Posted on 08/28/2004 6:49:37 PM PDT by NewRomeTacitus
Is there is an invisible army of terrorists gathering in America today? The mainstream media and the Bush administration do not want to talk about it.
In July, Defense Watch reported that, in Arizona, an area called the Naco Strip has become a primary route of illegal entry by “significant numbers of Arab-speaking males.” It took a small town weekly newspaper, the Tombstone Tumbleweed, to reveal that, “males of possible Syrian and Iranian descent have been detained in the past few weeks.” Since October 1, 2003, 5,510 illegal aliens designated “Other Than Mexican” (OTM) have been apprehended while crossing the Arizona terrain. These OTM’s are not here to pick vegetables, mow lawns, pluck chickens, or wash cars.
Just do the math. If only five Muslim terrorists crossed the border every day for a year that would add up to 1,825 people ready to do the bidding of Osama bin Laden. If this has been going on for just the years since 9-11, that’s an army of 5,475. Then, too, there are an estimated 2.9 million Muslims in America. Extremists, worldwide, are estimated to be about ten percent of the overall population. Applied to the U.S., that represents a potential 290,000 American Muslims sympathetic to the Islamist cause. No matter how you slice and dice the numbers, it suggests that a substantial threat exists and is exacerbated by the failure to stop terrorists at our borders.
They constitute a virtual army of terrorists who, if not apprehended, could create a day of havoc from coast to coast when al Qaeda gives the signal. When that day comes, remember that you read about it here first.
Or, as some argue, there’s no proof that any al Qaeda operatives have crossed the border. If, however, any were captured, normal counter-terrorism procedures would be to deny this and seek to extract information from those in custody.The 9-11 operatives were here thanks to sloppy immigration procedures and, in the case of illegal aliens, the estimates are that eight to twelve million live among us. That is a huge margin for error.
The topic the Bush administration wants to stay away from until after November 2, Election Day is immigration. Some have called the Bush administration immigration policies “schizophrenic”, but they are not. They are globalist, i.e., the views of someone for whom national borders should be regarded as outmoded while we all join hands in one big, global neighborhood.
One can understand the “schizophrenic” label, given the hue and cry about Bush’s so-called unilateralism and willingness “to go it alone”, but this is the same administration that supports a variety of policies that are globalist, most of which come straight out of the United Nations. The way civics is taught in our schools today is designed to create generations of globalists for whom our national sovereignty and the Bill of Rights are just a bunch of 18th century “ideas.”
There are a number of problems with this see-no-evil immigration policy. On August 10, Jerry Seper of the Washington Times, reported that, under President Bush’s guest-worker program, “Millions of illegal aliens in the United States would be free from arrest and deportation, have access to tax-deferred savings accounts and Social Security credits, and get unrestricted travel to and from their home countries.” This constitutes a massive dollar transfer to Mexico.
Homeland Security Undersecretary, Asa Hutchinson, responsible for the nation’s borders and transportation security, has apparently lost his senses. In a recently reported response to questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Hutchinson supported the Bush immigration policies while acknowledging that the “incentives” being offered illegal aliens are generous to a fault. The National Border Patrol Council that represents 10,000 of the non-supervisory agents called the guest-worker plan a “slap in the face to anyone who has ever tried to enforce the immigration laws of the United States."
In January 2004, the Mexican government acknowledged that the number of their people entering the US illegally had increased 66% from 1990 to 2002. Naturally, Mexico’s president, Vicente Fox, wants Bush to grant de facto amnesty to an estimated eight to eleven million illegal aliens already working in the United States, the majority of whom are Mexican. Amnesty and any other program of this nature is simply a reward for breaking the laws of the United States of America. There are even some voices suggesting they should be given the right to vote!
One little discussed cost of the open door policy being pursued by the Bush administration is the increase in the cost of law enforcement where illegal aliens gather in numbers. Right now, according to Seper, “About 80,000 illegal criminal aliens, including convicted murders, rapists, drug dealers, and child molesters who served prison time and were releases, are loose on the streets of America, hiding from federal immigration authorities.”
They don’t have to hide that hard. According the figures for 2002 from the former Immigration and Naturalization Service and from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, more than 375,000 known illegal aliens have been ordered deported, but have disappeared pending immigration hearings. Lee Boyd Malvo, the sniper who terrorized the Washington area, was one of them.
Recently, Brazil agreed to step up the policing of the Triple Border Area with Paraguay and Argentina. According to a Washington Times editorial, “It has long been identified as a fund-raising, training and procurement haven for diverse terrorist groups, including al Qaeda and Hezbollah.” The ease with which terrorists could be infiltrated into the US from these South American strongholds cannot be underestimated.
When the facts are examined, there are few good reasons to permit the massive daily influx of Mexicans and other illegal aliens, but there is one very good reason to shut it down completely.
I say we hire some unsuspecting PETA pigeons and have them start a "Save the Mountain Lion and Bear" campaign along the border.
That will put them to practical use.
Yes, they should take note, but probably won't. They would rather forget that 9/11 ever happened. It can't and should not be forgotten
Yes, 250,000 of them plan to invade Central Park in NYC.
We were in Oregon a few weeks ago and noticed the whole place was crawling with illegal aliens. What a difference 4 years makes.
They believe that if they allow the Republican Party to win the Presidency with a candidate that ignores the wishes of the overwhelming majority of American Citizen's, in respect to illegal immigration, border security, interior immigration enforcement and out-of-control legal immigration, yet again, that's the only otherwise Conservative Republican candidate that they'll ever get from the new, 'Big Tent', Republican Party.
That list of Conservatives is growing.
They'll vote for Republican candidates for congress, but not for president this November.
They'd prefer gridlock and sending a message to the Republican Party as opposed to 4 more years of total capitulation to the pro-illegal immigration, open borders, one-worlders.
I agree and I'm not a "DU TROLL" or any other name you or anyone else cares to call me, itsahoot.
I'm doubtful that continued derision, personal attacks, name-calling or other abuse will change the opinion of a single Conservative that's anti-illegal immigration and anti-open borders.
I know that there are many here that will redouble their efforts to insult us just the same. It won't work, but hey, whatever floats your boats.
For myself, I'd rather have 4 years of gridlock and another potential Conservative Republican revolution.
I believe that there are many Republican members of congress that are anti-illegal immigration and anti-open borders, but they're hesitant to say anything out of fear of receiving the same treatment Tom Tancredo's getting from Rove and the Republican Party leadership.
A majority of Republicans in congress and some Democrats will resist Kerry's efforts to grant a 'blanket' or not so blanket' amnesty, while these same Republicans will 'rubber-stamp' anything Bush wants.
IMO, if Kerry is elected and the Republicans maintain a majority in congress, they'll fight Kerry 'tooth and nail' the same as they fought the Clintons.
Conversely, IMO, if the Republicans win both the congress and the presidency, Bush's plan is a done deal.
That's unacceptable to me.
What's your opinion?
Not wishing anything bad on the residents of that city, should the terrorists unleash a weapon that's highly contaminating we'd all be better off if it happened in the gambling capital.
Because what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
Indeed? How'd you know they were illegals? Were they wearing sandwich boards? Stickers that read "HI! MY NAME IS (name scrawled in blank space) AND I'M AN ILLEGAL ALIEN"!? Taco residue on their hands? What gave it away for you?
Very cute indeed, but sarcasm and burying ones head in the sand does nothing to help solve this growing problem.
I quess having any kind of border policy other then anything goes is just out of the question huh? G*d forbit we suffer another large attack, but if we do and it is shown that the terrorest or their supplies crossed our "open border", the open border crowd will be in bigger trouble then they are today. The anger over our illegal immigrant policy, or lack thereof, is boiling just under the surface, an other attack might very well cause that anger to blow.
not sure where I said to inspect granny but not the Arabs...
No need to start a new party. There's already the Constitution Party, a party resembling the now-defunct, what-used-to-be Republican party, the party that has turned its back on its conservative supporters.
Is everyone in Arkansas as ignorant as you are?
Unfortunately a third party, even one a good as the constitutional party is not an option, not in this election anyway. To many judges to appoint and we can't let kerry appoint them.
All true. On the Nazi issue, though, Islam seems to be the latest target of neo-Naziism. Not that the enemy of my enemy is necessarily my friend, but every now and then you can sit back and watch as two evils destroy each other and spare you the trouble.
What do you like the most or what gives you the greatest concerns, ES?
your quote: "Does ethnicity prove anything?" is obviously the mantra of the Homeland Security airport-security nobs who watch, VERY carefully, Anglo-Saxon grannies and nursing mothers at airports rather than Arabs.
Let me help you with this: there were ZERO, zip, nada, Anglo-Saxon grannies piloting aircraft into the World Trade Center.
OTOH, there were 20 or so Arab males who were actively involved.
Ethnicity in and of itself does not prove anything. But prudence dictates that CERTAIN ethnics are deserving of more scrutiny than others.
That's called 'discrimination.' Get used to the concept--I discriminate all the time about where I go with my children, and about with whom they associate.
It's a GOOD thing to discriminate.
Are all xenophobes as paranoid as you seem to be?
Yes, I have read the Constitution Party's platform in detail. It details a return to the principles of our founders, nothing wrong with that. It would piss off bureaucrats and fat cats and those who illegally profit from us, nothing wrong with that. It would restore our rights as citizens. I like it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.