Crossing a border

RAYMOND

Registered
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2000
45,868
1,257
113
usa
Crossing a border








LET ME SEE IF I GOT THIS RIGHT

IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR

IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.

IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.

IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.

IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET

1 - A JOB,
2 - A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 - SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 - WELFARE,
5 - FOOD STAMPS,
6 - CREDIT CARDS,
7 - SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 - FREE EDUCATION,
9 - FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 - A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
11 - BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
12 - AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY'S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON'T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION.

Are WE dumbasses or what ?????
 

Skulnik

Truth Teller
Forum Member
Mar 30, 2007
21,823
1,095
113
Jefferson City, Missouri
Crossing a border








LET ME SEE IF I GOT THIS RIGHT

IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR

IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.




IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.

IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.

IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET

1 - A JOB,
2 - A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 - SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 - WELFARE,
5 - FOOD STAMPS,
6 - CREDIT CARDS,
7 - SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 - FREE EDUCATION,
9 - FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 - A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
11 - BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
12 - AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY'S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON'T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION.

Are WE dumbasses or what ?????

:toast:
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Yes Yes For way to LONG. Problem is for way to long we let states handel the border. And then in spots we tried a fence. Good luck. What was needed
20 years ago was a few 50's to meat and greet those who didn,t want to come in legal way. The word would have spread. You get shot over there stay home or go south. Cows are out of the barn now.
 

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
105,989
2,272
113
70
home
IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET

1 - A JOB,
2 - A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 - SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 - WELFARE,
5 - FOOD STAMPS,
6 - CREDIT CARDS,
7 - SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 - FREE EDUCATION,
9 - FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 - A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
11 - BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
12 - AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY'S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON'T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

:rolleyes:
 

SKEETER1

SKEETER1
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
2,256
4
0
64
Phoenix
You said PROTEST Ray......They are protesting on our streets (Marching) on our land. They are illegal....get the hell out of here. I see it andI live it here in Phoenix. EVERYTHING you worte on illegals Ray is TRUE. I want my damn country back. YES Arizona is making national news as a bill WILL be signed by Janet Brewer to make it illegal to be in AZ if your an illegal. What did the illegals do....they protested.....freaking arrest them and call ICE and ship their ass bk. Then put the military on the boarder. What is sorry ass McCain saying now.....oh illegals are my number 1 concern.....you dumbass....its only b/c you realized this is what the people want but you have said countless times AMNESTY. Then he said no americans will pick the fruit and vegetables for $20 an hour. Americans asked where they can be hired. Get the hell out of the way you old goat....J.D Hayworth will beat McCain.
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
Response to Skeeter:

Response to Skeeter:

Arizona Immigration Reform: Common Sense or Police State?
http://madjacksports.com/forum/#comments_controls
Mac Slavo
SHTF Plan
April 20. 2010
Arizona?s new immigration bill will require police officers to perform identification checks whenever they believe there to be a probable cause, or reasonable suspicion, that the person in question may have entered into the state illegally, namely through the Mexican border.
Though the bill does not specifically single out Latinos, it is clear that they will be disproportionately targeted by the new laws. Now that Arizona has paved the way, will the anti-immigration movement reignite?
First Lady Michelle Obama in Mexico last week said that changes to the immigration system are necessary. Rather than focusing on border security, however, Mrs. Obama hinted that the system changes in question will deal with how to handle immigrant already in the United States.
?We?re seeing young children who are trying to cross the border just to reconnect with their parents, and their lives are in danger. They?re put in precarious situations. And a strong immigration reform policy would help alleviate some of those challenges.?
Washington?s immigration ?reform? policies, like gun reform and health care reform, will attempt to spin the issue for the sake of the children, rather than addressing the root of the problem, which is securing our Southern border. Had the parents of these children not crossed US borders illegally in the first place, their children would not be forced to try and reconnect with them.
Thus, for the time being, while border control is not a serious enough issue for Washington to tackle, border states like Arizona are left with few choices, most of which revolve around dealing with the symptoms of illegal immigration, rather than the causes.
Had the Federal government done one of its few constitutionally defined duties of securing our border and protecting the citizenry, Arizona would not have to implement measures that resemble those of a police state. Individuals in, even those of Latino heritage, see the problems that illegal immigration brings with it, especially in Texas, New Mexico, California and Arizona.

What harm is there to having your identification checked if you haven?t done anything wrong? If you happen to be in the State of Arizona, are pulled over, and don?t speak a lick of English, wouldn?t it be prudent for the officer to verify if you have not broken the law? Residents of every state must go through these types of checks, anytime they are stopped by police ? a quick check to see if you have any warrants, or past violations that may require special attention. What the State of Arizona has said now, is that if you are suspected of being an illegal immigrant, for a variety of reasons, like the car you are driving doesn?t belong to you, you don?t have insurance, or you don?t speak english and happen to match a certain kind of ethnic profile, you are more likely to be in the State without permission than, say, a Caucasian female driving a mini-van.
The benefits of the new approach are clear.
But there is also a be-careful-what-you-wish-for danger.
There is a strong argument against the new measures, and that is, ?how can the law can be enforced while preserving the civil rights of Americans of Hispanic descent??
Today it is Hispanics that are profiled. Tomorrow, it might be you.
How long before the Federal government, seeing the merits of the argument for identification checks, requires, for the sake of civil rights and political correctness, that all citizens show their identification and have an ID check performed. Will American citizens readily accept an assault on their personal liberty, just as Hispanic American citizens or legal residents will be required to do in Arizona?
In a recent interview, Senator Joe Lieberman said that he is worried about domestic terrorism. If this is really true, then our first order of business should be to secure the United States from foreign enemies and those breaking the law to enter our country, as opposed to focusing our government?s limited resources on US citizens via More Surveillance on Planes, Trains, and Buses.
The new law in Arizona is a common sense approach to the problem of illegal immigration and tackles the issue head on. And, though it may open the door to more interference in our lives by way of a national identification card and traffic checkpoints, Arizona has been left with no other choice due to the failure of our Federal government to secure our borders from invasion, as it is obligated to do under Article IV of the United States Constitution.
There is a growing consensus that the most important strategy in the reform battle is the one dealing with outward facing security on our southern borders. There would be no illegal immigrant problems in Arizona or elsewhere if the border was not porous.
Isn?t it time that Washington finally takes a common sense approach?
 

SKEETER1

SKEETER1
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
2,256
4
0
64
Phoenix
I'm soooo tired after the gms but let me say this.......................free in state tuition for illegals.....33% of our prisoners are illegal....hmmmmmm will get more in depth....but enough said
 

RAYMOND

Registered
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2000
45,868
1,257
113
usa
You said PROTEST Ray......They are protesting on our streets (Marching) on our land. They are illegal....get the hell out of here. I see it andI live it here in Phoenix. EVERYTHING you worte on illegals Ray is TRUE. I want my damn country back. YES Arizona is making national news as a bill WILL be signed by Janet Brewer to make it illegal to be in AZ if your an illegal. What did the illegals do....they protested.....freaking arrest them and call ICE and ship their ass bk. Then put the military on the boarder. What is sorry ass McCain saying now.....oh illegals are my number 1 concern.....you dumbass....its only b/c you realized this is what the people want but you have said countless times AMNESTY. Then he said no americans will pick the fruit and vegetables for $20 an hour. Americans asked where they can be hired. Get the hell out of the way you old goat....J.D Hayworth will beat McCain.


MOST PEOPLE DON'T GET IT SCOTT =UNTIL IT HAPPEN TOP THEM:(
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
PLAN OF SAN DIEGO

hotheader.jpg


PLAN OF SAN DIEGO. With the outbreak of revolution in northern Mexico in 1910, federal authorities and officials of the state of Texas feared that the violence and disorder might spill over into the Rio Grande valley. The Mexican and Mexican-American populations residing in the Valley far outnumbered the Anglo population. Many Valley residents either had relatives living in areas of Mexico affected by revolutionary activity or aided the various revolutionary factions in Mexico. The revolution caused an influx of political refugees and illegal immigrants into the border region, politicizing the Valley population and disturbing the traditional politics of the region. Some radical elements saw the Mexican Revolution as an opportunity to bring about drastic political and economic changes in South Texas. The most extreme example of this was a movement supporting the "Plan of San Diego," a revolutionary manifesto supposedly written and signed at the South Texas town of San Diego on January 6, 1915. The plan, actually drafted in a jail in Monterrey, Nuevo Le?n, provided for the formation of a "Liberating Army of Races and Peoples," to be made up of Mexican Americans, African Americans, and Japanese, to "free" the states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and Colorado from United States control. The liberated states would be organized into an independent republic, which might later seek annexation to Mexico. There would be a no-quarter race war, with summary execution of all white males over the age of sixteen. The revolution was to begin on February 20, 1915. Federal and state officials found a copy of the plan when local authorities in McAllen, Texas, arrested Basilio Ramos, Jr., one of the leaders of the plot, on January 24, 1915.

The arrival of February 20 produced only another revolutionary manifesto, rather than the promised insurrection. Similar to the original plan, this second Plan of San Diego emphasized the "liberation" of the proletariat and focused on Texas, where a "social republic" would be established to serve as a base for spreading the revolution throughout the southwestern United States. Indians were also to be enlisted in the cause. But with no signs of revolutionary activity, state and federal authorities dismissed the plan as one more example of the revolutionary rhetoric that flourished along the border. This feeling of complacency was shattered in July 1915 with a series of raids in the lower Rio Grande valley connected with the Plan of San Diego. These raids were led by two adherents of Venustiano Carranza, revolutionary general, and Aniceto Piza?a and Luis De la Rosa, residents of South Texas. The bands used the guerilla tactics of disrupting transportation and communication in the border area and killing Anglos. In response, the United States Army moved reinforcements into the area.

A third version of the plan called for the foundation of a "Republic of Texas" to be made up of Texas, New Mexico, California, Arizona, and parts of Mississippi and Oklahoma. San Antonio, Texas, was to serve as revolutionary headquarters, and the movement's leadership continued to come from South Texas. Raids originated on both sides of the Rio Grande, eventually assuming a pattern of guerilla warfare. Raids from the Mexican side came from territory under the control of Carranza, whose officers were accused of supporting the raiders. When the United States recognized Carranza as president of Mexico in October 1915, the raids came to an abrupt halt. Relations between the United States and Carranza quickly turned sour, however, amid growing violence along the border. When forces under another revolutionary general, Francisco (Pancho) Villa, attacked Columbus, New Mexico, in March 1916, the United States responded by sending a large military force under Gen. John J. Pershing into northern Mexico in pursuit of Villa. When the United States rejected Carranza's demands to withdraw Pershing's troops, fear of a military conflict between the United States and Mexico grew. In this volatile context, there was a renewal of raiding under the Plan of San Diego in May 1916. Mexican officials were even considering the possibility of combining the San Diego raiders with regular Mexican forces in an attack on Laredo. In late June, Mexican and United States officials agreed to a peaceful settlement of differences, and raids under the Plan of San Diego came to a halt.

The Plan of San Diego and the raids that accompanied it were originally attributed to the supporters of the ousted Mexican dictator Gen. Victoriano Huerta, who had been overthrown by Carranza in 1914. The evidence indicates, however, that the raids were carried out by followers of Carranza, who manipulated the movement in an effort to influence relations with the United States. Fatalities directly linked to the raids were surprisingly small; between July 1915 and July 1916 some thirty raids into Texas produced only twenty-one American deaths, both civilian and military. More destructive and disruptive was the near race war that ensued in the wake of the plan as relations between the whites and the Mexicans and Mexican Americans deteriorated in 1915?16. Federal reports indicated that more than 300 Mexicans or Mexican Americans were summarily executed in South Texas in the atmosphere generated by the plan. Economic losses ran into the millions of dollars, and virtually all residents of the lower Rio Grande valley suffered some disruption in their lives from the raids. Moreover, the plan's legacy of racial antagonism endured long after the plan itself had been forgotten.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Don M. Coerver and Linda B. Hall, Texas and the Mexican Revolution: A Study in State and National Border Policy, 1910?1920 (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1984). Charles C. Cumberland, "Border Raids in the Lower Rio Grande Valley-1915," Southwestern Historical Quarterly 57 (January 1954). Charles H. Harris III and Louis R. Sadler, "The Plan of San Diego and the Mexican-U.S. War Crisis of 1916: A Reexamination," Hispanic American Historical Review 58 (August 1978). Friedrich Katz, The Secret War in Mexico: Europe, the United States and the Mexican Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981). James A. Sandos, "The Plan of San Diego: War and Diplomacy on the Texas Border, 1915?1916," Arizona and the West 14 (Spring 1972). James Sandos, Rebellion in the Borderlands: Anarchism and the Plan of San Diego, 1904?1923 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1992).

Don M. Coerver



The following, adapted from the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, is the preferred citation for this article.


Handbook of Texas Online, s.v. "," http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/PP/ngp4.html (accessed April 21, 2010).

(NOTE: "s.v." stands for sub verbo, "under the word.")
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
The Plan of San Diego?Then?And Now?

By Steve Sailer
The Mainstream Media has finally noticed what VDARE.com has been reporting for years: the constant incursions by Mexican military units into American territory, typically while guarding drug and immigrant smugglers. By one estimate, the Mexican military has violated our largely unfenced border 231 times in the last decade. [Reports Cite Incursions on U.S. Border, By Richard Marosi, Robert J. Lopez and Rich Connell, LA Times, January 26, 2006]
This has reminded Americans with good memories of Pancho Villa's murderous raid on Columbus, New Mexico in 1916 and of the Zimmerman Telegram of 1917, in which Imperial Germany offered to help Mexico retake Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona (reserving California for Japan).
Mexican President Venustiano Carranza rejected the Zimmerman proposal ? but only after studying the feasibility of a reconquista for several months.
Yet, almost nobody in America other than radical Aztlan separatists has heard of the sinister Plan of San Diego of 1915.
It's not a pretty story, so it's not surprising that few want to remember it.
I'd never known of it until 2004, when the Dallas Morning News tried to put a politically correct slant on it by running a front-page story by David McLemore entitled "89 years ago, Rangers singled out Hispanics, and thousands died." It promoted young SMU history professor Benjamin Heber Johnson's tendentious book Revolution in Texas: How a Forgotten Rebellion and Its Bloody Suppression Turned Mexicans into Americans.
The article was rattling along on predictable tracks:
"In 1915, as the chaos of the Mexican Revolution raged across the river, the [Lower Rio Grande] Valley [of Texas] underwent its own turmoil. For more than a decade, Anglo land speculators and Midwestern farmers flooded the Valley? The newcomers brought their racial prejudices with them. Foreigners and dark-skinned people were not to be trusted. "American" became a synonym for "white" and any brown-skinned person was a "Mexican" regardless of origin."
When suddenly it veered into new territory:
"In January 1915, authorities arrested a man near the border who carried a copy of a revolutionary manifesto. It called for a Tejano armed uprising to reclaim much of the Southwest for Mexico. It also called for Anglo males over age 16 to be killed.
"What?" I thought. "Mexican-Americans started a genocidal race war in Texas? Why hadn't anyone ever mentioned this?"
I started doing more research and soon found that this article gave a highly distorted account of an extraordinary episode in American history.
The second half of 1915 and first half of 1916 witnessed 30 terrorist invasions of Texas sponsored by the government of Mexico, and, in response, of Texas Ranger counter-terrorist excesses. Hundreds died and half the population of the Rio Grande Valley in Texas temporarily fled the guerrilla fighting.
By far, the fullest and most insightful history of the Plan of San Diego violence available on the Web is a series of articles for the alternative newspaper of Laredo, TX, LareDos: A Journal of the Borderlands,by local historian Robert Mendoza. He is heavily influenced by the 1978 article "The Plan of San Diego and the Mexican-United States War Crisis of 1916: A Re-examination," by historians Charles Harris III and Louis R. Sadler of New Mexico St. (The Texas State Historical Association provides a good short summary of the Plan of San Diego.)
Blame for starting the border war rested not, as the Dallas Morning News implied, with Mexican-Americans, who, indeed, paid much of the price, but with the President of Mexico, who reaped the benefits.
"Los Sediciosos," a Tex-Mex song of 1915, presciently noted:
Now the fuse has been lit
By the Mexican nationalists.
But the price will be paid
By the Texas Mexicans.
From the summer of 1915 through the summer of 1916, there were 30 cross-border terrorist raids by Carranza's soldiers and allied anti-American extremists, who killed six civilians and 17 U.S. soldiers.
In response, the Texas Rangers stained their proud tradition. Needing to expand rapidly, they deputized many untrained civilians who often turned out to be trigger-happy yahoos. In the nasty tradition of anti-guerilla warfare, the Rangers, along with local sheriffs and vigilantes, summarily executed about 300 people of Mexican descent, most of them probably utterly innocent of insurrection. (Johnson's estimate of thousands of killings, though, is inflated by an order of magnitude, according to the definitive 2004 book by Harris and Sadler, The Texas Rangers and The Mexican Revolution: The Bloodiest Decade, 1910-1920.)
Yet, in the beginning, few Texans had been alarmed when a Mexican revolutionary named Basilio Ramos was arrested in McAllen on January 24, 1915 carrying a document, supposedly written in the south Texas town of San Diego, that called for a Latino, black, and Japanese uprising in the border states to reunite them with Mexico. Paragraph seven of the Plan read:
"Every Norteamericano over sixteen years of age shall be put to death; and only the aged men, the women, and the children shall be respected?"
In May 1915, a federal judge laughed that Ramos "ought to be tried for lunacy, not conspiracy against the United States," and reduced his bail from $5,000 to $100. He promptly jumped bail and headed back to Mexico, where he had been working for the self-proclaimed President Carranza.
Squeezed between Emiliano Zapata's army in the south of Mexico and Pancho Villa's in the northwest, Carranza desperately needed President Woodrow Wilson's diplomatic recognition as the legitimate President of Mexico to be eligible to obtain arms from America and Europe. According to Mendoza, Carranza's strategy consisted of four steps:
"1) Carranza's armed and funded ?bandits? would raid Texas border communities;
"2) The US State Department would demand Carranza subdue the 'bandits';
"3) Carranza would reply that the 'bandits' were only able to operate because Carranza lacked US recognition and sufficient arms to combat them; and
"4) Carranza, having received recognition and arms, 'arrests' the raiders.
"Carranza's scheme to achieve diplomatic recognition and munitions was disguised as a Texas mexicano irredentist uprising."
Mendoza writes:
"The first sighting of the Plan de San Diego raiders was on July 2, 1915. Forty heavily armed horsemen were reported maneuvering near Sebastian, Texas north of Harlingen. Two days later, at an isolated ranchhouse near Lyford, two Anglo men were murdered. The raiders proceeded north through the brushlands to Raymondville, where they killed an 18-year-old Anglo boy."
More attacks ensued on government property and whites (although, interestingly, Germans were spared). In October 1915, Wilson recognized Carranza as the rightful President of Mexico and the assaults stopped within a week.
Terrorism often works.
President Carranza, however, wasn't purely cynical in his use of anti-American terror. In 1916, Pancho Villa attacked Columbus, NM, so Wilson sent General John Pershing's expeditionary force into Mexico. In almost a year of wandering around Mexico, Pershing failed to find Villa. (But at least he and his troops received some rigorous outdoor training that later paid off fighting the Germans on the Western Front.)
Although Villa was his enemy, Carranza's patriotism was affronted by the American incursion, so he relaunched the Plan of San Diego's violent incursions into Texas. Carranza's anger climaxed with his order for a brigade of 450 of his troops to invade America at Laredo in June 1916. Fortunately, one of his generals called it off at the last moment.
Many lessons can be drawn from the forgotten history of the Plan of San Diego.
But an obvious one is that Mexico was, and remains, a foreign country?with interests very different from ours.
[Steve Sailer [email him] is the founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog.]
VDARE.com Postscript: In National Review's The Corner [with added links] on January 22, 2005:
BLACKJACK PERSHING, CALL YOUR OFFICE [Mark Krikorian]
(Is it still OK to use "call your office"?) The continuing incursions across the southern border by Mexican soldiers are adding to the tensions in U.S.-Mexico relations and even prompting a second look at Pancho Villa's 1916 raid in New Mexico and Gen. Pershing's punitive expedition. Clearly things aren't that bad yet, but the governability of Mexico is becoming a real question. It's increasingly apparent that the Mexico City government isn't really in control of what happens in much of the country -- Nuevo Laredo is essentially a free-fire zone for drug gangs, heavily armed Mexican soldiers are moonlighting as escorts for smugglers, and there is open talk of the "Colombianization" of Mexico. How can anyone think that the Mexican government can be an effective partner in controlling immigration and enforcing the border?
Posted at 02:44 PM
RE: BLACKJACK PERSHING [Mark Krikorian]
From a reader: "I read your post on The Corner and I thought you should know that not only was General Pershing involved in the expedition but it also launched the career of future general George S. Patton, Jr., who killed 3 of [Pancho] Villa?s bandits in a gunfight at the Rubio Ranch and then strapped their bodies to the hood of his Dodge."
Now that's border enforcement!
Posted at 05:48 PM
RE: RE: BLACKJACK PERSHING [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
For the record: Mark is not endorsing the Rubio Ranch approach in that post.
Posted at 05:49 PM

[Vdare.com query: Is National Review endorsing anyapproach on the border?] [Steve Sailer [email him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog.]
 

Lumi

LOKI
Forum Member
Aug 30, 2002
21,104
58
0
58
In the shadows
MEChA: Racists, Selfish, Jealous
The racist and anti-semitic roots of MEChA?s ideology

The Irvine Review | March 7, 2005
by Kristen Lucero
It is true, racism happens, life is not fair, and ignorant people can be blinded by the color of someone?s skin. However, when a particular group of people feel they have been discriminated against and they act foolishly and emotionally on their feelings, it is easy to be just as guilty of racism as the group that first committed it. MEChA, which stands for Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztl?n (the Chicano student movement of Aztl?n), is a Chicano student group on campus whose roots go back to the 1960?s to the time of the start of the Chicano movement. Across California and several other states, MEChA is a strong nationalist group that openly endorses hate and discrimination against whites and Jews. MEChA discriminates against white people just as badly as they claim to be discriminated against. However, not only are they a racist group, they are selfish because they care only about the well-being of those select few that abide by the Chicano philosophy, and they are jealous of the success of others who have done well for themselves (including Hispanics).

There are a few goals and principles that MEChA ascribes to, according to their founding documents (EL Plan Espiritual de Aztl?n, El Plan de Santa Barbara and the Philosophy of MEChA), including the recapture of ?Aztl?n? or in actuality all the land Mexico lost way back in the Mexican-American War. MEChA somehow feels they are being denied land that they already live in, in a country of which they are citizens. Somehow, giving this land back to a foreign country that lost it hundreds of years ago in a war is going to make it theirs. Besides the delusional goal of the recovery of their ?homeland? MEChA would like for the government to take care of their daily needs. They believe that the institutions should give them everything they need to have a ?full life?, in other words they want to be taken care of. It is exactly this mentality that has suppressed the Chicano people, not the ?evil white man?. Expecting the government to take care of them and give them everything they need is not only lazy but extremely foolish.
Another one of their major goals is the advancement of their political party La Raza Unida (RUP) which was founded by Jose Angel Gutierrez. Gutierrez is a professor at the University of Texas, Arlington, and is an extreme racist. He has been quoted making racists remarks such as, ?We have got to eliminate the gringo (white man), and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst we have got to kill him? (source: www.stoptheinvasion.com/racism5.html), and ?Our devil has pale skin and blue eyes? (source:www.mayorno.com/villar.html). However, white American?s are not the only group being discriminated against by MEChA.
MEChA has a long history of being anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist, Starting back in the 80?s when the RUP leaders had a meeting with none other than Yasser Arafat in Beirut, Lebanon. Moreover, La Voz de Atzl?n, their newspaper has taken an anti-Semitic stand over the years. In 2000, La Voz blamed the Jewish community for ?corrupting democracy? and creating ?Judenrats?. Judenrat is a term they coined to describe Hispanic politicians who are ?owned by Jewish interests?. In an article entitled ?La Raza and Jews on Collision Course in Alta California,? they claimed that Jew?s had a conspiracy to subjugate up and coming Latino political power, and that ?the sectors that they (the Jews) cannot control directly, they will (control) indirectly through the purchase of influence as well as the cunning manipulation of ethnic and other minorities.? For some reason, every successful Latino that is not about to die for the cause of ?La Raza? turns out to be controlled by the Jews, or so it is in the mind of MEChA. Their paper has suggested that successful Latinas become successful because of their relationships with Jewish men. UCI?s own version of the publication, La Voz Mestiza, is constantly putting down and rejecting Hispanics that are successful, yet not loyal to the cause by calling them ?coconuts?, which is a Hispanic that is white on the inside, brown on the outside. In Winter 05? Issue 2, of La Voz Mestiza in an article entitled ?They Don?t Know, Who We Be!? they refer to ?the coconut, managerial traitors who have already proudly flown their assimilationist banners against us,? and about how they should ?let them grovel in that world; it is their penance for being chumps.? Essentially, for a Hispanic to assimilate into America, they must also be a traitor and a? chump? is MEChA?s view.
Perhaps there is a better explanation, however, for the ?disloyalty? of many successful Latino people than that of Jewish control and of treason. Could it just be that the United States is a good place that gave many Latino people the chance to become successful, and, therefore, they have no reason to be disloyal to the U.S.? Could it just be that Mexico has never had anything to offer anyone except dirt and corruption? Could it just be that if you stop complaining long enough you would realize that there isn?t much for you to complain about? I am not saying the U.S. is perfect, I?m not saying our system is perfect, but it is the best there is, and people literally would and do die to get the chance to be here and have a shot at their dreams. Instead of trying to figuring out new and innovative ways to be oppressed, perhaps MEChA should just take a cue from the supposed ?Judenrats? and be grateful for the chance to live in the greatest country on earth with some of the best opportunities Hispanic people have ever had.


Kristen Lucero is a third year political science major, the Executive Director of the Irvine Conservative Student Union, and, you guessed it, full Hispanic.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top