Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Palmer
    This a topic is better suited for RLC-Discuss. Jeff Palmer - jap@highstream.net * * * Quote of the Week: “Washington is a city of southern efficiency and
    Message 1 of 27 , Apr 13, 2005
      Message
      This a topic is better suited for RLC-Discuss.

      Jeff Palmer - jap@...
       * * *
      Quote of the Week:  “Washington is a city of southern efficiency and northern charm.” -- John F. Kennedy 

      -----Original Message-----
      From: F Worley [mailto:worley_f2003@...]
      Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 8:03 PM
      To: bill Jambura; sfgresh@...; rex2wheeler@...; jeff@...; indmtn@...; Republican-Liberty@...; westmiller@...; rlc@...; pusherprop3@...; alanrweiss78726@...; blood_pasta@...
      Cc: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

      Actually Bill, 

      I was the one that cautioned about the race issue.  It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of crafting messages and can see how easily a message can be misconstrured.  (I've made the mistake myself a number of times). 

      In our minds, the landmine idea makes perfect sense.  A simple matter of choice.  But we have to remember that the rest of the world, and the rest of the nation, does not think like we do. 

      If we placed landmines it would kill innocent children who have not freely chosen to cross the boarder, and therefore, it would not accomplish our aim. 

      Patroling the boarders is the right idea, but we as a group, should also make our voices heard.  An easy way to do that is to hammer away at the fact the policies of the Mexican government towards illegal aliens, US visitors and others are inconsistant with their demands on the U.S. 

      We are a nation of immigrants and should continue to welcome those, LOUDLY that come legally, and denounce those who do not, and the governments that sponsor them. 

      Frank Worley


      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
      Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.7 - Release Date: 4/12/2005

    • bill Jambura
      Frank, The first thing any nation does whether they are at peace, and especially when they are at war, is to secure their borders. America is the first nation
      Message 2 of 27 , Apr 14, 2005

        Frank,

         

        The first thing any nation does whether they are at peace, and especially when they are at war, is to secure their borders.  

         

        America is the first nation in history that’s not doing that!  Like it or not, America is deep into two global (world) wars simultaneously—the WW on Terror and the WW on Drugs—where it’s been established that international trafficking in illegal drugs is a major funding source for terrorists.

         

        In any war, innocent civilians suffer much greater loses than the armed combatants. It’s the tragedy of war.  That’s why our Constitution has very strict procedures for how we can go to as a nation.  How our elected officials usurped our Constitution to get us into these good sounding, aimless wars is different debate worth having, but for now, we’re in those world wars nonetheless.  And also, that’s why the Powel Doctrine opposed nation building.  Instead, he called for clearly defined missions (void of mission creep) with a well defined victory criteria and exist strategy.

         

        Let’s compare Iraq to America’s southern border. 

         

        First, Iraq: It’s estimated that over 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians were killed thus far—some in their homes, others at their businesses or on the streets in the cross fire.  They didn’t go out of their way to march cross an international border to get killed.  They simply suffered the consequence of being born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

           

        Now as for America’s southern border: If we secured it with mines (on our side only), only international criminals would go out of their way to cross an international border to dance through a minefield.  In every war, civilians flee away from the front line of battle; they don’t march into it.  We have an international right to secure our borders. Until they are secure, we’ll never know who is coming across our borders to do us harm, and everyone who crosses our borders illegally is by definition a criminal. That’s why every nation in the world (except us, for some reason) is serious about securing their border.

         

        Bill
         
        On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:02:32 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <worley_f2003@...> writes:
        Actually Bill,
         
        I was the one that cautioned about the race issue.  It was not intended as a diversion in anyway, just a caution as I work it the business of crafting messages and can see how easily a message can be misconstrured.  (I've made the mistake myself a number of times).
         
        In our minds, the landmine idea makes perfect sense.  A simple matter of choice.  But we have to remember that the rest of the world, and the rest of the nation, does not think like we do.
         
        If we placed landmines it would kill innocent children who have not freely chosen to cross the boarder, and therefore, it would not accomplish our aim.
         
        Patroling the boarders is the right idea, but we as a group, should also make our voices heard.  An easy way to do that is to hammer away at the fact the policies of the Mexican government towards illegal aliens, US visitors and others are inconsistant with their demands on the U.S.
         
        We are a nation of immigrants and should continue to welcome those, LOUDLY that come legally, and denounce those who do not, and the governments that sponsor them.
         
        Frank Worley


        bill Jambura <jambura@...> wrote:

        Frank,

         

        My sentiments exactly about the LP.  The Republicans are the equal opposites of the Democrats, but no less damaging to our Constitution, liberty and freedoms. 

         

        In this dialogue of e-mails I, and many of you, may have received the e-mail cautioning us against looking like we hate Hispanics if we defend our borders.  That is an excellent diversion.  Here's an answer to the bigotry vs. national sovereignty debate.

         

        The best way to defend our border without being bigots is to do what weve done all over the worldland mines. 

         

        1. Weve put them on every other continent of our world with great successbecause they are an extremely effective perimeter defense. 
        2. They don't require feeding or a massive payroll to manage them.  Nor can they be bribed.
        3. They are nondiscriminatorythey don't care about race, religion, ethnic background, sexual orientation, and whatever other bemoanings bleeding heart liberals can come up with.  They just don't like being stepped on.
        4. They will not harm you unless you step on them.  And you have to go out of your way to step on them.  Its freedom of choice.   If you dont want to get blown up, dont go there; or you can choose to achieve upward mobility on a one-time trip.
        5. And, to be a good neighbor, lets tell Mr. Fox to update his illegal immigration pamphlet so that his swarming hoards know that they may become commingled with desert dirt if they try to sneak across our borders and dance in our mine fields.
        6.  And, to be a good neighbor, we can put up signs (in all the romance languages of course) to identify the first several miles of American soil along the Mexican border as a: NO GO ZONERecommend you use a controlled entry point for your safe crossing. 
         
        On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) F Worley <> writes:
        If the LP would get a sane foriegn policy, borders included, I might actually consider rejoining them.
         
        No offense to my friends in the RLC but between budget deficits, Terri Shiavo and other issues, I've just about had it with the GOP and the DEMS ain't getting my vote.
         
        But I digress, where do we stand on this issue of the Minute Men?
         
        Frank

        Guy McLendon <guy@...> wrote:
        FYI ... to whomever it may concern ... my guess is there's more than a 50% chance the LP will water down their 100% open borders plank in 2006 ... to acknowledge Constitutional authorization for border security, and validity of reason to exercise this authority for purposes of protecting public health & national security.
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:49 PM
        Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] Mechanical Engineering - Good, Good, Good ... Good Vibrations

        OK, several have given their opinions on the MinuteMen, so let's get on to strategy;
         
        1) Tancredo talks like he would like to ride this issue into the Whitehouse.  Would the RLC endorse him?
        2) Every state has this problem.  Let's get to networking with groups that are working on this issue in our states.
        3) Democrats and Republicans don't seem able to handle this issue.  Can the RLC forge new ground here?
        4) Libertarians believe in open borders; maybe we don't even have a philosophical leg to stand on.  You decide.
         
        But at least you have to start thinking in these terms.  Guy's first email talked about issues that resonate with a broad swath of the public.  This might not be something that we can use, but the issue is becoming red hot.  It's starting to resonate, and ringing like a bell.
         
        Chuck Seberg 
         
         
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.