Supreme Court to Decide Arizona Immigration Law

The Supreme Court? THE Supreme Court? Is that a bit extreme, or am I the only one who sees it as overreaching? True, Arizona's new immigration law is essentially an insignificantly "tweaked" version of the unenforced USC, Title 8 (Chapters 6 and 12 inclusive) "Immigration and Nationality". However, it is not the legality of the federal law being challenged, nor is it the failure of the federal government to enforce the provisions of USC, Title 8 that's being challenged. What is under siege by the Obama administration's DOJ lackey, Eric Holder, Jr., is the right of the states to create their own laws. Here comes that pesky Constitution again...

Amendment X

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

The Constitution gives the United States the power to make laws... it also charges them with the responsibility to enforce those laws! The logical questions seem to be; If the United States chooses to abdicate its responsibility to enforce certain laws, does the enforcement of those laws not fall to each of the respective states, to deal with as they see fit? Also, do the states not then have the responsibility - and the right - to create specific laws that are applicable within the geographical boundaries of those states to insure that persons within their borders are legally entitled to be there? If the protections of our national sovereignty and citizenry are not enthusiastically pursued by the federal government, is it not then incumbent upon the states to provide such protections?

Logic aside (which is always the federal government's position), the Obama administration wishes to pick and choose which laws they will enforce. The United States of America is being invaded by illegal aliens on a daily basis. Who are they? Indeed, some are hard-working, law-abiding people looking for a better way of life. Some are criminals of varying degrees (ALL illegal aliens are technically criminals, because they have violated USC Title 8 upon crossing our border without legal authorization). Some come here for the entitlement benefits, such as public assistance (welfare) and free medical care. Their reasoning makes no difference - if they are not legally entitled to be in this country, they are de facto criminals. But, for some strange reason, these non-citizens are permitted to vote, and those votes are what Obama and the Democrats want. Votes that will enable them to continue to lead this country into economic disaster and soon achieve what we now refer to as "Third World" status.

In the meantime, the Holder-controlled DOJ bypasses the Arizona State Supreme Court, which (again, logically) should decide cases relating to Arizona State law under the Arizona State Constitution. Why? Probably to insure the court hearing the case will be more inclined toward supporting the position of the Federal Government, under the precept of what I call "circumventional victory" (which basically says, "If you don't feel that you can beat them on the appointed field, move the game to your home town"). The feds rarely lose a case in front of the SCOTUS, but the good news is that they don't always win! Finally, there is "hope" - although not of the kind Obama promised, and "hopefully" the "change" will come in November 2012, when Obama is replaced... before he and his cronies completely destroy our Democratic Republic! Keeping the borders open, overwhelming our public assistance programs, borrowing money, and the endless printing of more dollars (thereby devaluing those few that we may have in our possession) is the key to bankrupting the USA.

For further information on the mechanics involved in destroying a nation, Google the "Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis".

Of course there is always the possibility that I could be wrong about all of the above. The odds of that are about the same as the odds against the rising of the Sun in the east tomorrow morning. I may not have all the answers, but I do know what questions need to be asked.

Just A Couple Of Questions...

1. When the crotch bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutalla, tried - unsuccessfully - to destroy a Detroit-bound airliner and murder the 300 souls on board, WHY did our government decide to provide medical treatment for him? Any suffering he may have experienced was accidentally self-inflicted as he was trying to murder 300 other people! The only "treatment" he deserves is a swift execution.

2. Abdulmutalla admitted to being a tool of al-Qaida, which relatonship was confirmed by al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in a January 2010 speech - "The message delivered to you through the plane of the heroic warrior Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was a confirmation of the previous messages sent by the heroes of the Sept. 11," he said. "America will never dream of security unless we will have it in reality in Palestine," he added. "God willing, our raids on you will continue as long as your support for the Israelis continues." Which brings me to question #2 - WHY did our Department of Justice declare this a criminal matter for the civilian courts to adjudicate, rather than the terrorist act it was, which would have been tried by military tribunal - as it should have been?

3. This brings up question #3 - WHY are we wasting time and money on any trial? We have a confession by the principal that the act was one having been directed by al-Qaida , and confirmed by al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. Arraign him, find him guilty, and execute him within 30 days. No lengthy, expensive drawn-out trial. No lengthy, expensive incarceration. No lengthy, expensive medical treatment for his self-inflicted burns. Simply justice - sure and swift. You did it, you admitted to doing it, and the fact that you did it was confirmed by a 3rd party - now die!
And, as a parting gift, Abdulmutalla should be made aware that his lifeless body will be wrapped in the skin of a pig prior to removal from "The Green Room", thereby canceling his ticket to Paradise!

DOJ Investigates CIA Over Use of "Severe Techniques" During Terrorist Interrogations

According to one of the wire services - "Several key Democrats and officials with Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union said Tuesday that the potential prosecutions are a start, but they said the probe does nothing to investigate the actions of officials who sanctioned the brutal interrogation program."

So, lets see just who is upset over this... the left-wing headhunters who blame the Bush administration for everything since the crucifixion, the bleeding hearts who always side with those who have done wrong, and the American Communist Lawyers Unlimited who expend great time, energy and money defending anything designed to destroy the foundations of our nation. (It's always good to look past the heroic-sounding names to find out who the players really are and identify their true agenda.)

What is it they are upset about? Probably the only thing even close to a "severe technique"in this "brutal interrogation program" is waterboarding... which is something akin to a face washing on steroids. After waterboarding, comes those vicious techniques of threats and intimidation, and embarrassment.

Look at this word: TERRORIST. The first six letters spell TERROR, and the last three letters mean "practitioner of". So the CIA interrogators were dealing with PRACTITIONERS OF TERROR.

The first step in a successful communication - of any kind - is to use a language that the other party understands. It logically follows that if the party with whom you are trying to have a successful communication deals in inflicting terror upon others, then that is a language he or she will understand.

The next consideration is fluency in the language of the communication. In order to be effective, the interrogator must be generally as fluent as the person with whom he/she is trying to communicate, to insure the message is not misunderstood, without having to use the nuances of beheading, maiming, castration, murdering, or setting fire to their captive terrorists to "get their point across". If you are communicating in a language which is foreign to you, you do not want to be embarrassed by your clumsiness/inabilities in that language! Terrorists understand TERROR, so let's terrorize them... and feed them nothing but pork products!