Posted on 07/22/2005 5:34:28 PM PDT by 4.1O dana super trac pak
Yes, except "Evil" is setting it up.
You support giving legal status to illegal aliens.
[no]
If not, do you support using the United States military on a temporary basis to secure and enforce those borders.
[As a last resort; there are many other alternatives, not now in place, that might be tried like adequate staffing of the INS (or whatever it is called now), and jailing employers of illegals, and having a national and fool proof identity card, with must be presented to get a job)]
The term military suggests offing folks, since the military are not trained to be policemen. Maybe they should be.
I have no problem answering your questions. What is your plan to deal with illegals. I took my drawers down, no it is your turn.
Or supposedly against "The Brown Invasion."If that's what YOU want to call it, they're your quotes and caps.
This isn't a deposition, and you are the last person I want to reveal any of my personal information about, not already known on the internet. If you wish to assume I make my living off illegals somehow, and I am just protecting my source of putting food on the table, and that dictates my views, that is fine with me.
Hehehe. I was using someone else's quotes, someone with great affectation for Mullah Tancredo.
Whatever number of the largest conventional bombs in the arenal of the United States military you say that it would take to take out Mecca, I will for argument's sake accept that number. Whether you say the number is one hundred (100), one thousand (1,000) or ten thousand (10,000), the point is that Mecca can be taken out with conventional bombing.
Supposedly also with flatulence.
Sure we did it with Dresden. Mecca has about 700,000 residents. So many to kill, so little time.
She says it was Hilary who started out a "Goldwater Girl" then turned into a shrill loon.
I say it was pat buchanan.
Which was it?
In the hypothetical posed to Cong. Tancredo by WFLA host Pat Campbell, Islamic terrorists explode nuclear devices in six (6), seven (7) or eight (8) U.S. cities. If that happened how many Americans would the Islamic terrorists kill?
She says it was Hilary who started out a "Goldwater Girl" then turned into a shrill loon.
I say it was pat buchanan.
Which was it?
Who said you weren't affraid of the tackle the difficult issues?
I would secure and enforce the borders of the United States with Canada and Mexico. Border security has been a joke under both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush. I would construct physical barriers along the Mexican and Canadian borders to increase the security of the U.S. borders. Presently, there are not a sufficient number of physical barriers. I would drastically increase the number of both United States Border Patrol agents and United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. I would use the United States military to help secure and enforce this nation's borders.
I would begin agressively deporting large numbers of illegal aliens, including both illegal aliens that entered this nation illegally and those that have overstayed their right to be legally present in this country. Several of the Islamic terrorists that murdered over three thousand (3,000) Americans on September 11, 2001, were illegal aliens by virtue of having overstayed their visas.
I will never support any legislation that gives legal status to illegal aliens.
Just launch a trident or minuiteman ii missile.. most bang for the buck.. and best yet, no survivors in mecca.
Many immigration lawyers have the blood of over three thousand (3,000) Americans killed on September 11, 2001, on their hands. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is a pro-illegal alien organization. During the years leading up to 2001, AILA and many immigration lawyers opposed measures in the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives that would have made it easier to track and deport visa overstayers like several of the Islamic terrorists that murdered over three thousand (3,000) Americans on September 11, 2001.
Most of the 9-11 plane boarders were in the US legally, or so I understand.
The problem is nuking a country that has not sponsored or turned a blind eye or abetted those that do the nukes from suit cases, or bombing them, just because they are from that country. That is immoral by any moral compass that I know of that has much traction in the this age, unless that country does not fully cooperate in an appropriate hunt down. The response requires very fact specific information. Just pounding one's keyboard, or mouthing off like Tancredo did, is peurile and dumb and wrong, and needs to be rejected, as just that.
Hehehe. I was using someone else's quotes,Hehehe yourself, that's stupid.
Why would you respond to my post with someone else's irrelevant quotes, someone you can't even name?
someone with great affectation for Mullah Tancredo.That's even stupider yet. Since when do Mullahs call for bombing Mecca?
You have a major problem but it isn't Tancredo.
No matter how many times you repeat it, Cong. Tancredo did not say nor suggest that Islamic holy sites be nuked. In fact, Cong. Tancredo never said that Islamic holy sites have to be bombed after Islamic terroists explode nuclear devices in six (6), seven (7) or eight (8) U.S. cities. Cong. Tancredo said the following: "What would be the response? You know, there are things that you could threaten to do before something like that happens and then you may have to do afterwards that are quite draconian." Cong. Tancredo used the "may" not "must" when he spoke. The above quoted language preceded his comments about bombing holy sites.
Islamic holy sites can be taken out with conventional weapons. It does not require nuclear weapons to take out Islamic holy sites.
If Cong. Tancredo were president, this nation's borders would be secured and vigorously enforced. Our borders are presently neither secrued nor vigorously enforced. This country's borders are porous. The fact that our country's borders are so easily crossed illegally has placed this country in danger of having terrorists illegally cross the border and has also placed this country in danger of having weapons of mass destruction smuggled across the borders.
If Cong. Tancredo were president, illegal aliens would be agressivley deported, including Middle Eastern visa overstayers.
The policies with regard to border security and enforcement, deportation of illegal aliens and stricter controls on legal immigration that Cong. Tancredo would enact as president would help prevent any weapon of mass destruction from being used by Islamic terrorists against Americans on American soil. If a weapon of mass destruction is used by Islamic terrorists against Americans in this country, blood will be on the hands of all the politicians in Washington D.C. that have failed to demand the securing and enforcement of our borders, the agressive deportation of illegal aliens and stricter controls on legal immigration.
From your comments, it appears you would support nuking a country that has "sponsored or turned a blind eye or abetted those that do the nukes from suit cases." Further, from your comments, it appears you would support nuking a country that "does not fully cooperate in an appropriate hunt down." If I have misunderstood your comments, what would you do if a country acted in any of the ways described above?
You've already made clear you would support a Democrat, presumably including an extremely left-wing Democrat against Cong. Tancredo in his next election. You stated: "If Tancredo really said what it is asserted he said, he is not only unfit to be president, he is unfit for any public office, and I would vote against him if I lived in his congressional district, both in a primary, and in the general election (I would vote for the Dem)." Because of the comments Cong. Tancredo made, you would be willing to support a Democrat that might, for example, support amnesty for illegal aliens, gay marriage, gun control, as well as all kinds of other wonderful things.
Cong. Tancredo's comments were right on target. I would love to see the results of a poll of a large number of Americans whereby they would be played the audio tape of Cong. Tancredo's interview and asked whether they support Cong. Tancredo's comments.
What should be rejected are the insults and attacks of Cong. Tancredo by you and others.
How many Americans would die if Islamic terrorists exploded nuclear devices in six (6), seven (7) or eight (8) U.S. cities?
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.