Monday, July 30, 2007
This piece of artwork accompanied a pretty good SFGate article asking the question "Do we care about animals more than people?" I think in this case the answer is a resounding 'YES!'
Friday, July 27, 2007
443 registered in state
Over 100 in the Tenderloin alone
Over a dozen on 6th Street between Market and Mission
Most of them are on the registry for "lewd acts on a minor under 14," but also includes rapists and some other really shitty people. Check it out!
Based on the first sentence in Section 1, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is…..a citizen of the United States.” In the book titled “Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation,” Page 1672, Par. 3, line, 5, states, “The requirement that a person be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” however, excludes its application to children born of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state, children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation,” or children of members of Indian tribes subject to tribal law.”
Section 5: Page 2036, Paragraph 1 of the Library of Congress’ Law Library book entitled as referenced above: “The Congress shall have the Power to enforce by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” It is CLEAR, the 14th Amendment and the language used explicitly excluded “aliens” and their offspring, not legally within the United States - from citizenship. Our founding fathers did not have crystal ball to predict that 30 million illegal aliens from Mexico, China, Ireland and every other country would be using the birth of a child to violate the laws of the United States for sympathy and as a means to remain in the USA - and by intent and design - change the face of our nation by strong arming the American people in the name of family and child.
There can be no argument that Illegal Aliens fall in the ”alien” category which is specified in the documents pertaining to the 14th amendment - held in trust for the American people in the Library of Congress in our Nation’s Capital. The fact that our forefathers did not explicitly state that the Infants of Illegal Alien Female’s were included in this sentence, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE NOT EXCLUDED.
Aliens, NOT LEGALLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as opposed to those who are - such as a Resident Aliens - are one in the same, regardless of whether it be for “hostile occupation” or for “designed repopulation” for hostile purposes. The bottom line is, Alien means Alien - and all Aliens not legally present in the United States - to include ILLEGAL ALIENS and the children born of Illegal Alien parents - are clearly EXCLUDED for Citizenship and Residency in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
I swear, we could make some headway on this if only someone in Congress would take this on. Maybe someone has, but they're probably screaming in the dark.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
I usually don't like him that much - I find him to be an elitist snob pretending to be cool - but this show really pissed me off. An entire fucking hour of gringo-bashing, race-baiting, Mexico is better than America in every way, and we would all fall apart if the borders were closed, and don't we all just suck? Fuck you.
Bourdain essentially denies that there is an illegal alien problem, and that the only "real" action on the border is little old ladies trying to smuggle their illicit bladder-control medicine. He does this - as he does everything - in his snarky, asshole way.
But of course, he has interests to protect; this was essentially an open-borders advertisement so he can keep his restaurant full of that cheap, Mexican labor.
I wonder if he and Tamar Jacoby are an item?
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
H: What's your favorite Grateful Dead show, and why? Were you there?
AC: They were all my favorites – especially the shows at Shoreline. It's a beautiful outdoor amphitheater, the Dead's home field, with California chardonnay for sale by the glass (in addition to not being a pot-smoker, I'm not much of a beer-drinker), and I often ran into my college Deadhead friends there. We'd go sailing during the day and see the band at night.
I fondly remember seeing the Dead when I was at Cornell. It was the day of the fabulous Fiji Island party on the driveway “island” of the Phi Gamma Delta House. We'd cover ourselves in purple Crisco and drink purple Kool-Aid mixed with grain alcohol and dance on the front yard. Wait – I think got the order reversed there: We'd drink purple Kool-Aid mixed with grain alcohol and then cover ourselves in purple Crisco – then the dancing. You probably had to be there to grasp how utterly fantastic this was.
Also, I saw the Dead at Sandstone Amphitheater near Kansas City one Fourth of July, and it was an incredibly patriotic experience.
That's right... when you were at Shoreline at that last round of Dead shows, that tall skinny blonde chick twirling next to you in the dirt was...
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Hot On The Tail Of The Coyote Shooting In Golden Gate Park, the Chron's C.W. Nevius Wonders When Will We Deal With The "Real" Animals...
Forget the coyotes. Do you really think your biggest concern is getting bitten by a wild animal?
Frankly, if you are in Golden Gate Park, a far greater danger is that you, or your child, or your pet, will step on a dirty hypodermic needle. Step off the paths, and you'll have plenty of chances.
On a recent weekday morning, I stepped off a path in Golden Gate Park and found -- no more than 100 feet from a McDonalds and right next to scenic Alvord Lake -- a stash of 20 or more new needles, stacked up like pickup sticks, with the orange cap still on them. And tossed on the ground around the pile were dozens of used syringes or "dirty rigs.''
Clearly what they are doing now doesn't seem to be discouraging many campers. Up on Chicken Hill, just up the slope from the busy tennis courts, an entire community was just waking up when we arrived. It wasn't as if they were hiding. A wisp of smoke still curled out of the campfire, and scattered at the top of a well-traveled path were green quart beer bottles.
"It's kind of like one big family,'' camper Valo Astonea said when he poked his head out of his sleeping bag. Among the 10 to 12 campers in the area, Astonea said, there were sometimes intravenous drug users, "but we kind of frown on that here.''
That's not good enough. Inevitably when we write a story like this, there are complaints that we are unsympathetic to the homeless. But this isn't a homeless issue.
This is about a jewel of a public park, more than 1,000 acres of some of the most beautiful terrain in any city anywhere. This isn't about social welfare policy. The foliage must be cleaned along the road sides. The camps have to be controlled week after week after week. And most of all, this can't be a photo op. It has to be a steady, long-term effort.
Nevius is right - this is NOT a homeless issue. The fact is that virtually all of these folks have other places to go. The recent homeless count confirmed what most of us suspected; that nearly a third of "our" homeless became homeless somewhere else before they came here. There is no reason for people to be sleeping in the park other than that they WANT to. It's also clear that this isn't about "living the dream" or "freedom" as it is a nice, well-situated and pretty place to shoot drugs, get drunk, let dogs scare people and basically revert to a feral state. Sadly, there are a lot of allegedly sane residents in the Haight who think there's something "noble" in this. It's not noble; it's just pathetic.
Monday, July 23, 2007
by John M. Gilonna
SAN FRANCISCO — Mark Welsh chokes up as he describes his rape last fall and the word his two assailants kept repeating.
"They kept saying 'faggot' over and over again," whispers the 51-year-old owner of a video store in the Castro district. "It went on for what seemed like forever."
Welsh came forward about the attack to publicize sexual assaults against gay men in the Castro — which he says police have downplayed.
His outrage helped spark a new anti-rape education program as well as volunteer citizen patrols in one of the nation's best-known gay neighborhoods.
But because both Welsh and another rape victim say their assailants were black, news of their attacks has heightened tensions in a community that for years has been accused of racial exclusion.
In 2005, the San Francisco Human Rights Commission ruled that a Castro bar called SF Badlands discriminated against black patrons by requiring them to present multiple forms of identification before entering.
Officials now require the bar's owner, Les Natali, to post a notice informing patrons of state anti-discrimination laws.
"It's rare," John Carr, spokesman for the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, said of the requirement. "We wanted to send a strong message that we were going to keep an eye on them."
Still, many African Americans say they're made to feel unwelcome in the Castro. "There's an unspoken language, whether you're a black man or woman, that there's no space for you here," said Lisa Williams, a local activist who is black.
"When you go to a bar, you get the feeling that the prices are being adjusted," she said. "It takes forever to get served, and the wait staff watches you like a hawk."
African Americans recently marked the two-year anniversary of the closing of the Pendulum, the only bar in the Castro that specifically attracted black gays and lesbians. Natali bought the establishment in 2005 — and closed it for renovations. It has yet to reopen.
"We continue to fight the perception blacks are not wanted or aren't a part of the gay community," said Bill Doggett, who in February founded a monthly mixer for African American men.
Some worry that the citizen patrols could lead to racial profiling and vigilantism. "When you have a bunch of white men patrolling an area that has recently expressed alleged hostility toward African Americans, one would hope they would tread lightly," said Billy Curtis, a human rights activist.
Castro Community on Patrol members say race isn't an issue. "We're about safety," said co-founder Carlton Paul. "We're here to protect what's ours."
Still, both Castro residents and police acknowledge that people have yelled slurs at blacks on neighborhood streets.
"The gay community has enough opposition from the outside," said Lisa Frazer, a San Francisco police officer who patrols the Castro.
"It saddens me to see the infighting. But the Badlands thing has not been forgotten. It cut very deep. The wound is very much still there."
Welsh has also criticized police as being slow to investigate his crime. Officers say Welsh was late reporting the attack and disposed of evidence, hampering the inquiry.
Welsh admits that after the attack, he threw away his clothes and showered. "I got in and scrubbed like you thought you were taking the skin off," he said. "It was like the movies: You think this doesn't happen. But it does."
He was embarrassed to report it, he said. "It's stupid, but I'm supposed to be butch, the tough guy, and here I am getting the crap kicked out of me," he said.
Experts say many gays do not report rapes. "Mark Welsh is a community businessman with a good relationship with police, and even he struggled," said Michael Scarce, author of the book "Male on Male Rape: The Hidden Toll of Stigma and Shame."
"Imagine what it's like for someone closeted with no relationship with police," he said. "That's one reason a majority of male survivors never seek treatment."
Scarce said gay men face the same stigma as many women: the perception that they were partly to blame for the attack. "It's the myth of the hypersexual homosexual," he said. "If someone is always having sex and wanting sex, how could he possibly not consent?"
Welsh says it took weeks for police to publicize eyewitness sketches of the suspects. "Had I been a white woman with two kids, they would be all over it," he said. "Instead, I feel like a second-class citizen because I'm gay. There's no DNA evidence, but this is still a case. I can still ID the bastards."
San Francisco police say all crimes are taken seriously. "Race, gender; they don't come into play," said Lt. Dan Leydon of the department's sex crimes unit. "A victim is a victim. In this case, with no physical evidence, no witnesses and no other leads, the case goes cold."
Last month, the city began a gay rape awareness campaign that includes public ads showing a man huddled in bed over the caption: "I thought he was a great guy … until he raped me." A recent report by Community United Against Violence, a nonprofit advocacy group, suggests that "sexual assaults against gays [have] emerged as an alarming trend."
Nine cases of gay sexual assault were reported in San Francisco in 2006, but the number for 2007 had hit 18 by June. Most were casual encounters that turned into violent assaults, but some have been street attacks by complete strangers, police say.
So far this year, only two people have reported being sexually attacked in the Castro and none of the suspects appeared to be African American, police say. Gay rights organizations estimate that about 58,000 gay men and women live in San Francisco, a city of 700,000 residents. The numbers include 4,500 African American gay men and women.
Still, in the Castro the perception persists that black males are often responsible for crime.
"There's the typical stereotyping," said Jovida Guevara-Ross, executive director of Community United Against Violence. "Young blacks are dismissed as thugs, gang members who aren't welcome in the Castro."
Members of Castro Community on Patrol insist they don't want to add to racial stereotypes. The 50 steady volunteers do not intervene in incidents they encounter but will act as witnesses and alert police, organizers say.
One night, three volunteers in orange windbreakers walked the streets in the fog, handing out security whistles and good cheer. "We're not vigilantes," said Dan Alexander, 46, who along with his partner has volunteered half a dozen times for the patrol.
Taking notes on suspicious cars, they saw a woman huddled in the darkness. "How ya'll doing?" drawled volunteer Kenny Ray King. "Everything all right?"
They offered a whistle to one man. "I need everything I can get," he said. "I'd use a gun for protection if I had one."
Welsh says he feels bad over the racial fallout in the Castro.
"These days, you're not supposed to mention race, but you know what? If the attackers were purple, I still would have come out. I didn't ask to be raped."
Wow! Maybe I've been living with my head in the "breeder" bucket, but who knew??? And can you believe the comments by the Leftist nutjobs???
Oh, and (tee hee) before you guys start laughing about the idea of "gay vigilantes," know that it was NOT uncommon in the 70's and 80's for groups of gay men to go out looking for gay bashers - to do some bashing of their own!
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Answer to the question
Editor -- Reading through the latest of the never-ending litany of pro-illegal immigrant sob stories from The Chronicle ("Report: Deportation devastating families,'' July 17): I was floored by a comment from Human Rights Watch senior researcher Alison Parker.
"How do you explain to a child that her father has been sent thousands of miles away and can never come home simply because he forged a check?," Parker said.
Am I hearing this right? "Simply because he forged a check?" This is a person who not only violated American law in breaking into the United States in the first place, but broke the law again by forging checks. And I'm supposed to feel sorry for him?
I guess we now have the answer to the oft asked question: "What part of 'illegal' don't you understand?"
Wow, I couldn't have said it any better if I had written it myself (wink, wink)!
...And here's what a couple of SFGate readers said about my (whoops! I mean 'the') letter...
Kudos to David K. for calling the Chronicle out for its lopsided bias on the illegal immigration issue. David nails it when he cites the Chronicle's "never-ending litany of pro-illegal immigrant sob stories." The Chronicle is Johnny-One-Note on this subject--- illegal immigrants are always sympathetic characters "just looking for a better life." OK, that is one side of the story. The Chronicle's error lies in refusing ever to present the OTHER side: the burdens and problems illegal immigrants create in this country. I have yet to see a balanced treatment of the topic from the Chronicle's writers and editors, it is always presented from a perspective of sympathy for these poor, downtrodden people who are nothing but a benefit to our economy and culture. I tend to be very much a political moderate, shaded a trifle more to the left than the right, but on this subject I am adamant: illegal immigration is an enormous problem that has severely damaged California and the nation.sandy5274 wrote:
We agree that the San Francisco Chronicle has beome one of the most pro illegal alien lawbreaker criminal backers and totally bias in it's coverage of anything these Illegal Aliens do and the SOB Story Leader of Bleeding Heart Liberal Newspapers and totally out of touch with reality as San Francisco Ding Dong Democrat Speaker Nutty Nancy Pelosi on Illegal Immigration! Since the vast majority of up to 80% of Americans want Illegal Aliens Deported and their Employers and Landlords Arrested and Jailed and Severely Fined! Get Real SF Chronicle Will You? Or become jsut another failing big city newspaper!
Saturday, July 21, 2007
After the hearing, both Feinstein and Cornyn expressed outrage at the injustice of this treasonous prosecution and pledged to fight hard to get President Numbnuts to commute their sentences. If that jerk can pardon Scooter Libby, he can pardon two American heroes!
Now is the time to speak out! Please send letters, faxes, or e-mails NOW to President Bush, Senator Feinstein, and Senator Cornyn demanding the release of these brave agents who are protecting us.
Read Senator Feinstein's Press Release.
Read Senator Cornyn's Press Release.
Now... get e-mailin'!
E-MAIL President Bush
E-MAIL Senator Diane Feinstein
E-MAIL Senator John Cornyn
And, while your at it, please sign the Grassfire.org petition!
Sign the Petition to Free the Border Patrol Agents!
Friday, July 20, 2007
Remarkably Sober Assessment Of California's Looming Population Nightmare Misses The Point... Deliberately?
Recently, the California Department of Finance projected that there will be some 60 million people living in the state by 2050. At present there are 36 million. The numbers in themselves are frightening enough, but what I find terrifying is the bland assumption that a two-thirds increase in population is inevitable and that the main problem will be creating the infrastructure necessary to house, feed, educate, transport and govern all those people. To me, the main problem is how to keep them from showing up in the first place.
Somehow the numbers in themselves don’t really suggest the sobering weight of this projection. To say that for every three Californians now there will be five in 2050 doesn’t capture the scale of change. If you said that for every three houses now there will be five in 2050, or for every three cars, ditto, you might be getting a little closer to the visceral feel of the thing. But when it comes to houses and cars, California is a land of loaves and fishes, always multiplying in the most unexpected ways. To live in the state is to live with unrelenting change, whether you like it or not, and it has been that way for decades.
But this population increase will mean more than filling up San Bernardino, Riverside and Kern Counties and paving the entire midsection of the state and creating impromptu day-schools and conference centers in stopped traffic. We tend to talk about humans as if they were interchangeable — as if the Californian of 1957 were somehow equivalent to the Californian of 2007. But today’s Californian consumes far more, if you consider consumption in its broadest sense. Draw pictures of those two Californians to the scale of their consumption, and the present-day resident would dwarf his ancestor.
There’s a chance that a mid-21st-century Californian will look back in horror at the enormous consumption footprint of someone living in the state right now. That sense of horror would be good news — a sign that the coming generations had taken to heart that the way we live now, even in its current dimensions, is unsustainable. The trouble, of course, is that a population projection like this one more or less takes it for granted that not much will have changed by 2050. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be 60 million people in the state.
The point of thinking about the future is to help us think about the present. This population forecast is a vivid reminder of the assumptions that make meaningful change so hard. We can’t help believing in growth. We can’t help believing that the way to create change is simply to buy different stuff, so growth doesn’t stop. And we refuse to think seriously about the number of human beings on this planet, a kind of growth that somehow seems “natural” to us. It makes no difference how little each of those 60 million Californians will consume in 2050. The number cannot be negative. It’s nearly impossible to imagine how they could meet their water needs alone.
And then there is the impact of all those people on the other species with which they might have shared the Golden State. In 2007, we remain blindly impervious to the life-claims of almost all other forms of life — to the moral stipulation that their right to life is equivalent to ours. How it will be then I do not know, but if there are indeed 60 million people living in California in 2050, there will be nothing meaningful to be said on the matter, except as a subject of nostalgia.
We like to take it for granted that we’re moving ahead in environmental consciousness. We like to hope that the curve of our environmental awareness will catch up to the curve of our economic growth and things will somehow come into balance. But faith in our progressive enlightenment seems a little misplaced to me, especially when I remember a speech that James Madison gave to his local agricultural society nearly 190 years ago.
Madison said, simply, that we have no reason to suppose that all of Earth’s resources, which support so much living diversity, can rightfully be commandeered to support mankind alone. It seems incredible to me, in 2007, that a former president could articulate such an environmentally sound principle of conscience. But it’s a principle that should move to the very center of our thinking. It should cause us to re-examine not just how we shop and what we drive and who we elect but also how our species reproduces. It should cause us to re-imagine that once and future California, which lies only 43 years away, and make sure that it isn’t barren of all but us humans.
A nice assessment, but do you notice something missing here? That's right... not even a single mention of the elephant in the room: immigration. Right now, 90% of California's population growth is driven by immigration. And the same people who claim this disaster to be inevitable (like cheap labor shill Tamar Jacoby among others) are the same people who were pushing for the Senate's amnesty disaster - in short, the very people who will profit handsomely from California's inundation.
While I appreciate the intent of this editorial, I have to wonder about the message. Completely ignoring the obvious, the article seems to be saying that this is OUR fault. It is only those who believe that this disaster is inevitable who are truly at fault.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Be prepared for a classic litany of good old fashioned Liberal self-hatred, with plenty of extreme over-generalizations of nearly everyone and everything. Here's a small taste...
Americans? We're fat, decadent and getting dumber all the time. Our life expectancy, which rose for most of the last two centuries, is stalling because so many of us are obese. While most of us know everything there is to know about Paris Hilton, we know next to nothing about history, geography, international politics or the workings of our own government.
In American culture, the Xbox reigns supreme among boys, we market thong underwear to prepubescent girls and a growing number of adults think a McMansion with fewer than one bathroom per resident is the height of privation.
Our forebears tamed the West, but today, most of us couldn't tame a paper bag. If we had to cross the country in covered wagons, we'd be dead well before we reached the Mississippi.
Now contrast "our" culture with that of recent immigrants. On all too many measures, immigrants look a whole lot better.
Immigrants exhibit no shortage of pluck. It takes guts to leave your home and everything you know — even if a green card awaits. And when it comes to illegal immigrants, just getting here takes astounding courage. Illegal immigrants endure astonishing privation and risk — just for the chance to improve their lot by doing the backbreaking work so few native-born Americans have the inclination to do. While we demand McMansions, they share cramped apartments. We're up to our ears in consumer debt; they save almost every dollar to send to their less-well-off relatives.
The younger generation of illegal immigrants is particularly impressive. Each year, thousands of unaccompanied children cross into the U.S. without their parents, many literally walking here from villages in El Salvador and Guatemala. Could our sheltered and chaperoned children manage such a trip on their own?
Guess I picked the wrong week to try to tone down my language! What a fucking bitch! Maybe your children are spoiled retards (most children of Liberals are) but they will soon know what real hardship is... thanks to people like you. People like you ARE weak - especially morally - but there is no need to project your weakness onto the rest of the country! It is precisely the people who are the OPPOSITE of your stupid quote (y'know... "we know next to nothing about history, geography, international politics or the workings of our own government") who rose up en masse, got involved, wrote their congresspeople and got the fucking amnesty stopped! If you stupid liberals had gotten off your asses and actually done something instead of letting us run roughshod all over you than maybe you would have your amnesty and the cultural suicide you so desperately want would be on its way! But you are too Goddamn LAZY to do that. Since people like you are so convinced that Democracy doesn't work (and only Socialism will - I've read your Cuba piece), you look pretty fucking ridiculous complaining when it does!
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
State's population projected to reach nearly 60 million by 2050
Monday, July 9, 2007
(07-09) 14:53 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --
If you think California is crowded now, just wait until 2050.
The Department of Finance predicted Monday that California will have 59.5 million residents when the state reaches the mid-century mark — nearly 22 million more than today.
Hispanics will make up 52 percent of the population in 2050, up from 36 percent currently. Whites, now 43 percent of the population, will drop to 26 percent, while Asians' share will grow by one percentage point to 13 percent and blacks will decline from 6 percent to 5 percent, according to the department's forecast.
Hispanics are projected to become a majority of the population by 2042.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, said the report demonstrated the state's need to improve school performance by Hispanics, build housing close to jobs, increase efforts to protect the environment and end the "politics of division."
"If we don't work now to end immigrant bashing and the politics of division, we will allow wedges to form that can pull apart a society whose sheer size along will require enormous tolerance and cooperation to function," he said in a written statement.
The report is updated every three to five years by the department's demographics unit. The most recent previous report was issued in 2004.
Here are some other conclusions in the report released Monday:
_ Los Angeles, with 13 million residents, will remain the state's most heavily populated county, but Riverside will overtake Orange and San Diego counties and become the second most heavily populated, with 4.7 million people.
_ Five Central Valley counties — Sutter, Yuba, Madera, Kern and San Joaquin — will have the biggest percentage increases in population in the first half of the century. Sutter's population will grow more than 200 percent from its current level, to 282,894.
_ Trinity County will have the highest percentage of whites in 2050 — nearly 90 percent. Imperial County will have the biggest percentage of Hispanics — 85 percent. Alameda County will have the biggest concentration of Asians — 33 percent. And the biggest percentage of blacks will be found in San Bernardino County — 13 percent.
Jesus. I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again - probably till the day I die - but I'm simply amazed at how overpopulation has simply ceased to be an issue. The writers of this are saying all of this like this is a good thing. And that fucking dickwad Fabian Nunez - can you fucking believe that motherfucker? "Surrender now, Whitey!" Fucking asshole!
I find some of these numbers to be hilarious! First off I think that the 60 million total figure is probably about right. But I think it will probably be about 70% Hispanic, 15% Asian and Arab, 10% White, and 5% Black.
The sheer numbers of non-Hispanics who flee California's coming third-world nightmare will be more than made up for by soaring birthrates, completely uncontrolled immigration and an illegal alien problem that will only grow worse and worse. The only answer to California's (and possibly the nation's) problems at this point would be a quasi-Socialist state - much like Aincient Rome right before the end. And then would come, of course, the end.So, there you have it. 35 years. if you haven't been writing your Congressional Representatives yet you had better get a fucking move on!
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Never Missing An Opportunity To Advance Its Pro-Illegal Amnesty Agenda, The SF Chronicle Pours It On This 4th Of July...
"Illegal Immigrants, Students Fast To Revive Bill" - written by illegal alien sympathizer Juliana Barbassa of AP, documents a fast by a small group of illegals to revive the DREAM Act.
The students fasting this week — some for four days, some for seven — hoped their stand, taken at a time when the nation is focused on what it means to be American, would sway legislators to give this proposal another shot.
"The Spirit Of 2007" - The Op-Ed top of the page piece which is supposed to stoke our patriotic feelings, but, of course, gets the usual pro-illegal claptrap thrown in...
No party, no ideology, has a monopoly on patriotism or a special claim on this day. Whether the issue is whether to send our troops to a foreign war or whether to accept immigrants who take great risks to work in this country, there are folks on both sides of each issue who are motivated by equally fierce loyalties to their interpretations of American values.
"In Celebration of the Fourth of July: Patriotism And Pessimism Emerge In Times Of War" - Another opinion piece, the author - a member of the World Affairs Council, a globalist group whose website has an immigration reform piece written by Michael Chertoff - hashes out the tired globalist line of "every country has a right to its sovereignty, except the USA, which is nothing more than a global petri dish."
This was one half of what the Chronicle calls its "open forum" segment, usually containing "opposing" views, often between people who want illegal amnesty duking it out with people who REALLY want illegal amnesty.
These days, times are tough for patriots. Americans are seen as arrogant and selfish around the world. Our reaction to such criticism has always been to turn inward. Anti-immigration and isolationism views dominate during times of national discontent -- as this Fourth of July.
The first anti-immigrant "red scare" began in 1917 as U.S. doughboys fought the Kaiser's soldiers and foreign anarchists exploded bombs in our cities.
As Hitler's armies overran France in 1940, most Americans were isolationist, opposed to fighting in the wars of others. Jews and other refugees fleeing Europe were denied entry to our homeland.
During the unpopular Korean War, U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy lectured us on what it meant to be un-American. Laws with strict immigration quotas followed in 1952.Today, CNN news anchor Lou Dobbs, rails against a tsunami of illegal immigrants flooding across our border with Mexico. Pessimism over a frustrating war abroad often fuels anti-immigrant feelings here at home.
And Finally - for the "opposing" viewpoint - here's "In Celebration Of The Fourth Of July: A Test Of Our American Values" by Mohammed Nimer, a representative from the Council on American-Islamic Relations - a group that has been repeatedly linked to terrorist organizations, including Hamas. The author himself is identified on this website as a former board member of the United Association For Studies And Research - which is the strategic arm of Hamas in the United States - and was founded by Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook.
To help reverse the growing trend toward Islamophobia and anti-Americanism, we must address legitimate grievances, whether by calling for stepped up condemnation of terrorism on the part of Muslims, or for justice-based solutions to international conflicts.
Equally important, our government should live up to American ideals in practice. Lofty Fourth of July rhetoric must be translated into actions worldwide that show people of all faiths that America is on their side, not against them.
What can you say about a newspaper that lets known terrorist sympathizers lecture us on Patriotism on the 4th of July?!?
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
So, to get everyone in the mood, let's start off with some excerpts from David Horowitz' article "Allies In War" from FrontPage.com. I bring it up for a lot of reasons.
Recently, on a trip to New York City, I stayed at a hotel called The Larchmont on W. 11th Street in Greenwich Village. Across the street is #18, which is a very infamous address in leftist circles; on March 6, 1970, its occupants - several members of the radical leftist group "The Weathermen" - blew themselves and the building to smithereens while constructing a bomb to detonate at a non-com officer's dance at Fort Dix.
Knowing the history behind this place, I checked out the video documentary "The Weathermen Underground" from the SFPL. It's an excellent documentary, even if you go away from it shaking your head - it is clear that the filmmakers were sympathetic to the radicals, but they don't engage in much out-and-out disinformation, so it lets the terrorists explain (and summarily hang) themselves with their own words..
Another thing I got from the film is that certain people in the group have absolutely no remorse for what they did, and, if anything, only wish that they had been more violent. Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers in particular strike me as being dangerous people, and... well, it would not surprise me in the slightest if the FBI was still keeping a very close eye on them. It would really surprise me if they weren't.
This is a reminder of what we are up against. Here's a few excerpts...
ON THE MORNING OF THE ATTACKS on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, along with a million other readers of the New York Times including many who would never be able to read the paper again, I opened its pages to be confronted by a color photo showing a middle-aged couple holding hands and affecting a defiant look at the camera. The article was headlined in an irony that could not have been more poignant, "No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives." The couple pictured were Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, former leaders of the 1960s’ Weather Underground, America’s first terrorist cult. One of their bombing targets, as it happened, was the Pentagon.
"I don’t regret setting bombs," Ayers was quoted in the opening line of the Times profile; "I feel we didn’t do enough." In 1969, Ayers and his wife convened a "War Council" in Flint Michigan, whose purpose was to launch a military front inside the United States with the purpose of helping Third World revolutionaries conquer and destroy it. Taking charge of the podium, dressed in a high-heeled boots and a leather mini-skirt – her signature uniform – Dorhn incited the assembled radicals to join the war against "Amerikkka" and create chaos and destruction in the "belly of the beast." Her voice rising to a fevered pitch, Dohrn raised three fingers in a "fork salute" to mass murderer Charles Manson whom she proposed as a symbol to her troops. Referring to the helpless victims of the Manson Family as the "Tate Eight" (the most famous was actress Sharon Tate) Dohrn shouted:
Dig It. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!
Embarrassed today by this memory, but unable to expunge it from the record and unwilling to repudiate her terrorist deeds, Dorhn resorts to the lie direct. "It was a joke," she told the sympathetic Times reporter, Dinitia Smith; she was actually protesting America’s crimes. "We were mocking violence in America. Even in my most inflamed moment I never supported a racist mass murderer." In 1980, I taped interviews with thirty members of the Weather Underground who were present at the Flint War Council, including most of its leadership. Not one of them thought Dohrn was anything but deadly serious. Outrageous nihilism was the Weatherman political style. As soon as her tribute to Manson was completed, Dohrn was followed to the Flint platform by another Weather leader who ranted, "We’re against everything that’s ‘good and decent’ in honky America. We will loot and burn and destroy. We are the incubation of your mothers’ nightmares."
In my experience, what drives most radicals are passions of resentment, envy and inner rage. Bill Ayers is a scion of wealth. His father was head of Detroit’s giant utility Commonwealth Edison, in line for a cabinet position in the Nixon Administration before his son ruined it by going on a rampage that to this day he cannot explain to any reasonable person’s satisfaction (which is why he has to conceal so much). It could be said of Bill Ayers that he was consumed by angers so terrible they led him to destroy his father’s career. But in the 10 hours I interviewed him I saw none of it. What I saw was a shallowness beyond conception. All the Weather leaders I interviewed shared a similar vacuity. They were living inside a utopian fantasy, a separate reality, and had no idea of what they had done. Nor any way to measure it. Appreciating the nation to which they were born, recognizing the great gifts of freedom and opportunity their parents and communities had given them, distinguishing between right and wrong – it was all above their mental and moral ceiling.