Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If Minutemen Are Vigilantes, What Do You Call 500,000 Illegal Aliens Demanding Rights?
NewsByUs.com ^ | Apr 10, 2006 | Citizen Conservative

Posted on 04/10/2006 5:52:04 AM PDT by IrishMike

When the Minutemen set up shop at the Arizona border last year to call attention to the illegal alien loophole in US Homeland Security, President Bush foolishly chided these brave patriots by calling them vigilantes. Although chagrined at being deserted by the man who has the constitutional responsibility and authority to defend our borders, the Minutemen dug in their heels and persisted. And persisted.

Their Yankee determination to do the right thing was rewarded when President Bush finally sent additional border patrol agents to Arizona. Even the Mexican government was motivated to pay greater attention, at least temporarily, because of the due diligence of heroic Minutemen.

Before the Minuteman took their courageous stand, open border advocates and anti-American liberals insisted it was “impossible” to stop illegal immigration. Best to just accept reality, learn Spanish, and switch to rice and beans as food stables, according to the leftists and Hispanic racists.

Thank God, the Minutemen PROVED illegal aliens CAN be stopped, thereby delivering a great victory on behalf of all American citizens.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsbyus.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 1912election; agenda; alien; aliens; bush; crimigrants; grifters; illegal; illegalaliens; illegalien; illegalimmigration; illegals; immigration; immigrationreform; mexico; minutemen; squatterinvaders; yikeswebettershutup
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 701-711 next last
To: river rat
...a clear description of what can come from national denial of the circumstances we face from totally uncontrolled illegal immigration and granting "rights" and "entitlements" to burglars who sneak into our homes...

That is ... as it is.

461 posted on 04/11/2006 5:29:43 PM PDT by TigersEye (Sedition and treason are getting to be a Beltway fashion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

You know, the President reversed course on Harriet. I submit that now is the time for FR to pull a Harriet over this banning.

Semper Fi


462 posted on 04/11/2006 5:42:19 PM PDT by TomasUSMC ((FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, I ave read every post on this thread...all of Travis McGee's exchanges. I did not see him avocating violence...only indicating that he thought it was heding that way and that if it did, he hoped the ones who put us in such a position would "get their's" in the process.

I know there are a lot of high emotions about this topic. It is understandable because so much is at stake. It's about illegal entry into this country by millions, a vertable invasion, and one that must be stopped before it goes too far and brings on terrible consequences. The closer we get to that, the higher the fervor and emotion will be.

There are also a lot of folks who tend to try and paint those who are adamently against the illegal invasion as somehow anti-immigration and rascists. Nothing could be further from the truth. We welcome legal immigrants of any nationality who come here through the legal process and want to become an Americans, and adopt our laws and fundamental moral values. THAT, is what has made this nation great, and that's the key.

Anyhow, I would respectfully ask you to reconsider Travis posting priveleges. He is a valuable asset to thise forum, even if there are those who do not agree with him and whom he disagrees with. It is through such interchanges, as long as they are civil, that we refine and improve our position as consevatives and as those of a mind to restore and preserve our constitutional republic...which is a thing I know Travis is not only also adament about, but in which cause he is a great ally.

463 posted on 04/11/2006 5:54:50 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

Comment #464 Removed by Moderator

To: US Border Resident; Travis McGee; Czar; pbrown; Borax Queen
Banning any speech about this subject will not prevent it from happening. I hope that Travis is wrong about this one... but hope in itself accomplishes little in the scheme of things.

I agree with you. Thanks for your post. Hopefully, someone reading will be able to communicate with you about how to help in this patriotic endeavor to secure our borders so we may secure America.

465 posted on 04/11/2006 6:34:41 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: US Border Resident

p.s. Welcome to FR. Thank you for your many years of service securing our borders.


466 posted on 04/11/2006 6:36:06 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Jeff, I can't speak for Jim, but Travis McGee was salivating at the thought of civil war and hanging all the "quislings" that he felt were responsible for the current situation.

That is so far over the top for this forum that it's beyond defense.

There are plenty of forums where that sentiment is necessary for admission. This isn't one of them.


467 posted on 04/11/2006 6:40:03 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]

To: IrishMike

They are a Terrorist Army thumbing their noses at the American Patriots who built this Sovereign Nation.


468 posted on 04/11/2006 6:46:13 PM PDT by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
I don't agree with you.

I know Travis personally, and he is not in the least "salivating" over the prospect of war of any kind, much less civil war. He is a loyal American who has served his country and seen the horrors up close and personal. He is doing everything he can to avoid the prospect, including indicating that, to his own horror, we are headed that way.

That's the way I view his comments. Is he passionate? You are darned straight he is...he understands what is at stake. When we are impassioned, do we sometimes speak out of turn?...of course we do, everyone of us has at one time or another.

On this thread, you can read his responses and see how he in fact apologized for one such statement. But forecasting where this can potentially lead is not one of them, nor should it be. It's the truth.

469 posted on 04/11/2006 6:52:10 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Jeff, he hoped for thousands of Americans to be hung from trees in Post 407.

Is that cool with you?


470 posted on 04/11/2006 6:56:31 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 469 | View Replies]

To: US Border Resident
Thank you and welcome to FR. I agree with your sentiments...but I believe that the Minutemen are doing good...they are exposing the problem and representing an all-American way to go about addressing it right at the border as you say, by heloing law enforcement do their job. Something we should all be willing to do whenever we can. As to my own ideas, I have voiced them often and sent them to my reps. Here is how I see it:
1) Enforce the current laws.

2) Come down on any company hiring illegals aliens immdiately and dry up the draw. Fine them, make them pay for the deportation of any illegals they have hired, and put the woners or managers who knowingly do this on some sort of probation, where a repeat offense causes the crime to be permanently on ther record and the only way tokeep it off is to not repeat for 5-10 years.

3) Begin rounding up, arresting and incarcerating for a short period in work camps near the border (working the able bodied hard at helping build the fence), any illegals we can find, then expel them.

4) Build a serious two layer fence across the southern border, allowing for normal crossings for legal immigration and valid green card holders. If we seriously did these four things, we wouldn't need to worry about catching them all, most would leave on their own.

5) After executing the above program for 90 days, offer the remaining illegals the following:
a) If you voluntarily report at a border station or any INS office, you will be immediately deported, but, after we take a DNA sample, if you pass a background check while we do so, we will consider your immigration requst favorably if you get in line with everyone else and apply through the standard methods.

b) If you fail to report voluntarily and we have to catch you, or if you enter illegally again, then we will use your DNA to enusre that you are NEVER considered for immigration to the United States, then you will be incarcerated for 90 days abd expelled. If you are ever caught again, you will spend 20 years incarcerated, on work gangs before being expelled.
This plan offers no form of reward or amnesty and clearly sets forth both a positive and a negative incentive for these people to leave and begin obeying our laws. Something like this MUST be done very soon.
471 posted on 04/11/2006 6:57:39 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head; Borax Queen; pbrown

I like your plan, Jeff. Very good propositions.


472 posted on 04/11/2006 7:01:47 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.academia.org/lectures/lind1.html

The Origins of Political Correctness
An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind

Variations of this speech have been delivered to various AIA conferences including the 2000 Consevative University at American University

Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about this morning – the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic.

We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses, but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come from? What is it?

We call it "Political Correctness." The name originated as something of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of it as only half-serious. In fact, it’s deadly serious. It is the great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.

First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted "victims" groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.

Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be true – such as the whole of the history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women. Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and say, "Wait a minute. This isn’t true. I can see it isn’t true," the power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.

Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past is about that one thing.

Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, (only feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be "victims," and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn’t as well qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation. White owned companies don’t get a contract because the contract is reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism.

And finally, both have a method of analysis that automatically gives the answers they want. For the classical Marxist, it’s Marxist economics. For the cultural Marxist, it’s deconstruction. Deconstruction essentially takes any text, removes all meaning from it and re-inserts any meaning desired. So we find, for example, that all of Shakespeare is about the suppression of women, or the Bible is really about race and gender. All of these texts simply become grist for the mill, which proves that "all history is about which groups have power over which other groups." So the parallels are very evident between the classical Marxism that we’re familiar with in the old Soviet Union and the cultural Marxism that we see today as Political Correctness.

But the parallels are not accidents. The parallels did not come from nothing. The fact of the matter is that Political Correctness has a history, a history that is much longer than many people are aware of outside a small group of academics who have studied this. And the history goes back, as I said, to World War I, as do so many of the pathologies that are today bringing our society, and indeed our culture, down.

Marxist theory said that when the general European war came (as it did come in Europe in 1914), the working class throughout Europe would rise up and overthrow their governments – the bourgeois governments – because the workers had more in common with each other across the national boundaries than they had in common with the bourgeoisie and the ruling class in their own country. Well, 1914 came and it didn’t happen. Throughout Europe, workers rallied to their flag and happily marched off to fight each other. The Kaiser shook hands with the leaders of the Marxist Social Democratic Party in Germany and said there are no parties now, there are only Germans. And this happened in every country in Europe. So something was wrong.

Marxists knew by definition it couldn’t be the theory. In 1917, they finally got a Marxist coup in Russia and it looked like the theory was working, but it stalled again. It didn’t spread and when attempts were made to spread immediately after the war, with the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, with the Bela Kun government in Hungary, with the Munich Soviet, the workers didn’t support them.

So the Marxists’ had a problem. And two Marxist theorists went to work on it: Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary. Gramsci said the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said in 1919, "Who will save us from Western Civilization?" He also theorized that the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise was the culture: Western civilization itself.

Lukacs gets a chance to put his ideas into practice, because when the home grown Bolshevik Bela Kun government is established in Hungary in 1919, he becomes deputy commissar for culture, and the first thing he did was introduce sex education into the Hungarian schools. This ensured that the workers would not support the Bela Kun government, because the Hungarian people looked at this aghast, workers as well as everyone else. But he had already made the connection that today many of us are still surprised by, that we would consider the "latest thing."

In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank is established that takes on the role of translating Marxism from economic into cultural terms, that creates Political Correctness as we know it today, and essentially it has created the basis for it by the end of the 1930s. This comes about because the very wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by the name of Felix Weil has become a Marxist and has lots of money to spend. He is disturbed by the divisions among the Marxists, so he sponsors something called the First Marxist Work Week, where he brings Lukacs and many of the key German thinkers together for a week, working on the differences of Marxism.

And he says, "What we need is a think-tank." Washington is full of think tanks and we think of them as very modern. In fact they go back quite a ways. He endows an institute, associated with Frankfurt University, established in 1923, that was originally supposed to be known as the Institute for Marxism. But the people behind it decided at the beginning that it was not to their advantage to be openly identified as Marxist. The last thing Political Correctness wants is for people to figure out it’s a form of Marxism. So instead they decide to name it the Institute for Social Research.

Weil is very clear about his goals. In 1971, he wrote to Martin Jay the author of a principle book on the Frankfurt School, as the Institute for Social Research soon becomes known informally, and he said, "I wanted the institute to become known, perhaps famous, due to its contributions to Marxism." Well, he was successful. The first director of the Institute, Carl Grunberg, an Austrian economist, concluded his opening address, according to Martin Jay, "by clearly stating his personal allegiance to Marxism as a scientific methodology." Marxism, he said, would be the ruling principle at the Institute, and that never changed.

The initial work at the Institute was rather conventional, but in 1930 it acquired a new director named Max Horkheimer, and Horkheimer’s views were very different. He was very much a Marxist renegade. The people who create and form the Frankfurt School are renegade Marxists. They’re still very much Marxist in their thinking, but they’re effectively run out of the party. Moscow looks at what they are doing and says, "Hey, this isn’t us, and we’re not going to bless this."

Horkheimer’s initial heresy is that he is very interested in Freud, and the key to making the translation of Marxism from economic into cultural terms is essentially that he combined it with Freudism. Again, Martin Jay writes, "If it can be said that in the early years of its history, the Institute concerned itself primarily with an analysis of bourgeois society’s socio-economic sub-structure," – and I point out that Jay is very sympathetic to the Frankfurt School, I’m not reading from a critic here – "in the years after 1930 its primary interests lay in its cultural superstructure. Indeed the traditional Marxist formula regarding the relationship between the two was brought into question by Critical Theory."

The stuff we’ve been hearing about this morning – the radical feminism, the women’s studies departments, the gay studies departments, the black studies departments – all these things are branches of Critical Theory. What the Frankfurt School essentially does is draw on both Marx and Freud in the 1930s to create this theory called Critical Theory. The term is ingenious because you’re tempted to ask, "What is the theory?" The theory is to criticize. The theory is that the way to bring down Western culture and the capitalist order is not to lay down an alternative. They explicitly refuse to do that. They say it can’t be done, that we can’t imagine what a free society would look like (their definition of a free society). As long as we’re living under repression – the repression of a capitalistic economic order which creates (in their theory) the Freudian condition, the conditions that Freud describes in individuals of repression – we can’t even imagine it. What Critical Theory is about is simply criticizing. It calls for the most destructive criticism possible, in every possible way, designed to bring the current order down. And, of course, when we hear from the feminists that the whole of society is just out to get women and so on, that kind of criticism is a derivative of Critical Theory. It is all coming from the 1930s, not the 1960s.

Other key members who join up around this time are Theodore Adorno, and, most importantly, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse. Fromm and Marcuse introduce an element which is central to Political Correctness, and that’s the sexual element. And particularly Marcuse, who in his own writings calls for a society of "polymorphous perversity," that is his definition of the future of the world that they want to create. Marcuse in particular by the 1930s is writing some very extreme stuff on the need for sexual liberation, but this runs through the whole Institute. So do most of the themes we see in Political Correctness, again in the early 30s. In Fromm’s view, masculinity and femininity were not reflections of ‘essential’ sexual differences, as the Romantics had thought. They were derived instead from differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined." Sex is a construct; sexual differences are a construct.

Another example is the emphasis we now see on environmentalism. "Materialism as far back as Hobbes had led to a manipulative dominating attitude toward nature." That was Horkhemier writing in 1933 in Materialismus und Moral. "The theme of man’s domination of nature," according to Jay, " was to become a central concern of the Frankfurt School in subsequent years." "Horkheimer’s antagonism to the fetishization of labor, (here’s were they’re obviously departing from Marxist orthodoxy) expressed another dimension of his materialism, the demand for human, sensual happiness." In one of his most trenchant essays, Egoism and the Movement for Emancipation, written in 1936, Horkeimer "discussed the hostility to personal gratification inherent in bourgeois culture." And he specifically referred to the Marquis de Sade, favorably, for his "protest…against asceticism in the name of a higher morality."

How does all of this stuff flood in here? How does it flood into our universities, and indeed into our lives today? The members of the Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish. In 1933 the Nazis came to power in Germany, and not surprisingly they shut down the Institute for Social Research. And its members fled. They fled to New York City, and the Institute was reestablished there in 1933 with help from Columbia University. And the members of the Institute, gradually through the 1930s, though many of them remained writing in German, shift their focus from Critical Theory about German society, destructive criticism about every aspect of that society, to Critical Theory directed toward American society. There is another very important transition when the war comes. Some of them go to work for the government, including Herbert Marcuse, who became a key figure in the OSS (the predecessor to the CIA), and some, including Horkheimer and Adorno, move to Hollywood.

These origins of Political Correctness would probably not mean too much to us today except for two subsequent events. The first was the student rebellion in the mid-1960s, which was driven largely by resistance to the draft and the Vietnam War. But the student rebels needed theory of some sort. They couldn’t just get out there and say, "Hell no we won’t go," they had to have some theoretical explanation behind it. Very few of them were interested in wading through Das Kapital. Classical, economic Marxism is not light, and most of the radicals of the 60s were not deep. Fortunately for them, and unfortunately for our country today, and not just in the university, Herbert Marcuse remained in America when the Frankfurt School relocated back to Frankfurt after the war. And whereas Mr. Adorno in Germany is appalled by the student rebellion when it breaks out there – when the student rebels come into Adorno’s classroom, he calls the police and has them arrested – Herbert Marcuse, who remained here, saw the 60s student rebellion as the great chance. He saw the opportunity to take the work of the Frankfurt School and make it the theory of the New Left in the United States.

One of Marcuse’s books was the key book. It virtually became the bible of the SDS and the student rebels of the 60s. That book was Eros and Civilization. Marcuse argues that under a capitalistic order (he downplays the Marxism very strongly here, it is subtitled, A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, but the framework is Marxist), repression is the essence of that order and that gives us the person Freud describes – the person with all the hang-ups, the neuroses, because his sexual instincts are repressed. We can envision a future, if we can only destroy this existing oppressive order, in which we liberate eros, we liberate libido, in which we have a world of "polymorphous perversity," in which you can "do you own thing." And by the way, in that world there will no longer be work, only play. What a wonderful message for the radicals of the mid-60s! They’re students, they’re baby-boomers, and they’ve grown up never having to worry about anything except eventually having to get a job. And here is a guy writing in a way they can easily follow. He doesn’t require them to read a lot of heavy Marxism and tells them everything they want to hear which is essentially, "Do your own thing," "If it feels good do it," and "You never have to go to work." By the way, Marcuse is also the man who creates the phrase, "Make love, not war." Coming back to the situation people face on campus, Marcuse defines "liberating tolerance" as intolerance for anything coming from the Right and tolerance for anything coming from the Left. Marcuse joined the Frankfurt School, in 1932 (if I remember right). So, all of this goes back to the 1930s.

In conclusion, America today is in the throws of the greatest and direst transformation in its history. We are becoming an ideological state, a country with an official state ideology enforced by the power of the state. In "hate crimes" we now have people serving jail sentences for political thoughts. And the Congress is now moving to expand that category ever further. Affirmative action is part of it. The terror against anyone who dissents from Political Correctness on campus is part of it. It’s exactly what we have seen happen in Russia, in Germany, in Italy, in China, and now it’s coming here. And we don’t recognize it because we call it Political Correctness and laugh it off. My message today is that it’s not funny, it’s here, it’s growing and it will eventually destroy, as it seeks to destroy, everything that we have ever defined as our freedom and our culture.

473 posted on 04/11/2006 7:03:54 PM PDT by cva66snipe (If it was wrong for Clinton why do some support it for Bush? Party over nation destroys the nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
He hoped for any traitors to be hung...and if they are traitors, they should be.

That determination has not been made for specific individuals and he did not make it. He simply indicated that he hoped that traitors to this country would meet such a fate.

If people are traitors and abett an invasion of this country that leads to horrible civil war...then at some point a commission, a tribunal, would determine if they were traitors or not. If they were, that would be a just sentence.

474 posted on 04/11/2006 7:10:20 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; Jeff Head

bump!


475 posted on 04/11/2006 7:15:31 PM PDT by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Bump


476 posted on 04/11/2006 7:16:50 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 474 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
The President never called them (minuteman) vigilantes.

You are correct.

Notice how the people who disagreed with what you said get their information from the MSM. Notice how it's all removed from context. Notice how they don't cite the full transcript.

Oh, well. Maybe things changed down thread. I only read the first 50 posts.

477 posted on 04/11/2006 7:17:10 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: IrishMike
If Minutemen Are Vigilantes, What Do You Call 500,000 Illegal Aliens Demanding Rights?

Mobocracy.

478 posted on 04/11/2006 7:18:09 PM PDT by Prince Charles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IrishMike
What Do You Call 500,000 Illegal Aliens Demanding Rights?

A Socialist insurrection!

479 posted on 04/11/2006 7:21:30 PM PDT by higgmeister (In the Shadow of The Big Chicken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
When it's over, I hope that thousands of traitor Quislings, (who set us up for civil war out of their greed for illegal alien wages), are hung from trees.

Travis, I've see you all too often call posters on this forum Quislings. Now you want them hung from trees?

I agree with you that illegal immigration is a big problem.

I think your last comment was out of line.

480 posted on 04/11/2006 7:24:04 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 701-711 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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