allowing them to stay in this country permanently; and the sixth is a U.S. citizen." So, half the danger of this band - who were caught when they asked a Circuit City employee to transfer video onto a DVD – would have been averted with enforcement of existing immigration laws. In 2002, Richard M. Stana, Director of Justice Issues at the US General Accounting Office, testified before the House's Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, saying "Historically, Congress and INS have devoted over five times more resources in terms of staff and budget on border enforcement than on interior enforcement." He continued to summarize his main points:
Who benefits - profits - from lax interior enforcement of immigration laws? While Bush uses the scare tactic that we "must fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them over here," while he depletes our own homeland defense with repetitive draining overseas deployments of police/fire/EMT/Guardsmen that are fertile terrorist training grounds, he continues to acquiesce to his corporate benefactors demands. Is that not treason? Is it not "adhering to ... Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort?" But then again, perhaps it serves his own egocentric, megalomaniacal proclivities very well, as he recently signed a presidential directive that essentially declares that in the event of a “catastrophic event”, George W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator." "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government." Why, in the name of national security, is a toddler's sippy cup suspect – and yet our porous borders are tolerated? And we should legitimize between 12-20 million people whose first acts in our nation were illegal? Is it benign neglect – treasonous - presidential benign neglect? And now Congress is considering being complicit in the circumvention of our nation's laws? Anti-immigration laws are already on the books of the country for enforcement. Are these too harsh?
Too harsh you say? The above laws happen to be the immigration laws of Mexico.
|
Latest Threads
The ten most recent threads posted on
the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums. The Ten Most Hatd Companies in America. By No Elephants Mediocre earnings, stocks too pricey — so what? By No Elephants Clashes erupt as Greek Parliament debates austerity measures By No Elephants AlienGirl has passed away By Contrary1 The VAWA By femrap Romney wins Maine Caucuses (and CPAC straw poll) By No Elephants Singing superstar Whitney Houston dies at 48 By Contrary1 Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted
on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the
last 24 hours. AlienGirl has passed away 12 recs : By Contrary1 Dear God, let the News Corp. phone hacking scandal spread to FOX news and the NY Post 8 recs : By DainBramaged It would be nice to know the facts behind this claim about the air space bill. 7 recs : By Leopolds Ghost Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
|

