Posted on 05/26/2007 7:03:57 AM PDT by Valin
Perhaps I am wrong. I have been many times, and I am always ready to admit it upon hearing a better argument or facts previously unknown to me.
I do not see how it could possibly be a wise thing to grant probationary status to the tens of thousands --at least-- of illegal immigrants in the country who hail from countries with long standing terrorist networks and demonstrated jihadist-friendly populations. This seems to me to be the same thing as welcoming into our country tens of thousands of German, Italian and Japanese nationals in 1944 provided their fingerprints didn't show up in any database.
Secretary Chertoff told me I was wrong. He argued that providing probationary status to every illegal who turns in their paperwork would be useful in the effort to find the terrorists hidden in our own country. If I understand him correctly, he believes that the covert terrorists ill be afraid to turn in the paperwork and will thus be left much more exposed as everyone else will have their probationary documents.
I would like to hear from counterintelligence professionals this weekend on this specific point. Please provide me your analysis at hugh@hughhewitt.com. There are counterintelligence professionals throughout the federal, state and local governments, in foreign governments, in academia, and in the think tanks. Some are retired, some are junior and some are senior. I'd really like to hear your answers.
A lot of non-professionals will no doubt send me their opinions as well, but I am interested primarily in the opinions of those who are spending their days trying to prevent another major attack on our soil. Please give me an idea of your background, and if I can use your name and publish your e-mail, please let me know that too. I will not publish any e-mail that doesn't explicitly give me permission to do so. I will publish the opinions of those who agree with Secretary Chertoff.
After ten days of studying this bill and interviewing key participants in the debate, this seems to me to be the single greatest flaw in the bill: that it will legitimize, immunize from some scrutinies, invest with certain rights, and authorize the employment and travel (domestic and foreign) of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers in the country illegally.
Tell me why I am wrong.
I will post the e-mails (if any) here throughout the weekend, as well as links to any posts treating the same subject if you tip me to them as well. Thanks in advance
Of course you are right. This is not about right and wrong, it’s about cheap labor and new Democrat Party voters. Without a influx of several million new poor citizens the Democrat Party will be out of business.
On the other hand the country club GOP want the cheap labor. The fact that it revitalizes the Democrat Party doesn’t matter as much to them.
Take the money and run.
Talk about unintended consequences...
Unintended Consequences..”it not just a good idea....it’s the law.
Ok, which player has 666 on his/her head? Or do they all?
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back706.html
Here’s another theory and an interesting read. I got this link from another Freep thread.
Term Limits.
Thanks for the link. Interesting article.
I do not go a day without reviewing it. Clear, concise, succinct and always professional. No wasted time at this site. The contributors are all currently professionally employed in the very specific field of Counter Terrorism and are acknowledged experts in the field.
Old “Brick Agents” like myself are no longer privy to current classified data and as a result our opinions are flawed for the information and purpose Mr Hewitt seeks.
Now, more than ever.
Here are two which struck me as particularly poignant...
Virginia Patriot writes: Friday, May, 25, 2007 10:55 PM(and the second one)Dear Mr. President and Senators
This "Comprehensive Sellout of the American Citizen" will have consequences you have not even considered, not that you care.
I have been an active civic minded citizen for 47 years. Flying my flag on Flag day, July Fourth, Veterans Day, Memorial Day, etc. Standing for the national anthem. Serving on juries when requested. Serving on community boards. Voting in every election.
Our Constitutional Republic rests on the premise of consent of the citizens. If you succeed in jamming this amnesty down the throats of the American citizens you will have broken the contract. I will henceforth consider myself just another permanent resident. All of my positive citizenship activities will stop. I will remove the U.S. flags from my home and vehicles. I will ignore whatever laws get in the way of my "having a better life", just like the illegal aliens. I will dodge jury duty. Shade on my taxes any time I can. No more Good Samaritan acts. No more litter patrols. No more volunteering. No more charitable donations. No more USO donations. My son will not serve in your Armed Forces. I will only be looking out for myself, just like the cheap labor importers and hispandering vote whores. God help the U.S.A.
Brightwinger writes: Friday, May, 25, 2007 11:14 PM
Hobson Choice would be better than this
Chertoff would grant legal status to, oh I don't know, maybe 10 or 20 or 30 million illegal aliens because that will enable us to spot the 500 or 5,000 AlQaeda terrorists??
And they'll stand out because their paperwork will not be up to snuff, or ALL 500 to 5,000 terrorists will get stopped for speeding or somethin' and we'll nail 'em that way! Yeah, that could happen. Not!
Well, at least the well-to-do will be able to pinch pennies getting their hedges trimmed before the nukes go off. That's a fair trade.
At the very best, if Chertoff were right, the worst that happens is a permanent underclass of 30 million poorly educated foreigners (and their 100 million offspring) who have little interest in, or awareness of, our glorious and miraculous Constitution and all that goes with it.
So we either get nuked or slump into 3rd world lawless proclivities, or both.
THAT sounds like a win-win, doesn't it?
It sure does...
Term limits would be nice, but there’s no way congress critters are going to vote that in. Limits to their acquisition of power and money aren’t what they’d vote for.
“Term limits would be nice, but there’s no way congress critters are going to vote that in. Limits to their acquisition of power and money aren’t what they’d vote for.”
That’s right. And that is why more then ever we need to focus on it. Force every single politician to agree to it or out they go come election time.
They all talk about litmus tests. It is time for Americans to have their own litmus test. Leftwing, Rightwing, it is irrelevant. two terms and you are out. If you don’t support it, don’t even bother running. If you lie to us, then you will be recalled.
Bttt!
bttt
Good to see you back
I noticed a few of the banned have recently been unbanned, so I just did a test bttt on my own. Lo and behold, my posting rights have been restored, it appears.
You’re back
Looking forward to seeing more of your replies and posts
Da Madman
The real difficulty with the immigration initiative is that there is absolutely no intention on the part of its proponents to see even the limited penalties in it enforced. This isn't even amnesty, it's abdication. Mass deportation was never on the table - believe me, the stories about refugee camps along the lines of the Palestinians' are already written and waiting at Reuters, AP, and CNN. Bush has never been of any use on this issue and there are precious few individuals in Congress who are brave enough to weather the media storm that will be coming their way.
I am not personally optimistic. Those of us - myself included - who were laughing at the French for failing to face the situation aren't laughing anymore.
What a great Memorial Day!
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.