angelofdeath

Violence against Border Patrol increases Rammings up 188%, shootings up 122% in Tucson area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: June 2, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com U.S. Border Patrol agents find themselves on defense against an onslaught of illegal alien traffic in the Tucson area with assaults on officers up 50 percent over last year. Agents in the Tucson sector are patrolling a total of 261 miles of border, but some are forced to do it from the confines of cages, according to a report on KVOA-TV in Tucson. The special vehicles are called "war wagons" – designed to protect against rocks and boulders thrown by smugglers of illegal aliens. But the metal caging isn't protecting the agents from a new problem. "When our agents try to do a vehicle stop, the criminal element try to run over our agents to evade arrest," says agent Jose Garza. So far this fiscal year, the Tucson sector of the Border Patrol has reported 163 acts of assault against agents, compared to a total of 118 for the entire fiscal year of 2004. National reports say vehicle rammings are up 188 percent, shootings are up 122 percent and cases of rock throwing are up 23 percent. Garza says, "They're getting frustrated because we're out there. We're encountering them more times." Agent Garza says he knows, with more manpower and resources, will come more encounters with criminal activity. There are no reports at this time of deaths or serious injuries to agents. Garza says those on patrol are constantly being trained about the dangers along the international line.

Mexican commandos new threat on border U.S.-trained elite force now works for drug cartel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: May 27, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com WASHINGTON – Elite Mexican commandos, trained by U.S. forces to combat the drug cartels have switched sides and are working for the drug smugglers in the border area posing a special hazard to American law enforcement and Border Patrol agents, according to a U.S. Justice Department memo. The commandos, trained by the U.S. Army at Fort Benning, Ga., are known as "Los Zetas." The Justice Department warning was sent to law enforcement agencies throughout the Southwest. Using the commando training, Los Zetas are known to be extremely violent and have been blamed for an outbreak of violence along the Mexican border. There are reports of the commandos making cross-border runs into U.S. territory in military-style vehicles, armed with automatic weapons. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars training Los Zetas to intercept drugs, some of them coming from Mexico's southern border, before they could reach the U.S. The U.S. government has also sent U.S. Border Patrol agents to Mexico's southern border with Guatemala to train law enforcement and military forces to intercept human smugglers destined to reach the U.S. "Things like that are a concern to us, especially trained here on the U.S. side," Pima County Sheriff Tony Estrada told KVOA, channel 4 in Tucson, Arizona. "They've gotten pretty special training. ... Now, they are working with drug traffickers on the Mexican side." Lt. Ron Benson added: "Not only did they receive some early military training but they developed their own internal training as well increasing their violence far beyond their own original capabilities." Benson has worked with the Department of Homeland Security and tracked the rogue Mexican commandos. He is now retiring from the Pima County Sheriff's Department and will be working with the FBI. "They are a threat to authorities not only in Texas, but in New Mexico, Arizona and California," he said. "Because we believe Los Zetas are being used as protectors for narcotics coming into this country." Benson says sons and nephews of Los Zetas are starting their own organization and taking part in the drug wars.

HOMELAND INSECURITY Iranian smuggling ring busted near Mex border Feds believe man brought 60 from terrorist state into U.S. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: June 1, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com A smuggling ring specializing in bringing Iranians into the U.S. over the Mexico border has been broken up in an FBI sting operation. A 39-year-old Iranian with permanent legal residency status who is suspected of having smuggled 60 other Iranians into the U.S. was arrested Thursday in Mesa, Ariz., according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. At his arraignment yesterday, Zeayadali Malhamdary, who owns a tailoring business, pleaded not guilty. He faces a detention hearing tomorrow. Iran has long been designated a terrorist state by the U.S. State Department and FBI. The FBI began investigating Malhamdary after a source told immigration officials that Malhamdary had sought help getting false Mexican visas so he could bring Iranians into Mexico and then across the border into Arizona. The source also told investigators that Malhamdary had asked for help bringing his sister into the United States. According to the probable cause statement by FBI Agent Aaron Kellerman, the source didn't help him, but the sister did arrive in Arizona. Federal prosecutors say Malhamdary had previously smuggled about 60 Iranians into the United States. Malhamdary flew to Tehran, Iran, in March, allegedly to get the passports of the Iranians he planned to smuggle into the United States through Mexico, Kellerman said in the statement. In late March, the undercover agent was given three passports. Malhamdary allegedly told the undercover agent in May that he had eight more people who wanted to be smuggled into the United States. The undercover agent on Thursday met with Malhamdary and agreed to pick up three Iranians in Mexico City and then to bring them to Nogales, Mexico, and arrange to have them smuggled across the border, Kellerman said in his statement. When he was arrested, Malhamdary allegedly told investigators that he wanted to bring Iranians into the United States so they could seek refugee status. No one answered the phone at his tailoring business yesterday afternoon. If convicted of the three attempted smuggling charges, Malhamdary could face up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each of the counts. FBI officials said they had no reason to believe there were any terrorist connections to the case.

:rolleyes: learn something before you start showing your ignorance. "they like all carry guns and threaten people, dUdE!!!! GUNS ARE BAD!!!!!!!!!! I heard they killed 300 some immigrants just minding thier own business!!!! DUUDEEE"

from ron paul a couple years ago... Border Tragedy Reveals Deeper Problems We all feel tremendous sympathy for the men who lost their lives last week locked in a truck-trailer outside of Victoria, Texas, in the congressional district I represent. Regardless of the circumstances of their entry into the United States, it is a terrible tragedy for their families, and a horrific example of what can happen when human life is considered cheap. This event also reminds us of the serious immigration and border control problems that remain to be addressed. Why is it that people will take incredible risks to come to this country? Fundamentally, it is because they seek a better, more prosperous life. Such a life is possible only in a nation of laws, where there is a reasonable assumption that the law will be applied equally to all. This is why, regardless of one’s position on immigration, existing immigration laws must be better enforced. Incidents like this, and the thousands of illegal border crossings that take place every day, demonstrate that authorities are not enforcing the law effectively. This tragedy also reminds us of the lengths to which some will go to gain entry into the United States. Even as the government takes more and more of our income and curtails our liberties, incidents like this serve as a poignant reminder of the great freedoms and prosperity we enjoy in the United States. That dozens of people would cram themselves into a trailer like cattle, just for the opportunity to come to the United States, says a great deal about our relatively free-market system. It should also remind us of just how important it is to do everything we can to preserve our liberty and constitutional form of government. This tragedy highlights something more chilling, however: our continued vulnerability to terrorist attacks. More than four million trucks enter the United States through Mexico each year; border authorities inspect less than one percent. Indeed, our borders have become more porous than ever, as federal authorities in some cases simply will not enforce the laws that Congress has passed. Suppose that rather than human cargo, the truck was carrying a chemical or nuclear weapon. Suppose 100 trucks loaded with nuclear weapons crossed the Mexican border driven by Al-Qaeda operatives. Some 99 would get through. Who believes terrorists would have much trouble getting into Mexico? Yet while we maintain more than 200,000 US troops in more than 120 countries- many of whom are involved in guarding foreign borders- our own border patrol stands unprepared to prevent terrorists from bringing terrible weapons into our country. Surely those soldiers and resources would be better used protecting our own shores. The recent bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed several Americans, indicates that Al-Qaeda is still alive and well. We therefore ignore our unguarded borders at our own peril.

ron paul is a true conservative. he is famous for his libertarian presidential run in the 80's. he has voted against virtually every power boost to the federal government. he is one of the only 100% no compromise constitution upholder in congress. hes 100% pro gun. hes 100% limiting federal power. you guys might like some of what he has to say, but will most likely hate most of it. sorta like the wacky alex jones, you might be all about his anti bush stuff, but would cringe at him supporting michael peroutka for president last year, his abortion stance is 110% pro life, and 100% for closed borders. same with ron paul, you might like his anti patriot act stance, but might hate stance on social issues. by the way hes a republican, one of the "real" ones left.

oddly i just saw a snipet of a program on the country music channel about the minute men. villian you are right, they are privitizing a government function. for one reason, our government WILL NOT SECURE OUT BORDERS. (for anyone who is into conspiracy theories, which im not, you can surely come up with some on this topic)let me break it down: the southern mexican border is closed the fuck down. its northern border (bordering the US) is wide the fuck open. the mexican army has been seen and photo's exist of them aiding and encouraging illegal entry into the US and they have showed them the best immigration routes. our northern border as said before, is virtually wide open. President Fox has said he sees "america and mexico becoming a fully integrated society" not only is it "mexicans" coming over the southern border, it is people from the middle east, czechnians(sp?), turkish, etc etc, read some statistics. "muslims" are coming over the border from vancouver. Article IV section 4 of our constitution explicitly gives power to the federal government to protect its states against invasion. congress approves 4000 new border agents, bush gives us 400. we have mexican radicals claiming they still own what is now texas and the US southwest. they are smearing racial slurs at us ("fuck you gringos," "i wish they would of blew up that jew hell hole new york all the way..." actual racist slurs not the loose lefty definition of racist) after the minutemen ended their project in may, the border guard was ORDERED TO STAND DOWN. they didnt want any arrests to make it seem like the border which had been SHUT DOWN, was not a problem. they didnt want the Minutemen to seem as though they have done good. further: "Costs The net cost of immigration is $70 billion a year. Mexican nationals sent $10.5 billion in remittances to Mexico in 2002. Remittances to Mexico are the second-highest source of income, exceeding tourism, and lagging behind only oil revenues. The 1986 amnesty program cost $78 Billion to American citizens in services and benefits, or about $26,000 per legalized immigrant. Medical Care for illegal aliens, required under the “emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act,” costs American taxpayers $3.7 billion in Medicare and Medicaid funds. Immigration accounts for most of the increase in public school enrollment in the past 20 years. Mexico is the 10th richest country in the world and has the fourth-highest number of billionaires. It is the fifth-leading exporter of oil in the world and has twice the oil reserves of the United States. Crime More than 20 percent of the inmates in federal prisons in the U.S. are illegal aliens, and the criminal-alien prison population cost taxpayers about $1 billion annually. Mexican Interior Secretary Santiago Creel, who has been agitating for the United States to grant amnesty to the Mexican illegal aliens, said on July 28, 2003, that his country will never help the Unied States secure its southern border. Two-thirds of the cocaine coming into the United States comes via the U.S.-Mexico border, along with 50 percent of all the heroin in this country and 95 percent of the marijuana. Twenty cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago, Miami, Denver, Seattle and Portland, Maine have adopted “sanctuary laws” banning police from asking people about their immigration status. Source: Justice, Labor, Health and Human Services Records and the U.S. Census Bureau - Compiled by The Washington Times " why anyone would want open borders during this "war on terror" is beyond me. that is why it is totally hypocritical of bush to be fighting wars of inverventionism, yet cant protect our borders. maybe when someone walks on in the US and plants a bomb and blows up some city they will wake up. why doesnt Bush want to close the borders? he doesnt want to be called "racist." he and the congressional republicans, doesnt want to lose ANY of the mexican/latino vote. the democrats again dont want to be called racist and wouldnt think of securing our borders. most republicans fear the "r" word as well. the only people trying to combat the illegal invasion are a few republicans. as for being racist, you will perhaps always have a few apples. you would be suprised to read the actual members of the project consisted of over 15 races and nationalities, including legal mexicans. its like this... close our borders. reform immigration laws, make it easier for people to come in, i dunno, but we need border security. our government can fund bullshit government jobs and departments, most of which arent needed, it can fund our retirements, fund the welfare state, fund all these "socialist" institutions, yet cant provide a basic constitutional guarantee. the minuteman project has proven, that when the government cant do something, the people will do it. it is what this country was founded on. we were founded on do it yourself ethics. its "we the people" not "we the government" remember? the people are the original homeland security. at the time of the constitution the militia consisted of every able bodied man 18-45, at the time of the revolution it was every able bodied man 18-60. and they were required to be armed. the minuteman project has proven that with more man power the border patrol can perform thier job like it should be. it is a wake up call to congress to say "WE WANT SECURE BORDERS." perhaps they will fund more agents, or better yet, put our national guard, reserves, military on the border. the key to being a soveriegn nation is secure borders. what other nations of our status can you just walk into? we protect the border between north and south korea better than we do our own. from teamamericapac.org: "10. It's time to raise the American standard of living. The real minimum wage has been declining for over a decade. Some advocate raising the minimum wage--but this, of course, would raise the price of unskilled labor above its free-market value. Mass unemployment would result. Why has the market value of unskilled labor declined? For the same reason that all prices move: supply and demand. It's hard to change the demand side of the equation: you can't make anyone "need" an unskilled worker who doesn't need one already. For years, however, we have been artificially modifying the supply side by quietly tolerating a massive influx of unskilled workers across our borders. We can reverse the trend by enforcing immigration laws. We won't need to raise the minimum wage. It will raise itself. Millions of Americans will be lifted out of poverty, and millions more from the lower middle class to prosperity. 9. We can immediately create millions of new jobs. Conservative estimates place the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. at 10,000,000. That's ten million. Taking into account minor children and the aged, that's still millions of people who are flooding our labor force. Remove them, and opportunities will abound for Americans. There's an old canard that says that illegals "take the jobs Americans don't want." This is a fallacy! There's no job an American can't or won't do for a living wage. It is a cruel joke on the American worker to allow illegals to depress wages for many jobs below poverty level, and then to mock Americans for being reluctant to participate in the poverty. 8. Breaking the law is crime. Lawbreakers are criminals. Out of deference to the PC crowd, many like to use the term "undocumented workers"--as if illegals were merely missing a piece of bureaucratic paperwork. By the same logic, we can call a car thief an "undocumented driver." Our immigration laws exist for good reasons: to protect our safety, our national sovereignty, our standard of living, our health, and our culture. Those who break them may "want a better life for themselves," but then again, so do all who enrich themselves by disregarding the law. Besides, many people who wish to immigrate honestly are waiting patiently. Granting privileges like driver's licenses and social security cards to illegals is a slap in the face to law-abiding citizens and immigrants alike. It's like opening an express window to give titles and owner's cards to car thieves, while making legitimate owners stand in line! 7. Open borders threaten our safety. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, two things have become clear. First, we have enemies, and they are vicious and without conscience. Second, our enemies obviously believe that an attack from within is more feasible than an attack from without. Even before the horrid events of September 11, our immigration laws had the primary purpose of protecting us. The use of visas and passports allows our government to monitor, and to control, who enters our country, and why. Certainly, few illegal aliens are terrorists. But it only takes one! More importantly, the creeping ideology of open borders--the (usually unspoken) belief that treating foreigners who enter our country differently than we treat our own citizens is somehow "discriminatory" or "racist"--is creating a terrible dilemma: Either we cease to monitor the aliens (and open ourselves up for even worse attacks), or we create the "equality" of the police state by casting aside constitutional protections for citizens and monitoring everyone. The more resolutely we protect our borders against threats from without, the safer, and freer, we can live within them. 6. We're a nation of 300 million; the Third World population is in the billions. Do the math. Our country seems large, but its population is tiny compared to that of the Third World. China and India alone have seven times our population. For whatever reasons, our society has succeeded in creating immense wealth where many others have created only poverty. An American welfare recipient would still be "rich" by the standards of most of the world. One can't blame the citizens of countries who produce much less wealth per capita than we for wanting to reap the benefits our forefathers have sown for us. But if we open the borders, our island of productivity and prosperity will soon disappear beneath a flood of Third World squalor. 5. American culture is worth preserving. Culture is more than operas and Shakespearian plays--it's the sum total of the customs, beliefs, artistic creations, attitudes, goals, and norms that make a society what it is. It is passed down, as a treasure, from grandparent to parent to child. In other words, culture is what gives us our identity. Some advocate "multiculturalism"--creating a society in which multiple cultures exist side by side, and believe that "diversity"--having as many cultures as possible, with none dominant--is desirable. The majority of the media elite believes that we need more multiculturalism and diversity; the majority of the population doesn't. Regardless of how anyone stands on this issue, the fact is that our society is already multicultural and diverse. Anyone who wishes to enjoy, and celebrate, the many cultures now coexisting in America need only visit any American city. By contrast, genuine American culture--the Founding Fathers, the story of the pioneers and the winning of the west, the Pledge of Allegiance, Columbus Day, the Bill of Rights--is under constant assault. Some of our country's detractors vilify all that is traditionally American, while others would reduce our traditions to one more example of quaint folklore beside those of other nations. Russian culture can be found in Russia, Mexican culture in Mexico, multiculturalism in any major city... but where can one find American culture? Only in a place where Americans treasure it, and lovingly transmit it from generation to generation. Immigration laws should ensure that those who seek to live permanently on American territory be willing to adopt and preserve its culture. And they are useless unless they are enforced. 4. It's not your father's immigration. Previous generations romanticized immigration. The images are still with us: Starry-eyed Irish, Italian, Jewish, and Polish arrivees toting their bags and trunks onto shore at Ellis Island... The tablet at the base of the Statue of Liberty exhorting other nations to "Give me your tired, your poor..." The native-born American learning to love pizza and bagels. That was then. This is now. Yes, there are still many people in foreign lands who harbor the "American dream," and who seek to come here to realize it. Millions of illegal aliens, however, have attitudes and motives very different from those of the immigrants in the fading black-and-white photos of yesteryear. It's not fashionable to speak the truth about this group. But the truth must be spoken. What makes this new breed of "immigrants" different? To begin with, they're not "immigrating" at all--they're sneaking in. They don't have an "American dream" of building this country; rather, though still loyal to their home nations, they want to exploit ours economically. Many even dream of taking over regions of our country, and displacing us. There's already a word for this goal: reconquista. If the members of this group don't intend to return home, yet have no loyalty to America, what should we call them? Certainly not "immigrants." Colonists is perhaps a better term. Today's colonists, like those of the past, want to build enclaves on American soil from which they can expand their own wealth and power, and that of their homeland, while drawing on the resources that were created by the native population. How can we welcome legitimate immigrants while keeping out colonists? By knowing who is coming here, and why, and only admitting those whose presence is in our country's best interests. In other words, by enforcing immigration laws. 3. It's an issue we can all come together on. Conservatives, traditionally, aim to preserve the valuable legacy of the past, and to protect freedom by limiting the power of government. Liberals seek to provide all citizens, even the most disadvantaged, with the opportunity to realize their full potential. Both have worthy goals, but often squabble over how to realize them. Removing illegal aliens can give us the best of both worlds. We can preserve our traditional culture. And without resorting to costly and intrusive government programs, we can give our poor a genuine "hand up": as the glut of cheap labor dries up, those at the bottom rung of the economic ladder will suddenly find themselves able to climb higher without ruinous competition. People of good will on the left and the right can only smile approvingly as the free market (hallowed by conservatives) provides our unskilled and uneducated with a decent wage, and with a job market that welcomes instead of marginalizes them (the well-meaning goal of liberal government programs). We can "live better than we did four years ago" and have a rebirth of national pride, as President Reagan wanted for us. And we can have a "New Deal" for our poor, a society where no American is left out, which were the ideals of President Roosevelt. At last, we can come together. Maybe that's what patriotism is all about. 2. We either face tough issues now, or tougher ones later. Immigration issues are complex. We need a national debate--which, judging by the 2004 primary and general Presidential campaigns, isn't happening. Most Americans, when confronted with the facts, will probably continue to want what they want now: strict enforcement of our immigration laws. It won't be easy. We'll have to find workable ways to deport illegal aliens without creating unnecessary hardships for those who have broken our immigration laws, and without creating severe dislocations for the unscrupulous employers who have benefited from their presence. And, of course, we'll have to counter, with quiet reason, the voices of those who scream "discrimination" or "racism." Some cringe at the challenges that await us. These challenges, however, pale in comparison to those that future generations will face if we fail to act. Imagine an overcrowded, impoverished America with shrinking wages and expanding burdens on the social service system. Imagine an America where millions of Americans have been driven out of their neighborhoods by throngs of foreign colonists who neither speak our language nor understand the culture that created American prosperity--but who deeply resent the poverty that inevitably results from their own unwillingness, or inabilty, to live as true Americans. Will Americans be forced to tax away their own shriveling wealth, and to transfer it to the aliens within our borders, if they wish to appease the colonists' anger? Will the shrinking American middle class merge with the alien underclass to form a new "peasant culture" while a tiny American elite trembles behind the walls of heavily policed gated communities? Or will full-scale cultural and racial war break out? None of these possibilities is appealing. Nonetheless, a society is a reflection of the population that comprises it. If we, as an advanced society with a low birthrate, continue to import a Third World population with a high birthrate, we will become a Third World society, and will face the problems which other Third World societies face as well. Isn't it better to face the issue of illegal immigration now--and to do something about it? ... and the number one reason is: 1. We owe it to our kids and grandkids. Our children and grandchildren will marvel at the digitized archives of the TV shows of the 1950s and 1960s. They'll see a prosperous, free, united America-- the envy of the world, a place anyone would be happy and proud to call home. This, they'll realize, was the legacy our grandparents and parents left us, the American citizens of the early 21st century. How will the America we leave to our children stack up against the America our parents left to us? What will future generations think of us? Will we be known as the preservers and expanders of the beautiful legacy, or as its destroyers? By our actions or inactions, we're deciding which it will be. Right now. " and yes i can cite you actual sources for every claim i made.

i asked myself the same question about trespassing on government property( im assuming its government property). apparently its legal or i would think the minute men would all be locked up.

pic?

GOA is not a "republican" group. get your facts straight nukka

DUDE, the very few dudes who carried guns, have carry permits. this makes it legal. do you know what a "carry permit" is? LOL

"You know the neocons will never do this. They are the one's that want free trade, not fair trade. They will sell this country out any chance they get. And you really haven't brought anything to support your position, unless you consider accusing the left of empty arguments and of unjustly calling the right racist, support for your position. " yeah your right, the neo cons wont do any of that. that is why they have got to go. not only do the neo cons want free trade, so does damn near everyone. nafta?=clinton. now bush is pushing cafta. as for supporting my position, sorry about that, but im just killing time before i go on vacation, and wanted to throw a bunch of stuff down, in response to pretty much this whole thread, really quick.

"Which is why I find armed militias patrolling the arizona border to be very disturbing... as well as Fox news blubbering over them. " are you one of those guys who thinks that the minute men are shooting illegals too? why cant a citizen who can legally carry a firearm, is following all state laws, carry a firearm for self defense while doing the job our government wont?

Liberal Media Unsheathes Long Knives To Attack Tom DeLay Gun Owners of America 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 22151 (703)321-8585 Tuesday, May 3, 2005 If there's one thing the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the network news hate more than conservatives, it's an effective conservative. So it is hardly surprising that they've launched a personal attack on Tom DeLay which is virtually unprecedented in recent history. You may remember that, after the Columbine tragedy, DeLay worked with Gun Owners of America to set up a procedure which killed all anti-gun legislation -- even anti-gun measures which had overwhelming support. DeLay also worked with us to sidetrack, for many years, the anti-gun Incumbent Protection Act. At a time when even the Bush administration endorsed the reauthorization of the semi-automatic gun ban, DeLay was the one major voice in Washington who stood firm against maintaining the odious ban. The current attacks on DeLay's ethics involve complex factual issues which are sometimes difficult to understand. The liberals are counting on this. Part of the problem is a partisan Democratic prosecutor in Austin who is out to make a name for himself. But more so, the problem involves complex, unconstitutional incumbent-protection statutes which seek to silence pro-gun voices -- and accusations that DeLay's strict compliance with the technicalities of those laws fails to comport with the "spirit" of the liberal anti-gun legislation. Then, there are activities the liberal media concede are legal and legitimate -- but seek to demonize nevertheless. For instance, a legal DeLay trip financed by a conservative non-profit organization was challenged because the non-profit, in turn, received contributions from groups which could not fund the trip directly. Even the Washington Post concedes that DeLay had no knowledge of the group's funding, had no obligation to find out, and therefore acted legally. Funny. Bill Clinton committed perjury -- and the liberal media rallied behind them. So the members of the Washington press corps are obviously no sticklers for ethics. The bottom line? This fight is about an effective, pro-gun congressman who is being persecuted because of his beliefs. ACTION: Write your congressman. If he is a Republican, urge him to stand behind Tom DeLay. If your representative is a Democrat, ask him to stop the partisan attacks on this great pro-gun leader. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm where one of the two pre-written messages below will automatically load depending on who your Representative is. -- Sample Republican Communication -- Dear Representative You and I both know that the media's frenzied attacks on Tom DeLay are not as a result of anything he has done –- but rather because he is a principled pro-gun advocate. The last thing we need is an ethics lecture from pundits who, a few years back, were apologists for Bill Clinton's perjury. Please stand behind Tom DeLay and support him in his battles against the liberal media. Sincerely, -- Sample Democratic Communication -- Dear Representative You and I both know that the media's frenzied attacks on Tom DeLay are not as a result of anything he had done -- but rather because he is a principled pro-gun advocate. The last thing we need is an ethics lecture from pundits who, a few years back, were apologists for Bill Clinton's perjury. Please ask Nancy Pelosi to stop the partisan attacks against DeLay. Sincerely,

ron paul is my boy.

im glad the judges are being voted on, and im glad the filibuster is saved. the judiciary is the last hope for liberalism

its pretty simple guys. illegals fuck us in more ways than the economy. fuck open borders, fuck free trade fanaticism, fuck wars of needless intervention. after victory in iraq, bring our boys home, get out of the UN, no nato expansion, put the millitary and national guard on the borders, and we might start becoming a super power again. right now we are over stretched, and wore out. to think it is racism to dislike ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, is fucking lunacy. its a tactic of leftists to smear your opponent by calling them a racist. it does do one thing, it shows me, that if you call me a racist for wanting to stop ILLEGAL INVASION of our country, you have an empty arsenal of real arguments. for all you pro illegal immigration types, learn something before you speak.

STTTTTTTTOOOOOOOOOOOOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

^^^ yup it will and is. and please guys lets be realistic, dont just blame bush, blame all of congress as well. democrats and republicans for this. there was NO OPPOSITION at all to this bill in the senate.

cmon man. i hear the "republicans own most news networks" line all the time. why are they spouting liberal views? do republicans own the new york times? if i recall about 10 years go the republicans owned congress. neither the democrats or the republicans are going anywhere, any time soon. (which is what i would like to see, them both dissolve.) the democrats are predominately one step away from socialists, and the republicans are liberals in conservative clothing. (socially conservative, generally liberal on everything else, cmon, speading democracy?) the reason why the republicans are in power and arguably gaining power is because alot of americans (non northeasterners or west coasters) vote on values. all the neo cons have to do is preach conservative values, and they are in. look, at what the leader of the democrats is doing. dean is backpeddling, so is hillary. they are trying their hardest to drop thier liberal labels. dean is preaching about how the democrats are not the party of anti abortion, pro gay marriage, anti gun types. hillary is talking about how she is really a "religous conservative." the south and the heartland is solidly conservative. the dems must penetrate this to win. they are doing good for trying to get elected, but they also look stupid and pussified, as some of thier voting records resemble a communist, then they are trying to do a 180. back to the media. you are blind if you actually think ALL the media is neo conservative. perhaps you are to far to the left realize that the big "print media" outlets (new york times, etc etc etc) are blatantly liberal. the cable news predominately lean left- cnn, nbc, abc. fox leans neo conservative. on the radio, conservatives rule the airwaves. the internet, conservative bloggers hold thier own, however there are plenty of liberal bloggers. dont forget about the hollywood michael moore type stuff. there is no such thing as an unbiased news source. if there is one, send it my way, id be interested in giving it a look.

sounds like houston might have a few new "spots." there are cameras in a yard we hang out around. 2 of them.

damn at the sidebar huh? reckon i'll see you there, son. best show i have been to lately... was sick of it all and terror. good energy, people flipping off the top balcony. great times. dont forget deicide and goatwhore soon, and napalm death and goatwhore a few months from now.

bump, yors should come back up to baltimore.

with honor is a decent band. saw them with sick of it all last month. good shit