Brits are discovering the truth to "As ye sow, so shall ye reap"
Hmmm...kinda makes you wonder who's running the 50+ Mahjids (mosques) in Houston. I wonder how many of those "peace loving" Muslims are in America right now preaching this same kind of "love and tolerance" our Democrat Terrorism apologists keep speaking of."September 7, 2007
Hardline takeover of British mosques
Almost half of Britain’s mosques are under the control of a hardline Islamic sect whose leading preacher loathes Western values and has called on Muslims to “shed blood” for Allah, an investigation by The Times has found.
Riyadh ul Haq, who supports armed jihad and preaches contempt for Jews, Christians and Hindus, is in line to become the spiritual leader of the Deobandi sect in Britain. The ultra-conservative movement, which gave birth to the Taleban in Afghanistan, now runs more than 600 of Britain’s 1,350 mosques, according to a police report seen by The Times.
The Times investigation casts serious doubts on government statements that foreign preachers are to blame for spreading the creed of radical Islam in Britain’s mosques and its policy of enouraging the recruitment of more “home-grown” preachers.
Mr ul Haq, 36, was educated and trained at an Islamic seminary in Britain and is part of a new generation of British imams who share a similar radical agenda. He heaps scorn on any Muslims who say they are “proud to be British” and argues that friendship with a Jew or a Christian makes “a mockery of Allah’s religion”.
Seventeen of Britain’s 26 Islamic seminaries are run by Deobandis and they produce 80 per cent of home-trained Muslim clerics. Many had their studies funded by local education authority grants. The sect, which has significant representation on the Muslim Council of Britain, is at its strongest in the towns and cities of the Midlands and northern England."
I guess this is why the tin-hat club members...from both sides of the aisle keep telling us that we need to use diplomacy in dealing with the Iranians, the Syrians and Hugo Chavez, rather than shoving a nice tactical nuke up their posteriors.
What the Times is reporting is simply a snapshot of America's own future if we continue to follow the lead of the ACLU (an organization dedicated to defeding terrorists and telling lies), CAIR (an organization dedicated to defending terrorists and telling lies), and the Democrat Party (an organization dedicated to defending terrorists, slandering our troops, and telling lies.
A dystopian future is well within our grasp unless the American people wake up. We do not need Sharia law in America, and we do not need radical Islamics in positions of power. I do not want to live under a Caliphate, benign or otherwise.
What we need is a strong homeland security policy in which the FBI, the CIA, and local authorities are tightly integrated with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. All illegal aliens guilty of a crime, even jay-walking, should be immediately placed in custody...maybe in Sheriff Arpaio's tent cities down in Maricopa County, Arizona. So called Sanctuary Cities should immediately have all federal funds cut off and "The Fence" needs to be constructed now.
All foreigners need to be documented with biologically unique identity cards which are for all intents and purposes cannot be forged. All businesses and their senior officers, employing illegal aliens need to be severely penalized and since all you Liberals out there are so concerned about "anchor babies" being left without parents, then there is an easy answer. They can go back to their parent's country with their illegally present parents, or you as compassionate Liberals can adopt them; problem solved.
Besides, there is some question as to the applicability and constitutionality of the policy of granting immediate and automatic citizen status to any child born on American soil, when the parents are knowingly breaking the law in coming to our nation. It is a question which needs to be settled by the SCOTUS. Is the child of an illegally present alien covered under the Constitution's guarantee of citizenship? Does that legitimately follow the original intent of the framers of our Constitution?
Operation "Wetback" worked for Ike Eisenhower in the fifties, and it held until Lyndon Johnson-a Democrat-became our president. It was he who reversed the policies which had held illegal immigration in check for a decade. It is time for another operation Wetback.
The only people who claim that it is impossible to remove the 12-20 million illegals from our Sovereign Nation's soil are those who have no real desire to do so. Where there is a will, there is a way and that way is to enforce the laws currently on the books.
I support the "Patriot Act" for as long as it is necessary. I support the use of telephone monitoring when and where it is necessary to protect the American people from a very real and growing threat. I do not live in fear, I live in disgust at our nation's politicians increasingly inability to do that which is good for the nation rather than that which is good for their Party. Both Republicans and Democrats have proven themselves duplicitous in their actions regarding illegal immigration.
It is time to get tough. This is my country, not the alien's. This is our national sovereignty that is at risk, not some pitiful game of pitch and toss.
Long Live Our American Republic!!!
What do you think?
To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below
posted by Will Malven at 9:15 PM
4 Comments:
I love your page.
1. "Operation Wetback" was abandonded for political reasons. Americans of Mexican descent accused the government of using "police state" methods. How would you get around that?
2. Is "Operation Wetback" something you see as a means of preventing terrorism? Does that mean it would be fitted to apply to immigrants from Arab countries?
Thanks
1."Operation Wetback" was ended because of Lyndon Johnson's close ties to the ranching industry and the good old boy networking. The displeasure of Americans of Mexican descent was only ancilliary to the termination of the program.
If you read about the history of the operation, one of the first acts of General Joseph "Jumpin' Joe" Swing did as INS Commissioner was to remove all INS agents from the border states who had close ties to those businesses that prospered from the steady influx of illegal aliens. They were transferred to areas of the country where they were unable to provide cover for businesses and the illegals they employed.
Johnson was a croney of those same businesses and it was under his orders that "Operation Wetback" was terminated. The state troopers and INS agents only had to physically deport about 80,000 illegals, another 5-800,000 left of their own volition.
You see political correctness was not in vogue in those days. Most Americans didn't care what others thought about their actions. Back then, if your feelings got hurt, it was your problem, not the government's. That's what liberty and freedom is all about...self responsibility.
2. Yes, I'm an equal opportunity deporter. I don't care what country you have come from, if you are here illegally, then you need to be deported.
I believe I made myself quite clear when I said:
"all foreigners need to be documented with biologically unique identity cards which are for all intents and purposes cannot be forged. All businesses and their senior officers, employing illegal aliens need to be severely penalized and since all you Liberals out there are so concerned about "anchor babies" being left without parents, then there is an easy answer. They can go back to their parent's country with their illegally present parents, or you as compassionate Liberals can adopt them; problem solved."
What part of all foreigners didn't you understand? Surely you aren't one of those bigots who believes that all illegal aliens are of Hispanic descent, are you?
1. I was unable to find anything about the Johnson conspiracy; I'll take your word for it. I'm sure that was involved, but in a representative democracy I like to think that public outrage had some influence.
2. The deportation was accomplished with the cooperation of the Mexican government, which was friendly to the US. How do you propose handling the deportation of immigrants from unfriendly countries? Cuba, for example, or North Korea?
3. How would a program of enforced adoption of "anchor babies" be implemented? Would each citizen be given an annual political litmus test, for example, that labeled him or her as "Conservative" (exempt from the adoption law) or "Liberal" (forced to adopt a child)?
That opens more interesting questions. Would single liberals be forced to become single parents? How about gay couples? And what would it be like to live in a country slowly filling with government-created orphans?
As to the anchor babies problem, that was merely a suggestion to those who are expressing such angst over the fact that their parents would be deported.
Personally, I would just send the kids with their parents, and allow the SCOTUS to determine their status as citizens. If the parents don't want to take them with them, place them in orphanages; preferably orphanages that were run like boot-camps.
Sheriff Arpaio has the right idea in his policy of forcing all illegals in his tent cities to take a two week intensive course in the English language, the constitution, civics, and to learn the Pledge of Allegiance.
It's at least a good start.
As for the rest, it requires no cooperation of the other nations, you just fly them one way into the southern portion of Mexico, one-way and dump them there. If Mexico doesn't like it, let them shoot the planes down. If the Arabs or the Chinese or any other nation doesn't want to assist us do the same.
I guarantee you no one is going to shoot down the planes.
Why should there be any public outrage over all of this? These people are by their very presence criminals...so deport their butts. If a bunch of bleeding hearts don't like it, they can lump it.
Teddy Roosevelt once said it. "The world will never love us. They may fear us; maybe respect us, but they will never love us."
Malcolm Muggeridge once commented something similar when he said:
"England was never more powerful or successful than when the world hated them."
It's time the American people woke up and realized that the world will never love us because we are too powerful, too arrogant, too successful, and God fearing.
Ask me if I care what a bunch of Frogs or Limey's think of me. They had their chances, and foolishly squandered them with their pursuit of "social justice" AKA socialism/communism.
The world is not fair. Never has been and never will be. People (especially Liberals) need to get over it.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home