Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
I think the thing he was calling "bunk" was that there was a large secret working group in the executive branch working to implement this. Not that there wasn't a Council on Foreign Relations who was pushing the idea.

I don't think that's "bunk" either. How can we ignore the senate, their bill, the president's behavior, the fact that their answer to our demand that they stop the illegal alien problem is to create a way to bring tens of millions more people into the country?

Not to mention the president himself, calling the Minutemen "vigilantes" from his ranch in Texas, while he was conferring with the Canadian Prime Minister and Vicente Fox?

Sorry. It's not bunk. It's in the papers and in front of our eyes. We ignore it at our peril.

37 posted on 06/14/2006 1:52:48 PM PDT by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: Types_with_Fist

You're wasting your time with the OBL BushBots. They're scared to death of Tancredo and his stand against illegal immigration. They know a third party Conservative candidate running on a strong anti-illegal immigration platform will sink the moderate republican party.


45 posted on 06/14/2006 2:02:53 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Types_with_Fist

"Sorry. It's not bunk. It's in the papers and in front of our eyes. We ignore it at our peril."

You're wasting your time. For years America has been trained to believe any conspiracy of this kind is tin-foil-hat bunk and you're an idiot if you believe it. It's perfect cover and it's working very well.


96 posted on 06/14/2006 2:37:23 PM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Types_with_Fist
"Not to mention the president himself, calling the Minutemen "vigilantes" from his ranch in Texas, while he was conferring with the Canadian Prime Minister and Vicente Fox?"

I think we should all be against vigilantism because of one good reason: it is too easy for good intentioned people to get hurt because of poor training. I am in favor, like the President, of vigilance. Vigilance that does not endanger people to physical harm from those they are watching is good vigilance. Good vigilant citizens who do not endanger themselves in the process are doing a good. I ask, what do you do if you spot a drug smuggler high on cocaine crossing the border and he decides to kill you? You might get killed if the adrenalin rush causes you to do something stupid. You might be in big danger if your head is spinning from the heat of the Arizona desert.

Vigilantes are those who put themselves in harms way against lawbreakers. They automatically put themselves in such a position because they lack the training specifically for border patrol operations. They also do not have the advanced organizational mechanism that the border patrol possesses. For that reason, they lack the critical ability to change their tactics when those they watch employ an alternate tactic. This operational adeptness is crucial and failure in this one area could have mortal consequences.

This is why President George W Bush, when asked about "those people who are hunting migrant people along the border," he answered: "I'm against vigilantes in the United States of America. I'm for enforcing law in a rational way. That's why you got a Border Patrol, and they ought to be in charge of enforcing the border."

194 posted on 06/14/2006 3:33:28 PM PDT by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson