Posted on 01/14/2003 8:01:56 AM PST by JackelopeBreeder
Oh, so you claim that you are a lawyer? Bull spit. A lawyer knows he has to prove his arguments and all you've done is post your claims and backed them up with nothing. As a lawyer...hehe...I'm sure that you know the definition of libel and slander. Tell me how those terms do not apply to what you've done here so far in your baseless attacks against Glenn Spencer of American Patrol and Chris Simcox of Civil Border Defense.
If, in Arizona, where these self-appointed buttinsky militia groups thrive, is so terribly worked up over these great threats to "our" civilization, perhaps you can explain McCain and your new governor. Were they elected by phantom ballots or were you guys so busy playing nighttime warrior that you don't bother electing guys like Salmon as governor? America wants to know, especially if Napolitano runs for Senate against, say, John Kyl.
Hey now, there's no need to go on insulting perfectly good vegetables by comparing them to this worthless, cheese eating, sand pounding, demonrat politico!
That said, this guy is more clueless than LIEberman and daschle.
It's RACISM that people don't want ILLEGALS crossing through their property... gimme a break.
Of course his ties with Salinas de Gortari who stole billions of dollars from the Mexican people and then exiled to Cuba and then Ireland should make them wonder. Salinas with the murdered brother-in-law ---and he's not exactly loved by the people of Mexico who openly mock him. Salinas should have never passed background checks to be in the same room with an American president.
Well, Mister make-believe lawyer, if you knew the law you would know that these groups are not breaking the law. You have demonstrated an immense level of sheer ignorance about these groups, who they are, and how they operate. You seem to believe the libelous attack articles printed in the liberal lapdog media that these guys are rednecks forming their own militia and running around on the border with high-powered rifles hunting down "Pedros" (as you called them) for sport.
I know these guys. I've seen how they operate. That's not what they're doing.
There is no law the prevents any group - birdwatchers, hikers, rock hunters, or a group calling themselves "civil Homeland Defense" - from walking around in the border area carrying fully licensed and properly handled personal firearms for their protection. There is no law preventing any group - naturists, sightseers, nature photographers, or a group calling themselves "American Border Patrol" - from walking around in the border area using various photographic and wireless video equipment to record what they see. And if any of these groups happens to see suspected border intruders the law even states that they should report the crime to the appropriate authorities - which in this case is the U.S. Border Patrol.
Know the law, Mister make-believe lawyer, and maybe you'll stop spewing your nonsense.
That was an issue I had with Spencer, but after a lot of wrangling here on FR, that ended up being a primary point of agreement - that Spencer should probably be more careful with whom he associates, but otherwise none of the charges made by the SPLC could stick to him, and some were outright fabrications that the SPLC, when challenged, refused to substantiate.
Ah, the simplicity of it - you are absolutely dead on accurate! ALSO, it's not vigilante justice, it's militia taking up the slack and doing the job the Federal governement has failed to do.
Clearly, Rep. Grijalva (D-AZ) has a personal problem, that is, being liberal. "Liberal," by definition, means bigoted, mean spirited, etc. (you know, all those things they always call thinking Americans when we dare to disagree with them - their position is intellectually vacuous, so they resort to name-calling, not realizing that they are actually characterizing themselves)! People like Rep. Grijalva (D-AZ) cannot stand the light of truth!
Someone needs to tell this pathetic loser that "illegal," as in "illegal entry" (to the US), must be dealt with, and if not the gov't then the militia (NOT vigilantes) WILL take care of the problem! That's the AMERICAN WAY, and if illegal entrants can't deal with it, maybe they ought to stay home!
Stay vigilent, stay armed, and never trust a muslim or a liberal (both are terrorists, they differ only in technique and weaponry).
Come close and listen.
Most of our cities are overcrowded, our schools are overcrowded, our expressways and freeways are bumber to bumber, our social services are being choked off, our GD jails are full of illegals, we have hundreds of thousands of American citizens out of work, our land fills are full, our energy resources are limited, there are only so many labor jobs left..
HELLO THERE! We don't need millions more people here, regardless of what the hell they look like.
HELLO? ANYONE HOME?
LOL!
You want to live on the coast. That is the coast that you describe. I moved inland to America from the East Coast.
Huh? The article of this story is about land locked Arizona, and many down there that are sick and tired of this titanic lawlessness. And yes I do live near the coast. So what are you suggesting? I move to Illinois if I don't like this titanic invasion? Horse crap.
They just opened up a Mexican consulate in downtown Indianapolis. LOL! The coast my butt. This attack on our borders is nationwide, from California to Florida, to New York, to Tennessee, to Oregon, to Colorado, to Ohio, to Illinois, to Utah, etc etc etc.........
America is largely empty. It is not by any means overcrowded
Huh? Go to *any* major city in America. It's the same in every damn city....You are fooling no one.....
You too complain about "illegals" accessing welfare schemes but I don't notice you taking the genuinely conservative and perfectly legal approach of abolishing all welfare. Instead, you are suggesting that, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments notwithstanding, we should simply deny welfare benefits to "persons" among us while maintaining them for ourselves. Your argument is with the authors of the Bill of Rights and with the Civil War era Congresses and the legislatures of both eras and not with me.
All of it sinks in but you are wrong and you advocate lawbreaking! Any applicable part of the constitution trumps any statute or any referendum or any executive order. Don't you agree?
You are wrong. Does that sink in?
If that ain't irony, I don't know what is. We're in favor of stopping illegal immigration and we're advocating lawbreaking.
Are there any other logical concepts that you wish to attempt to destroy today, or is your work done here?
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.