Posted on 07/23/2007 10:48:39 AM PDT by AuntB
There is only one person who has the power actually to do something about the egregious state of our immigration law enforcement and lack of border controls. As FSM Contributing Editor Peter Gadiel charges, that person is the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
Insecure Borders: Let’s Give Blame Where Blame Is Due
By Peter Gadiel
For five years, members of 9/11 Families for a Secure America have lobbied in Washington and in many state capitols for immigration law enforcement and secure borders. The opponents of our goals are many throughout Congress and elsewhere, but during this period the most powerful of them has been that individual with the sole authority to require the federal government to enforce these laws and who, by his refusal to do so, has made that government a co-conspirator in undermining the security of this Nation. That person is of course, George Bush.
As chief of the Executive Branch he has under the Constitution not only the sole power but the duty to enforce the laws of our country, a duty he refuses to honor. He thumbs his nose at the obligations imposed on him by the Constitution, which, in the name of the God he claims to worship, he has sworn to uphold. Since the people of the United States have no recourse through the court system to make him enforce the law, he alone has the power to decide that illegal aliens will be permitted to prey on Americans, and he has made that decision.
The harm that George Bush has done to this country is seen by many but felt most severely by those who have been the victims of crimes committed by illegal alien criminals, many of whom, after all, are in the United States due to Bush’s refusal to enforce federal laws already on the books.
The president’s efforts to undermine the collective security of the Nation and the individual security of citizens have caused many to ask: “Why does Bush allow illegal aliens, every one a law breaker, to enter the United States freely? Why does he refuse to enforce existing law and to allow terrorists, violent felons and drug smugglers full access to their intended American victims? Why does he continuously ignore the Constitution and the oath he swore to uphold it? Why doesn’t he care about Americans suffering as a result of depressed wages and working conditions, or about the Americans who have been the victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens?”
Each time I speak with a person whose family has been shattered by the violent act of an illegal alien, an illegal who almost invariably has had numerous previous encounters with the law, I wonder anew what kind of man it is who occupies the White House and tolerates, and by that tolerance encourages, these crimes. What kind of man is this who lifts not a finger to acknowledge his role in these acts of violence and refuses to take action to prevent future crimes?
I have been meeting such victims and families for almost six years. As time passes I’ve grown more disturbed by what the Bush malfeasance indicates about his character. In part this is so because I meet ever more victims and see the list of victims grow longer. But there is another list that is also growing and this too affects my view of the man: the number of elected officials I have spoken with who, because of their positions in the government, have had one-on-one conversations with the president and who insist he is fully aware of the crimes inflicted by his illegal alien friends. There was a time when I gave Mr. Bush the benefit of the doubt; I believed he was insulated from the facts…that he didn’t know what was happening in the states. But now I grasp the truth: He does know. He doesn’t care: What kind of man must this be?
Shortly after September 11, I began encountering 9/11 family members who were convinced that George Bush had had advance knowledge of this conspiracy and that for his own purposes he refused to interfere. Vehemently, I disagreed for two reasons. First, I did not believe that George Bush would intentionally allow thousands of Americans to die. Second, I believed that the incompetence of our government was so highly perfected that it would be impossible to keep secret for very long the fact that officials had advance knowledge of such a catastrophic event.
Today, I have had over five years’ experience in meeting with bureaucrats and members of Congress. I’ve read Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports; transcripts of Congressional Committee hearings and testimony; the 9/11 Commission Report and its associated documents; reports produced by private think tanks and individual experts on crime, immigration and national security. These have confirmed my judgment that our government is staffed by so many individuals who are incompetent or corrupt that it is insane to believe that a secret such as advance knowledge of 9/11 could remain a secret six years after the event. (The 9/11 Commission, in an exquisite formulation of words succeeded in describing and excusing the pervasive incompetence and negligence of federal officials with the phrase “a failure of imagination.”)
But as to George Bush (and many other elected officials and bureaucrats) I have come to realize my original appraisal was wrong. His actions since 9/11 have, for me, established that he lacks concern for the lives of individual Americans. Three thousand people died on 9/11, but since that day far more than three thousand have been killed, individually or in small groups, by illegal aliens. And still he refuses to enforce the laws that would end the killing. Thousands of Americans have been killed in intentional murders, or as ‘by-products’ of robberies, rapes, beatings or auto accidents caused by drunken illegals driving automobiles. Thousands more lives have not been ended but have nevertheless been shattered by acts of violence short of murder, such as child molestation. (The Bush Administration makes a proper accounting of these crimes impossible by virtue of its refusal to require local police to inquire into the illegal status of those arrested.)
That George Bush’s refusal to enforce the laws of this Nation has been the direct cause of these Americans’ death and suffering is simply beyond dispute. He and the Tony Snows and Michael Chertoffs he hires can protest all they want about the “impossibility” of securing our borders. He and they can pretend to be merely incompetent for only so long before Americans wake up and realize they’re not just incompetent, they are misrepresenting the truth.
To the many who wonder why Bush is doing what he’s doing, I offer some advice. For a long time I wondered too. Finally, I realized the futility of spending another moment on this imponderable. The reason why doesn’t matter. The fact that it is so is all that matters. But for those who need to have an answer as to the ‘why’ of the Bush actions I suggest you look at the motives of others who have betrayed our country: ideology, revenge, greed.
One or more of these pretexts must be what Bush employs in his own mind to justify his tolerance of violence and death. In that sense he is undoubtedly conventional, typical of his breed. But in one respect Mr. Bush has carved out a place that is unique among corrupt politicians. In his obsession to pass his amnesty, a major tool in the permanent elimination of our borders, he offered what amounted to a bribe, in public, to members of the US Senate, telling them that if they would vote for his amnesty bill he would provide 4.5 billion dollars to build the border fence that a 2005 federal law he signed required to be built. In those two years Mr. Bush has managed to get only a few miles of that fence built, but suddenly he saw that enforcement of this federal law could be used as a payoff to be offered to Senators to vote for his amnesty. Presto, he promises to come up with four and a half billion to build it.
Of course Mr. Bush is far from the first politician to engage in illegal or immoral behavior. But it is customary for politicians to try and keep their corruption a secret. For example, Boss Tweed of New York; Sen. Tom Dodd (father of the current Sen. Dodd) of Connecticut, Ted Kennedy. These bribe takers, philanderers, drunk drivers and lady killers at least tried to keep their crimes hidden from the public. As reprehensible as they were or are, they at least comprehended that their actions deviated from the norm and felt sufficient concern for public opinion that they didn’t want their crimes exposed. Mr. Bush appears to be unique in this regard, for either he lacks awareness that his behavior is wrong, or his contempt for the people of the United States is so absolute that he is doesn’t care that we see him offering bribes.
Naturally, when corrupt politicians are discussed Bill and Hillary Clinton cannot be ignored: Whitewater; cattle futures; Travelgate; Vince Foster; pardons for Susan McDougal, Puerto Rican terrorists, and Marc Rich; questioning the meaning of the word “is.” We also cannot forget that for eight years prior to September 11, while Moslem terrorists escalated their attacks against the United States these co-Presidents successfully schemed to avoid dealing with terrorism by sweeping it under the rug for their successor. These are the two who paved the way for September 11 by their refusal to respond with sufficient force to the numerous terrorist acts that occurred during their presidency: the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the embassy bombings, the Mogadishu atrocities, the bombing of the USS Cole, etc. By their inaction they encouraged and permitted the growth of the power of binLadin. Ultimately, the greatest responsibility for September 11 lies not with Bush but with the Clintons.
Yet it is George Bush who has been in office for six years after the murders of 3000 on 9/11. It is he who has been president since then as crimes by illegals have killed thousands more. It is possible to excuse the inaction of the Clintons as opportunistic passing of the buck to their successor in the White House. But George Bush cannot claim that excuse. The resulting damage was obvious for all to see. He cannot claim ignorance. He cannot avoid his guilt. Yet, he marches on, completely dismissing the blood that is spilled and the pain that results from his refusal to act.
It is useless to speculate about “why” he permits these crimes. So to those who continue to wonder, my advice is: don’t waste another moment of thought on the matter. Use your energy to contact your members of Congress, your governor, state legislators. Then contact them again, and then again. Educate your friends and enlist them in the cause of immigration reform.
Elected officials do respond to pressure from constituents. You have power, but only if you use it by communicating repeatedly with them. The richly funded campaigns of LaRaza, Chamber of Commerce, Ford Foundation, bankers, lawyers, et al., to open our borders succeed precisely because they make themselves heard while others remain silent. Your silence in the face of their campaigns is as powerful an ally of the open borders lobby as the open borders lobbyists themselves. So, make yourselves heard. You have a voice. Use it.
# #
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Peter Gadiel is the president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America. He is a lifelong Republican who voted for George Bush in 2000.
It was official policy LONG before Bush took office.
Tell that to the thousands of American victims of illegal alien drunk driving, murder, rape, robbery, burglary, shootings, drug smuggling, fraud, etc over the past 6 years.
Those things occurred before Bush took office as well. If you want to fault Bush on this issue, then you must also fault Reagan and Bush Sr. (Reagan especially
I have a 2 questions for you.
1. So if you took over a large corporation as a CEO, that was previously hiring illegal aliens, and you continued that policy, of knowingly recruiting illegals, are you directly at fault here and responsible for the current situation?
2. If Reagan were alive today and was president, given our *current* situation of complete out of control, lawless borders, do you think Reagan would have failed to secure our borders during wartime, and pushed for amnesty even though the huge majority of Americans are totally against it?
W is our current Presidente!
You're the one who quoted Reagan ("It's okay if you come here illegally. We'll just grant you amnesty.")
Sorry, but I won't speculate on what you say he said. I asked for his quote, but since you seem disinclined to provide it, I'll follow your lead.
Please direct me to that in the links you provided. The passage you posted doesn't say anyone was told to 'stand down.' Even if in one particular area, they were told to 'stand down' by some official, we know that sweeps have been occurring since these articles were published in various places around the country, so there's been no general order to stop such sweeps from President Bush.
I already did. There's no point in providing any more because you've already proven you don't read what's written there.
If the sweeps are continuing as you assert, then why do you say Bush deserves part of the blame? What's he done wrong?
LOL Did you already forget what we are talking about on this thread? Insecure borders.
No, I haven't forgotten. I would like to know what you think Bush done wrong with the borders? I asked twice in the previous post, but apparently you forgot, so I'll ask again.
You write that interior enforcement (sweeps) is being done. Why do you say that Bush shares the blame with previous Presidents for our current immigration situation?
What exactly has he done wrong with regards to immigration and border enforcement?
Pay him no mind - ‘conservatives’ like that would sooner try and drag Reagan’s name through the mud than point the finger at the figurehead of the party apparatus thatfeeds them milk bones.
(Can't help but think that sounds like the libs.)
Reagan probably also didn't see the dire consequences of his granting of amnesty.
LOL That isn't what I asked you. I asked you what message granting amnesty to illegals sends. You still haven't answered.
I already did.
Ah, so since the passage you posted, nor the articles in the links you provided say that Bush ordered anyone to stand down, you've apparently backed off that claim.
If the sweeps are continuing as you assert, then why do you say Bush deserves part of the blame? What's he done wrong?
Like I assert? If you don't know that sweeps are continuing, you are apparently being very selective in what you remember from reading FR threads as well as the news you hear/read.
I would think from other posts I've made on this thread, you would be able to get the answer to your question, but since you don't seem able to do so, here's the answer (again). Like former Presidents, he hasn't sealed our borders nor sent back every single illegal the INS or other government entities get their hands on. Therefore, as I have said repeatedly, he shares the blame for the immigration mess.
I find it really odd that you have to ask that question, since it is you that jumped on my statement that other Presidents share the blame with Bush. Obviously, you felt he should be blamed for it all or you wouldn't have jumped all over my statement. Therefore, you must have SOME idea what he's done or failed to do.
I suspect your asking of the same question to which you know the answer over and over is an attempt on your part to avoid acknowledging the truth - that former Presidents share the blame for the mess we are in.
I'll accept your failure to answer my question on what message Reagan's amnesty sent as well as your asking the same question over and over (4 times in one post!) as an admission that my original assertion was correct.
Have a nice day.
I would agree we have a lot more illegals than we did. I still say that Reagan's amnesty was an invitation for illegals to enter our country. I do agree that Bush has done nothing to stem the tide, and is in fact friendly to illegals.
Nevertheless, he can't be blamed for the whole mess.
You share the blame with former CEOs that set and followed the policy.
If Reagan were alive today and was president, given our *current* situation of complete out of control, lawless borders, do you think Reagan would have failed to secure our borders during wartime, and pushed for amnesty even though the huge majority of Americans are totally against it?
Yes. Americans were against amnesty when it was granted under Reagan, but he did it anyway. I'm quite sure he thought it was the right thing to do, of course, but he was wrong. Also, I do think Reagan would fail to secure our borders. He failed to secure them against the enemies we had at that time (which, by the way, included Islamicists as well as the USSR). Again, I'm sure he thought he was doing the right thing, but he was wrong.
That is all that need be said IMHO! The author nailed it!
No, you paraphrased what you wanted me to believe Reagan said instead of posting a direct quote as I asked.
You're the one who asserted this 'mess' started with Reagan's amnesty yet you have failed to provide any evidence to support your assertion.
Like I assert? If you don't know that sweeps are continuing, you are apparently being very selective in what you remember from reading FR threads as well as the news you hear/read.
If sweeps are continuing, then what is Bush done wrong? Why do you say he should he share blame with previous Presidents?
Like former Presidents, he hasn't sealed our borders nor sent back every single illegal the INS or other government entities get their hands on. Therefore, as I have said repeatedly, he shares the blame for the immigration mess.
I wish you'd make up your mind. In your previous paragraph you said that Bush was conducting interior enforcement, which means rounding up and deporting any illegals found. In this paragraph you claim Bush isn't conducting interior enforcement because he isn't sending back every single illegal the INS or other government entity get their hands on.
So, which is it? Either he's conducting interior enforcement or he isn't. He can't be doing both.
Obviously, you felt he should be blamed for it all or you wouldn't have jumped all over my statement.
You believe he deserves some of the blame, yet when I press you for details about what he's done, all you do is provide contradictory statements, like the two paragraphs above.
...Therefore, you must have SOME idea what he's done or failed to do.
As I have repeatedly detailed, Bush's actions are much worse than his predecessors. (Partnership for Prosperity? New Alliance Task Force? Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico? Drop in employer sanctions?)
You're the one who can't seem to make up your mind about what Bush has done or not done.
I'll accept your failure to answer my question on what message Reagan's amnesty sent as well as your asking the same question over and over (4 times in one post!) as an admission that my original assertion was correct.
You can't even provide a quote about what Reagan said was his intended purpose for the IRCA of 1986.
Have a nice day.
And we were just starting to have fun, too.
So much stupidity in one small post. You deserve an award.
1. So if you took over a large corporation as a CEO, that was previously hiring illegal aliens, and you continued that policy, of knowingly recruiting illegals, are you directly at fault here and responsible for the current situation?
You share the blame with former CEOs that set and followed the policy.
What kind of answer is this? Want to give it another shot without all the double talk?
2. If Reagan were alive today and was president, given our *current* situation of complete out of control, lawless borders, do you think Reagan would have failed to secure our borders during wartime, and pushed for amnesty even though the huge majority of Americans are totally against it?
Yes.
You know, I just knew your responses would be less than truthful and genuine to the above questions. You response to #1 was very revealing, and basically proves what I suspected and anticipated your responses to be.
In addition, I would suggest others avoid you here, as it's clear your motives and responses are less than genuine and truthful.
It's what I have been saying all along. When someone 'in charge' continues a policy that has been a policy for decades, he shares the blame for the current situation, but the blame is not all his. Sorry you don't like the answer, but there it is.
You know, I just knew your responses would be less than truthful and genuine to the above questions responses that I didn't like because I want to blame Bush for everything
There, fixed it so that it shows your genuine and true feelings.
Can't help but think what a liberal reaction that is.
Good heavens, you are thick.
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.