Torch of Freedom

Federal Court Overturns Injunction against National Scout Jamboree; American Legion Hails Decision

2007-04-06T13:49:00.000-07:00

INDIANAPOLIS (April 5, 2007) - The leader of the nation’s largest veteran’s organization hailed yesterday’s decision from the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago that dismissed the ACLU’s lawsuit against the Dept. of Defense for supporting the National Boy Scout Jamboree.

“This is a victory for not only the youth of our nation but also for the preservation of tradition and common sense,” said American Legion National Commander Paul A. Morin. “For more than 25 years, Boy Scouts have held the National Scout Jamboree every four years at Fort A.P. Hill near Fredericksburg, Va. for ten days of activities emphasizing physical fitness, appreciation of the outdoors, and patriotism. It is especially fitting that the Scouts will be able to go forward with the 2010 Jamboree as they celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America.”

In 1999 the ACLU sued DoD over its support for the Jamboree. In 2005, a federal district court in Chicago concluded the Jamboree statue was unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause because Scouting has a nonsectarian “duty to God” requirement. DoD appealed the district court’s injunction against military support under that statute for the 2010 Jamboree. The American Legion filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting the Dept. of Defense in Winkler v. Gates.

Seven Presidents have attended the Jamboree since President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937. The Jamboree grounds at Fort A.P. Hill are open to the public and an estimated 300,000 visitors attended in 2005 along with 43,000 Scouts and their leaders. The U.S. Congress called it an incomparable training opportunity for our armed forces; it requires the construction, maintenance, and disassembly of a “tent city” capable of supporting tens of thousands of people for a week or longer.

“Patriotism and mentoring youth are pillars of The American Legion,” Morin said. “When Scouts have the opportunity to interface with members of the finest military in the world, they acquire many of the leadership skills that will guide them throughout their lives.” The American Legion is one of the nation’s largest sponsors of scouting units across the country.

Media Contacts: Joe March, (317) 630-1253; Cell (317) 748-1926 or Ramona Joyce, 202/263-2982; Cell, 202-445-1161. This text and a high-resolution photo of Cmdr. Morin can be downloaded at www.legion.org.

2007-04-01T07:48:00.000-07:00

Senate Passes Iraq Surrender Provision,
American Legion Urges Presidential Veto

Washington, DC (March 28, 2007) - The National Commander of The American Legion criticized an amendment narrowly passed by the U.S. Senate that would add a timeline of withdrawal to an Iraq spending bill.

“You don’t have to be a military strategist to understand the advantage a withdrawal date gives to the enemy,” Paul A. Morin said. “First the House passed a blueprint for disaster and now the Senate passes a recipe for surrender.”

Morin called on the president to honor his promise to veto legislation that includes timetables to withdraw from Iraq. “The American Legion supports the troops. You cannot support the troops if you want them to cut and run. Congress authorized Operation Iraqi Freedom, now it needs to let the troops finish the job.”

Morin pointed out that Congress cut off funding in Vietnam, even though the troops won every military battle. “Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. The American people need to support the troops and their commander in chief, even if Congress won’t.”

The Senate voted 50-48 for the provision containing the withdraw requirement, which was supported by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV. Reid did not seem willing to compromise with the White House, saying that he is “not anxious to strip anything out of the bill.”

Morin added that the United States has only one commander in chief. “The American people did not elect 535 legislators to be armchair generals. It is outrageous that Congress would leave our troops on the battlefield without the funding that they need. It’s time for the president to veto this surrender bill and for Congress to pass a serious war-funding bill, which would provide the money without the micro-management. I call on my fellow Legionnaires to let their senators and representatives know where we stand on this war.”

The American Legion accepts Kerry’s apology; renews call for better GI Bill

2006-11-07T11:41:00.000-08:00

INDIANAPOLIS (Nov. 1, 2006) Late this afternoon, Senator John Kerry issued a statement which said: "I personally apologize to any servicemember, family member, or American who was offended" by comments he made about being “stuck in Iraq."

“On behalf of The American Legion, we accept the senator’s apology for his intemperate remark,” said Paul A. Morin, National Commander of The American Legion.

“We hope that the senator will use this opportunity to join with his colleagues in both houses to pass a GI Bill that gives members of the National Guard and Reserves educational benefits equal to those received by their regular Army counterparts,” said Morin.

“Both are standing in Harm’s Way and both deserve educational benefits sufficient to pay for a first class education in a decent college. To date the Congress has been unwilling to give Guardsmen and Reservists the same benefits given to other servicemembers, and, compounding the error, the Congress has not seen fit to award any servicemember a level of benefits sufficient to pursue an education full time. It’s time to correct this error,” Morin said.

A MILITARY FAMILY PERSPECTIVE ON JOHN KERRY, ET AL

2006-11-02T19:09:00.000-08:00

A very good read. Sent to me by our friend, Jim Stoll.

By Frank Schaeffer

John Kerry disrespected our troops by saying they get sent to Iraq because they don't study hard. George Bush attacked Kerry for calling the troops dumb and told us again how great he thinks our troops are. Meanwhile Senator Hillary Clinton called for a "fundamental change in course" in Iraq. All these politicians have something in common: none have a child in uniform.

As the father of a Marine that served in Afghanistan and Iraq, and as a writer of many books and articles on the military family (including "Keeping Faith A Father-Son Story About Love and the United States Marine Corps" and my new book "BABY JACK," about redemption through service and many op-eds for the Washington Post), I've heard from more military families than just about anyone in this country. And the military family is sick of our leaders!

With a few exceptions like John McCain and James Webb, who have sons serving, our leaders talk about service but make sure their children are on a fast track of academic and material success uninterrupted by something so mundane as risking anything for our country. So Bush just "loves" our soldiers, but apparently he never imparted that love where it counts: to his own children. And Kerry also just "loves" our troops and is outraged by those terrible Republicans that would twist his remarks for political purposes, but he never inspired his kids to serve either. And Hillary Clinton has pictures taken of herself standing next to the troops, but her daughter isn't one of them.

Franklin Roosevelt led a wartime military in which his children were all serving. One of the things the Roosevelts shared with the military family they led was personal anxiety about their children in uniform. In her diary Eleanor wrote: "[Franklin] would have liked to have taken [his] son's places." Our museums are filled with portraits of the scions of leading families who led fateful charges, all of whom did their part. A lot has changed since our elites encouraged their children to serve as something that many American just did.

Today, the number of Congressmen and Congresswomen who are veterans is about one-third the figure it was a generation ago, and almost none have children in uniform, and where, in the 1950s, about half the graduating classes of the Ivy Leagues served, today less than one third of one percent do. Our elites have turned their back on America, but they still claim the privilege of leadership, only now it's leadership without dues-paying. (Barack Obama is considering a run for "Commander in Chief" and his best "qualification" was that he was on Oprah!)

They aren't fooling us. Here is a letter from a military parent that represents literally thousands I've received: "In a time when all my neighbors, in an affluent and very Republican district, sport 'support the troops' bumper stickers on their cars, you see no blue star emblems in the windows of their homes signifying a son or daughter serving . . . I feel we have been duped by cunning political opportunists . . . They talk the talk but do not walk the walk..."

Democrats and Republicans in Washington, leading liberals and conservatives and neoconservatives, the consultants, the lobbyists, the publishers, the talking heads, all have something in common: Almost none of them, have a picture on their desk of their son or daughter in uniform. The people who do the loudest talking and the most deciding about the fate of our sons and daughters aren't connected to the military family. We in the military family don't really give a damn what Kerry said or didn't say. (Though his excuse that his vile comment was a "joke" is lame, no better than saying a racist remark was "only a joke.")

What we do long for is leaders who can look the American people---and especially the military family---in the face and call for sacrifice. But they can't do that credibly any longer. They have no skin in the game. To the military family our elite look more and more like Persian pontentates, not democratic leaders sharing the fate of those they lead.

In the closing days of this election here is a request from the military family to our leaders: Please stop abusing our sons and daughters as political cannon fodder. Unless you have a child in uniform standing shoulder-to-shoulder with ours please just shut the hell up about how you "feel" about those who serve!

American Legion to Sen. Kerry: Apologize Now

2006-10-31T17:42:00.000-08:00

INDIANAPOLIS, October 31, 2006

The National Commander of The American Legion called on Sen. John Kerry to apologize for suggesting that American troops in Iraq are uneducated.

"As a constituent of Senator Kerry's I am disappointed. As leader of The American Legion, I am outraged," said National Commander Paul A. Morin.

"A generation ago, Sen. Kerry slandered his comrades in Vietnam by saying that they were rapists and murderers. It wasn't true then and his warped view of today's heroes isn't true now."

While addressing a group of college students at a campaign rally in Pasadena, CA., Monday, Kerry suggested that they receive an education or "if you don't, you'll get stuck in Iraq."

"While The American Legion shares the senator's appreciation for education, the troops in Iraq represent the most sophisticated, technologically superior military that the world has ever seen," Morin said. "I think there is a thing or two that they could teach most college professors and campus elitists about the way the world works.

"And while we are on the topic of education, why doesn't the senator and his comrades in Congress improve the GI Bill so all of today's military members - reserves and guard included - can achieve the educational aspirations that the senator so highly values?" Morin said.

"The senator's false and outrageous attack was over-the-top and he should apologize now."

The 2.7-million member American Legion, www.legion.org, is the nation's largest veterans organization.

WHO WAS THE FIRST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

2006-09-22T19:23:00.000-07:00

I'm sure that George Washington was your best guess. It is what all the schools teach, and what we have heard all of our life. After all, no one else comes to mind.

But think back to your history books - The United States declared its independence in 1776, yet Washington did not take office until April 30, 1789.

So who was running the country during these initial years of this young country? It was the first eight U. S. Presidents.

In fact, the first President of the United States was one John Hanson.

The new country was actually formed on March 1, 1781 with the adoption of The Articles of Confederation. This document was actually proposed on June 11, 1776, but not agreed upon by Congress until November 15, 1777.

Maryland refused to sign this document until Virginia and New York ceded their western lands (Maryland was afraid that these states would gain too much power in the new government from such large amounts of land). Once the signing took place in 1781, a President was needed to run the country.

John Hanson was chosen unanimously by Congress (which included George Washington). In fact, all the other potential candidates refused to run against him, as he was a major player in the revolution and an extremely influential member of Congress.

As the first President, Hanson had quite the shoes to fill. No one had ever been President and the role was poorly defined. His actions in office would set precedent for all future Presidents.

He took office just as the Revolutionary War ended. Almost immediately, the troops demanded to be paid. As would be expected after any long war, there were no funds to meet the salaries.

As a result, the soldiers threatened to overthrow the new government and put Washington on the throne as a monarch.

All the members of Congress ran for their lives, leaving Hanson as the only guy left running the government. He somehow managed to calm the troops down and hold the country together. If he had failed, the government would have fallen almost immediately and everyone would have been bowing to King Washington.

Hanson, as President, ordered all foreign troops off American soil, as well as the removal of all foreign flags. This was quite the feat, considering the fact that so many European countries had a stake in the United States since the days following Columbus.

Hanson established the Great Seal of the United States, which all Presidents have since been required to use on all official documents. President Hanson also established the first Treasury Department, the first Secretary of War, and the first Foreign Affairs Department. Lastly, he declared that the fourth Thursday of every November was to be Thanksgiving Day, which is still true today. The Articles of Confederation only allowed a President to serve a one-year term during any three-year period, so Hanson actually accomplished quite a bit in such little time.

Seven other presidents were elected after him:

Elias Boudinot (1782-83),

Thomas Mifflin (1783-84),

Richard Henry Lee (1784-85),

John Hancock (1785-86),

Nathan Gorman (1786-87),

Arthur St. Clair (1787-88),

and

Cyrus Griffin (1788-89)

all prior to Washington taking office.

So what happened? Why don't we hear about the first eight presidents? It’s quite simple - The Articles of Confederation didn't work well. The individual states had too much power and nothing could be agreed upon. A new doctrine needed to be written - something we know as The Constitution.

And that leads us to the end of our story. George Washington was definitely not the first President of the United States. He was the first President of the United States under the Constitution we follow today. And the first eight Presidents are forgotten in history.

YOU HAVE TO BE A LOVER OF HISTORY TO APPRECIATE THIS!!

(It took 8 years for us to establish a successful government. Remember this when you hear that so little progress has been make during these last 3 years in establishing a Government in Iraq.)

2006-09-12T14:38:00.000-07:00

If you don't think our military pilots earn their pay, take a look at this picture.

This photo was taken by a soldier in Afghanistan of a helo rescue mission. The pilot is a PA Guard guy who flies EMS choppers in civilian life.

Now how many people on the planet you reckon could set the ass end of a chopper down on the roof top of a shack on a steep mountain cliff and hold it there while soldiers load wounded men in the rear??? I can't even imagine having the nerve ... much less the talent and ability. God Bless our military!!!!!

No Further Comment Needed

2006-08-29T17:59:00.000-07:00

LATEST POLLING SHOWS:
43 percent of all Americans say that illegal immigration is a serious problem.
The other 57 percent said, "No hablo inglés"

Avon Park's Debate Far From Finished - A Very Good Read

2006-08-06T07:27:00.000-07:00

Published Sunday, August 6, 2006 by The Lakeland, FL Ledger

By BILL HUTCHINSON
New York Times Regional Newspapers

AVON PARK -- History-minded residents of this little citrus town at the center of the state like to point out that the rocky ridge on which their community rests is the original Florida, the part of the peninsula that first rose out of the sea eons ago.Pockmarks along the Highland Ridge created numerous small lakes here, including what some say may be the oldest in the northern hemisphere, Lake Tulane.

Until last month, its lakes and its elevation -- 154 feet above sea level, the highest point in Southern Florida -- were the slender foundation for whatever reputation Avon Park had beyond the borders of its 4.4 square miles.In July, however, Mayor Tom Macklin stepped forward with something he called the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, and all hell broke loose.

With the federal government immobilized over how and whether and where to enforce existing immigration law, and what to do about the 12 million to 20 million illegal residents already inside U.S. borders, Macklin's proposal took dead aim at one of the most explosive social issues of the 21st century.

City Ordinance 08-06 would have heavily fined and/or suspended the business license of anyone hiring, renting to, or otherwise conducting any business whatsoever with an illegal immigrant, knowingly or not, inside the city limits or anywhere else.

Avon Park's 8,900 residents are not much given to controversy of any kind. The last time the community's feathers got seriously ruffled was more than a decade ago, over whether alcohol should be sold on Sunday. (It is, after 1 p.m.)

Nor are they accustomed to national attention. The last time Avon Park made the papers in anything but a local sense was in 1959, when the old bottling plant here created a 25-foot-tall Coca-Cola. Ten years before that, according to the local history museum, two guys from Avon Park made headlines for inventing the brown-and-serve roll.

"La tempestad," as the local Spanish newspaper called the immigration debate, put Avon Park on international television, side by side with Lebanon and the "American Idol" concert tour.

The final City Council vote was made for TV: 3-to-2 against the ordinance, but right down to the wire it could have gone either way.

That was nearly two weeks ago now. The reporters from The New York Times and at least a dozen other newspapers, eight TV stations, Fox and CNN are gone, for the most part.

The Broward County socialist who preached revolution to the council meeting audience is gone, as is the gentleman from up the ridge who suggested that Adolf Hitler may not have been such a bad guy after all.

The Sunday afternoon drinkers at the Village Bar on Main Street are talking bass fishing again, not politics, and the politicians themselves have returned to the pocketbook issues that dominate next month's School Board elections.

"I'm over the immigration thing," said Avon Park Councilwoman Sharon Schuler at the end of last week, weary after siding with the majority against the Macklin ordinance. "We need to move on.

"As they'll tell you at the Village Bar, and pretty much everywhere else in Avon Park these days, don't bet on it.

AN EPIPHANY

Sunday is Tom Macklin's day to cut the grass.

The three-term mayor of Avon Park believes "very deeply in Christian values," he says, but he is not a churchgoer. That gives him the morning to tool around on his riding mower at home in the east end of town.

He's gotten up to 75 mph on that mower out at the Avon Park Mower-plex, which, he notes with pride, is "the only purpose-built mower-racing track in the country.

"Macklin's campaign on behalf of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act continues to occupy so much of his time and energy that the only mowing he gets to do lately is out in the yard.

He has a new bill in the works: new wording, new ways to approach what he calls "the problem.""Once you've gone this far down the track," he says, "you don't go back. The issue is out there. People on both sides realize that something has to be done.

"What needs to be done, in Macklin's opinion, is no less than whatever it takes "to stop the bleeding, the daily invasion into the United States of illegal immigration.

"Like much of the country, Avon Park has officially ignored the illegal immigrants in its midst for more than 20 years.

Every autumn, a thousand or so migrate into town, mostly from Mexico, pickers in the citrus groves and farms that have been the economic foundation of Highlands County since the late 19th century.

Each year, some illegal immigrants stay on, disappearing into a Latino population that long ago eclipsed blacks -- a community with its own illegal immigrants from Haiti, Jamaica and elsewhere in the Caribbean -- as the county's largest minority group.

Now a flourishing one-third of Avon Park's population, the Latino community includes not only Mexicans but also a significant number of Puerto Ricans and lesser numbers of Dominicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans and Cubans, most of them here legally, some not.

The legal year-round Latino residents have provided an economic shot in the arm for Avon Park.The busiest places in town are the used-car lots that advertise "se habla espanol," and the Taqueria Merlo, a Main Street Mexican market and restaurant that draws a varied crowd all day, every day.

It is the illegal immigrants, Macklin says, who have become a problem, not only for Avon Park but, he says, but for "just about every small town in America.

"His ordinance read, in part:"Illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates, contributes to overcrowded classrooms and failing schools, subjects our hospitals to fiscal hardship and legal residents to sub-standard quality of care, and destroys our neighborhoods and diminishes our over-all quality of life.

"The wording, like the idea for the law, came to Macklin via talk radio.Twice in one day, on two different stations, he heard the mayor of Hazelton, Pa., talk about the illegal immigration ordinance his council had passed 4-1.The second time, Macklin says, "was like an epiphany."

In other interviews, he has said it was like hearing a sermon.These church-pew allusions have brought Macklin support from the God-is-on-our-side social conservatives who inhabit every Florida town.

And his ordinance has drawn solid backing from those of his constituency who object to Latinos for essentially racist reasons.

But "this is not a hate-based proposition," says the mayor. "I will argue that for as long as I have breath left in my body and days left to waste it."I thought everybody would be for it, to tell you the truth," says Macklin of the ordinance.

Over nearly 10 years in city government, he has fielded an increasing number of complaints from residents who feel their lives, and their property values, are being compromised by the presence of illegal immigrants.

"It just seemed like the right thing to do."

With his shaved head and Bruce Willis grin, Macklin has stage presence, acquired in the spotlight. Before he ran for office for the first time in 1995, he and his wife had a karaoke business, and spent a little time trying to crash the music business in Nashville. The training shows.

"I've been very impressed with Tom, I have to say," says the woman who runs the migrant-assistance program at South Florida Community College just outside Avon Park.

"I don't agree with him, but he has presented his case very well," says Daune Neidig, an art history scholar from New Jersey by way of Beaufort, S.C., and Nicaragua, where she spent two years in the Peace Corps after her husband died in the 1990s.

"He's a smart guy," says Neidig of the mayor, "and he knows what he's doing. He's got people talking. And he's obviously touched a nerve.

"With that nerve still tingling from the ordinance debate, Macklin intends to keep prodding.

"There's no going back to Mayberry," he says.

CITY OF CHARM

Last Sunday, Pat Boone crooned "April Love" from one end of town to the other, compliments of a Reader's Digest mix tape of old-time classics. The song played over and over again in the lobby of the Hotel Jacaranda at the east end of Main Street, and a mile or so west in the Avon Cafe.

A sign on the side of a building in Avon Park’s downtown reflects the old — brick buildings built in the 1920s — and the new — Taqueria Merlo, a Main Street Mexican market and restaurant that draws a varied crowd all day, every day. Many doubt the illegal immigration issue ended with last month’s vote.

The Chamber of Commerce promotes Avon Park as "The City of Charm," meaning heartland charm as it was defined in 1950s America, when every star was a wishing star, as Boone sings, and nobody locked their doors.

"When I came here 28 years ago, there was one blinking stoplight and everybody looked the same," says Tem Tagesson, a self-described "Swedish redneck" who runs the local Winn-Dixie. "Now it really is quite a melting pot," he says, in a distinctive accent that mixes herring and grits.

Stick around long enough and you can hear smatterings of a dozen languages along Main Street: Russian to French to Farsi, with a heavy dose of several Caribbean patois.Within so diverse a community, everybody has an opinion about the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, and every one is different. But they all start the same way, with a sigh at the enormous complexities of the issues that the ordinance has raised.

"I'm not smart enough to solve immigration," says Terry Heston, a local contractor who graduated from Avon Park High a few years ahead of Tom Macklin. "And Tom isn't smart enough, either. I think he started out looking for a way to fix the housing situation, and then he just went too far."

Of the three basic elements of the original ordinance, the section dealing with migrant housing -- imposing a minimum $1,000 fine on anyone who knowingly rents to illegal immigrants -- gets almost universal support around Avon Park.

"The situation is way out of hand," says Maria Sutherland, a grant writer and project manager for the city.

"You've got your little house, and you keep it fixed up, and you're out mowing the lawn every weekend, and right next door to you here comes 15 or 20 migrant workers, sharing one bathroom, sleeping on filthy mattresses, 10 cars in the front yard, people coming and going all night. How would you like it?"

Terry Heston, for one, points out that existing city ordinances already prohibit group rentals by more than four unrelated individuals. "Nobody's enforcing the laws we have," he says. "The folks at City Hall are all nice people and all, but I just don't know what they do down there."

Still, if it takes another law to make the point, OK, says Heston, who has invested heavily in gentrifying once-blighted neighborhoods. "Do what you have to do, but just get 'r done."

The part of the ordinance that would have made English the city's sole official language has support, too.

"When I came to this country, I did not ever think, `Well, they should all learn Swedish to be able to talk to me,' " Tagesson says.

"I don't understand this idea that you can live in this country and not learn the language," says Maria Sutherland, originally from El Salvador. "Where did that come from?"

"Of course anyone coming into this country to live needs to learn English," says Neidig, whose migrant program at the college provides language lessons and other services to legal workers. "I mean, duh."

But it's not that easy. It's not like they're just being stubborn, you know."The section of the ordinance dealing with undocumented workers generated the most intense controversy.

Under the proposed law, any employer who hires or otherwise "aids and abets" anyone without verifiable eligibility papers would have been subject to fines and a suspension of their license to do business in the city, among other penalties.

The earliest and loudest opposition came from agricultural interests, particularly citrus growers, who argued that their businesses would suffer profoundly if they didn't have access to illegal labor willing to pick oranges 12 hours a day for 60 cents a bushel.

Eventually, the Avon Park Chamber of Commerce sided with the growers, which still rankles Macklin, who says, "These are some of the same people who are telling me on the phone they're behind me one hundred percent."

It was the business community, he says, that fostered various public misconceptions that eventually did the ordinance in.

One rumor was that a business owner would be open to punishment for doing no more than selling a Coke to an illegal immigrant.

You can still hear around town that Wal-Mart threatened to pull out of its plan to build a store in Avon Park if the ordinance had passed, an allegation that Wal-Mart denied almost two weeks ago.

"I heard so many things, it all got me confused," says Tylene Gandy, who works full time in a local nursing home and runs a taxi service with her husband.

Terry Gandy, though, has no confusion on what side he's on.

There's a Mexican cab service in town, he says, that can undercut his fares because they're not paying insurance and taxes.

"The cops know about it, but nobody wants to do anything about it.

Anybody who's doing something illegal, or living here illegal, the law's the law, as far as I'm concerned."

Avon Park Dilemma: Try Again?

2006-07-26T07:27:00.000-07:00

End of story?

Published by The Lakeland, FL Ledger
Wednesday, July 26
By Eric PeraThe Ledger

AVON PARK -- A City Council supporter of the controversial proposal to outlaw assistance to undocumented workers in Avon Park said Tuesday he doesn't want to revisit the issue with an amended version.

The proposed ordinance failed by a narrow 3-2 vote Monday night following an impassioned public hearing that garnered national attention.

After voting, several council members inferred that a retooled version could be brought back for a vote sometime in the near future -- an idea fostered by Mayor Tom Macklin.Macklin drafted the ordinance patterned after a law passed earlier this month in Hazleton, Pa.

A similar measure is also being considered in Palm Bay in Brevard County.

But at least two council members Tuesday said they have no appetite for pursuing the matter further, including Doug Eason, the only member who sided with Macklin in voting for the proposal.

He and Councilman George Hall said it would do no good to try to repackage an issue that divided this small Highlands County town.

"I voted for it because I thought it was the right thing to do," Eason said. "I thought it would serve as an example to other cities."

However, he said he isn't interested in keeping the issue alive.

"I have no intentions of bringing it up" for a future vote," he said.

Hall said he'd prefer to address issues related to illegal immigrants through laws and codes that already are on the city books.

"I don't disagree with the intention of the (proposed) ordinance," he said, "I just think we can do that without the divisiveness. But I agree with the mayor -- a lot of that (opposition) was with people taking the ordinance out of context. It got so blown out of proportion and was inflammatory." Had it passed, the proposed ordinance would have made English the city's official language. It also would have imposed fines for those who offer jobs, services or housing to illegal immigrants.

Titled the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, it was intended to stop illegal immigration that "destroys our neighborhoods and diminishes our overall quality of life," the act read.

The Avon Park Chamber of Commerce and many local companies with a substantial Hispanic work force or customer base strongly opposed the ordinance. Citrus growers, an influential economic sector in Highlands County, led the opposition from the business community.

A Tampa law firm sent a letter to the city promising a legal challenge if the ordinance was passed.

Councilwoman Brenda Gray cast the decisive "no" vote.

She said she switched her vote from a month ago after praying for guidance.

"The ordinance was not introduced in the right way," she said after the meeting that included a public hearing. "When an ordinance is given to me, I like to feel all the I's are dotted and the T's crossed. This needs to be looked at again.

"But even with the mayor's support, both Eason and Hall said they see no reason to resurrect the controversial ordinance.

"I think we can spend time on the issues," Hall said, "but I think we already have a method (to address them).

"Eason said he's been bombarded with e-mails from people throughout the nation, most of whom support a law to crack down on the flood of immigrants entering the country illegally.

"For every one that was against it I got probably 25 (e-mails) that were for it," Eason said.
"Something needs to be done to help these people. I'm not against them, (but) it's a national security problem."

Material from the Associated Press was used in this report.

Georgians should be singing the primary blues

2006-07-23T10:16:00.000-07:00

From the Marietta Daily Journal
Sunday, July 23, 2006

By: Bill Shipp

Looking for a model of democracy you can show off to the world? You have come to the wrong place. Steer clear of Georgia.

An ideal democracy, the Peach State is not. In fact, we're not even close. As democracies go, Georgia rates about a C-minus, on a good day.

Georgia's just-past primary election is a perfect example of a democratic process gone awry. The Georgia primary looked like an election that tinhorn dictators would stage in Central America or that mad mullahs would attempt in the Middle East. In any other part of the world, after such a debacle, U.N. troops would be stationed at polling places.

Just look at this mess we call a primary election:

The July 18 primary was designed to chill voter participation. Its designers ought to celebrate. Just over 400,000 voters cast ballots in each party primary. Georgia has more than 4.2 million registered voters and 6 million voter-age residents. That means only a tiny, tiny fraction of the voter-eligible population participated. Georgia already has the lowest voter-turnout percentage in the nation.

Our elected leaders deliberately schedule the primary in midsummer. The heat index rises out of sight. No sensible voter wants to venture outside. Half the population is on vacation. The original purpose of the hot-weather primary was to protect incumbent officeholders.

Hot-weather voting seems to create lethargy among potential insurgents. That plan has certainly worked well. Primary challengers are relative rarities. Something else has happened too. The primary has attracted a plethora of plainly nutty candidates. Some of them win because primary voters also tend to be on the eccentric side. To be candid, the primary does not attract anything close to an accurate cross-section of voters.

The primary as well as the general election is a confusing tangle of new faces and freshly configured jurisdictions. Our elected lawmakers are continuously redrawing districts for legislators, members of congress, county commissioners, school board members, etc. The names and district numbers change with every election cycle. As a result, voters are constantly baffled by strange names and new district shapes. Our founding fathers envisioned implementing reapportionment only once every 10 years. Our modern-day General Assembly apparently never heard of the founding fathers.

Gov. Sonny Perdue and his band have set out to make voting at polling places as complicated as possible. At the same time, they want to simplify voting by mail. Absentee voters (mostly Republicans) need no special ID and no valid excuse for not voting in person. Under the Perdue plan, only dummies (many of them Democrats) who dare go to real polling places would have to prove their identities with official photographs. There is little evidence of Georgia voters falsely identifying themselves in person.

Both federal and state courts finally suspended the law because it was patently discriminatory. Even so, stories abound of poll officials demanding picture IDs during last week's primary. Small wonder that Georgia was singled out in Congress as a prime example of why the federal Voting Rights Act needs to be extended.Most of the evils of the present primary system were initiated by white Democrats intent on maintaining power as long as possible. For decades, Democrats saw reform-minded Republicans as a menace to "our way of life." When the GOP finally gained power, Republicans discarded the reform mantle and took up where the Democrats left off. Maybe that is because the new-order Republicans are, in fact, mostly former Democrats.

Reform-minded Republicans went out of style a long time ago.

Postscript: A couple of weeks ago, we said the primary results might tell us whether the Democratic Party of Georgia is still viable. The message turned out to be less than clear.

True, Democrats polled only 480,000 votes. However, they attracted more voters than the Republicans did. Some Democratic leaders told us that the Democratic turnout might have been even greater, but many usually loyal Democrats decided to vote in the GOP primary just to oppose Ralph Reed.

In winning the 2006 nomination for governor, Mark Taylor outpolled Gov. Roy Barnes in the 1998 primary. Taylor undoubtedly sees a favorable omen in that 60,000-vote margin over Barnes' showing. Barnes went on to win the 1998 election.

On the Republican side, Ralph Reed ran well in south Georgia, winning numerous counties across the Coastal Plain. His undoing occurred in metro Atlanta. Casey Cagle clobbered Reed in Fulton, Cobb, Gwinnett, Clayton and DeKalb counties. Reed lost those metro-Atlanta counties by a collective margin of 20,000 votes.

You can reach Bill Shipp at P.O. Box 440755, Kennesaw, GA 30160, or e-mail: shipp1@bellsouth.net

Official Waffles on Avon Park Measure

2006-07-21T05:54:00.000-07:00

And the beat goes on ...

Councilwoman Brenda Gray voices qualms about illegal- immigration plan
Published Friday, July 21, 2006
By Kevin Bouffard The Lakeland (Florida) Ledger

AVON PARK -- Councilwoman Brenda Gray, the swing vote on passage of Avon Park's controversial illegal immigration ordinance, said she is rethinking her support for the measure, scheduled for a final vote Monday.

"I'm not sure today," Gray told The Ledger on Wednesday evening from her front porch.

"This whole ordinance as stated is written poorly. Some things stated as facts, I don't know that they are facts.

"Gray added that she doesn't accept the ordinance's initial premise that "illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates, contributes to overcrowded classrooms and failing schools, subjects our hospitals to fiscal hardship and legal residents to substandard quality of care and destroys our neighborhoods . . .

"However, Gray said, she does think housing code enforcement and other problems stemming from illegal immigration "diminishes our overall quality of life," as the ordinance also states.

The ordinance, which has brought unprecedented national media attention to the city of nearly 9,000 residents in northern Highlands County, would prohibit the city from giving a business license, contract or grant to any business "that aids and abets illegal aliens or illegal immigration for a period no less than five years from its last offense.

"It would also make English the official language of the city and would bar any municipal business in any other language.The councilwoman voted for the proposed ordinance on first reading at the June 26 meeting, even though she had seen it only hours earlier, she said. It passed 3-2.

None of the other four council members has indicated they are reconsidering their votes.Gray said she had intended to vote for the ordinance at Monday's council meeting, when it is scheduled for a final vote, until she heard about outgoing City Attorney Michael Disler's remarks made Saturday.

"I was stunned at the city attorney's comments," she said.In a July 13 Ledger story, Disler called the ordinance poorly drafted and unconstitutional. It was the first time the city attorney, who played no role in drafting the ordinance, had commented on it publicly.

Two days later, at a special council meeting on the new municipal budget, the five-person council voted unanimously to dismiss Disler. Gray said she was upset that Disler did not comment on the ordinance during the June 26 council meeting.

"He should have told us something. If that were the case, it would not have gotten this far. It could have saved a lot of grief," the councilwoman said.

The legal questions raised by Disler have caused her to reconsider her support, Gray said. She initially supported the ordinance because of concern about illegal immigration stemming from her work as a state parole and probation officer in Sebring.

"That's why I can't approve of anybody breaking the law. That's my job. That's near and dear to my heart," she said.

Gray said she wouldn't support the ordinance if she concludes it is unconstitutional and that she needs to do more research on the question before Monday's meeting. But she acknowledged that question might not be resolved by next week without a city attorney.

In addition to constitutional questions, Gray said she also agreed with Disler that the ordinance is vaguely worded. She pointed to how city officials enforcing the law would define "aid and abet.

"Despite her concerns, Gray would not say Wednesday whether she would vote for or against the ordinance or even whether she would seek to delay a final vote to study the issues further.

One reason for her indecision is that the ordinance has strong support from Avon Park's black community, according to Gray, the council's only black representative.

"The majority of the black community is expressing wishes for the ordinance to be passed. They say it's been a long time needed," she said.

Out of some 100 black residents who've spoken to her about the ordinance, only two expressed opposition, Gray said. Both gave no reason for their opposition beyond saying it's not right.

One strong supporter of the ordinance was Willie Jenkins, 58, a lifelong Avon Park resident who was visiting Gray that evening.

"My main concern is jobs (taken by illegal immigrants) are not going to be limited to migrant jobs," Jenkins said. "You're going to have jobs at Winn-Dixie and Kmart that citizens could get that will go to illegal immigrants just because they can speak Spanish. We've got high school (graduates) looking for jobs, and they can't get them because they're not bilingual."

Gray agreed the black community supported the ordinance in part because of a long-standing competition with the Hispanic community for good jobs and housing.

The councilwoman pointed to the Palms of Lake Tulane, a new public housing development in her neighborhood where most residents are Hispanic. The rules used to determine eligibility for public housing, such as no misdemeanor or felony convictions in the past five years, disqualifies many black applicants, she said.

Gray said she was sensitive to the criticism raised by many Hispanic residents that the ordinance is discriminatory, but she rejected it.

"I don't believe the ordinance is discriminatory because it identifies only illegal immigrants," she said. "I want to be fair to the citizens of Avon Park."

Avon Park Fires City Attorney

2006-07-18T05:22:00.000-07:00

Here's the lastest from the Avon Park, FL article we published a few days ago. It's getting dicey! We'll follow to see if the city "caves" from the prospect of having a Super WalMart built within the city limits next year, or whether it stands up for its principles. Interesting ...

From The Lakeland, FL Ledger
Published Tuesday, July 18, 2006
By Kevin Bouffard

AVON PARK -- The City Council has fired City Attorney Mike Disler after he publicly criticized Avon Park's controversial illegal immigration ordinance as "poorly drafted" and unconstitutional.
"They have every right to do what they did," Disler told The Ledger on Monday in response to the council's action during a Saturday budget meeting, which the lawyer did not attend.
The Ledger reported Disler's remarks Thursday regarding how the ordinance might affect Wal-Mart's plans to build a supercenter in the city later this year. It was the first time Disler had spoken publicly on the ordinance.
When asked Monday if he regretted those remarks, Disler said, "No, I don't."
According to local media reports, the five council members did not discuss the reasons behind their unanimous vote to give Disler a 30-day notice of his dismissal. But Councilman Doug Eason, who made the motion, said it stemmed from a recent embarrassing incident.
Disler said "it would appear" his firing was related to criticisms of the ordinance, which he had no part if drafting.
As currently written, the ordinance could prevent the city from giving Wal-Mart Stores Inc. a business license for a supercenter it plans to open in Avon Park about a year from now.
It states, "any for-profit entity, including acts permitted by its parent company or subsidiaries, that aids and abets illegal aliens or illegal immigration shall be denied approval of a business permit . . . for a period no less than five years from its last offense.
"Aiding and abetting shall include, but not be limited to, the hiring or attempted hiring of illegal aliens . . . Any act that aids and abets illegal aliens within the United States, not just within the city limits, will constitute a violation . . .
"Wal-Mart last year paid a record $11 million fine to settle federal charges that it hired illegal immigrants in more than 20 states through contractors for janitorial services.
The council passed the ordinance 3-2 on first reading at its June 26 meeting. A final vote is scheduled for Monday.
The controversial measure also establishes English as the exclusive language of city business, prohibits illegal immigrants from leasing or renting property and calls for "punishing the acts, policies, people and businesses that aid and abet illegal aliens.
"Disler did not comment on the ordinance during the June 26 meeting because no council member asked his opinion, he said.
The original draft prepared by Mayor Tom Macklin was faxed to his office Friday afternoon, June 23, after he left for the day, Disler said. He did not see it until Monday morning, the day of the council meeting.
Macklin said he would consider amending the ordinance to specify the five-year period would not begin until enactment of the law.If so, he will do it without Disler's assistance. Although the council gave the lawyer a 30-day notice, it also instructed he not attend any council meetings during that time, City Manager C.B. Shirey said.
Macklin and Eason did not return calls from The Ledger on Monday.Councilman George Hall, who voted against the illegal immigration ordinance but agreed to fire Disler, said Monday the two votes were not related.
"I simply think we need more representation on a wide variety of issues beyond a general attorney (Disler)," Hall said.
Shirey said he would recommend the council hire Gerald Buhr, a lawyer in Lutz who holds certification in municipal government law. Buhr serves as a consultant for the Avon Park utility department and works as city attorney for Mulberry, Bowling Green and Zolfo Springs.
In a related matter, Bishop John J. Nevins of Florida's Roman Catholic Diocese of Venice came out against the illegal immigration ordinance in a letter to Macklin dated July 7.
"The attempt to criminalize the immigrants, and those responsible for meeting their health and safety needs, is totally incomprehensible. Regardless of their status, the immigrants work hard and make every effort to feed, clothe and shelter their families," Nevins said. "As a pastor and the bishop, I feel obliged to plead for them."

Military, Free Speech - Soldier Tests Limits

2006-07-16T07:37:00.000-07:00

Response to "Soldier tests free speech limits, " @issue, July 9, AJC

"Remember, oath taken voluntarily

"As is typical with journalism on the liberal left, the AJC examines 1st Lt. Ehren Watada's story only from the perspective that holds the government at fault. The article fails to emphasize that the lieutenant voluntarily joined the U.S. Army. After 1973 all such affiliations have been totally voluntary. In the process, the lieutenant took an oath and pledged to obey the commander in chief and all officers appointed over him.
"And, yes, as the article obliquely mentions, behavior to the detriment of good order and discipline is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. But the most egregious violation of the code is failure to obey a lawful order. For this primarily, but the lesser violations as well, Watada must be subjected to a court martial.
"Personally, I think Watada is a coward. But since the AJC and its kind are against the war, it swings the emphasis of Watada's story over to freedom of speech.

"GORDON R. PRENTICE

Macon"

No compromise on border security

2006-07-14T20:06:00.000-07:00

By D.A. King, Marietta Daily Journal, July 12, 2006

http://www.mdjonline.com/articles/2006/07/12/270/10224481.prt

At all costs, secure your perimeter.

This very basic and logical concept is a “no-brainer” fundamental that has been taught to every military recruit since cave men began to organize the defense of their families and shelters.

Much is now being made of a possible “compromise” on “immigration” in the Congress of these United States. On one side, we see those who are pushing to grant a “pathway to citizenship” [amnesty] to the millions of illegal aliens who, along with powerful and privileged employers and bankers, seem to be immune to existing U.S. laws.

In the other corner, the more pro-American members of that body are taking the position that securing American borders is essential to our existence as a sovereign nation.
On securing our borders, there can be no compromise.

With great respect and admiration for Senator Johnny Isakson and his tireless work, doing so should not be a “trigger” to repeating the mistakes of the “one-time” amnesty [pathway to citizenship] of 1986 and should not be a bargaining chip in what has become a very dangerous political game.

There, I said it.

Senator Isakson has correctly publicly recognized that regardless of what the Bush - Kennedy-McCain coalition keeps telling us, it is in fact possible for a nation that put men on the moon to secure its own borders.

We should start with the southern 1950-mile long border. Constructing an easily patrolled barrier on the Mexico- U.S. border will not be a problem for a nation that fifty years ago built and still maintains more than 46,000 miles of interstate highways.

Such a basic deterrent to illegal immigration has been in place in San Diego for years and has proven to be very effective.

Let’s decide how to return the twenty million or so illegals to their home countries next year. Let’s begin to punish criminal employers - using existing laws - beyond the three who were fined in 2004 and watch the effects of equal application of the law.

Many pundits are now telling all who will listen that the Republican party will be toast if it does not pass some kind of “immigration reform” bill this year.

Nonsense.

The GOP will be toast if it continues to allow existing immigration and employment law to be ignored and people from all over the world to walk into the U.S. while the huge majority of Americans wonder who to vote for if the Republicans will not secure America in a war on terror.

The GOP will lose its base of support if it continues to regard illegal aliens as “guest workers” and passes legislation that contains little publicized provisions that allow them to apply for American citizenship when their guest status expires, as does the senate bill.

Another Republican, my own Congressman, Tom Price [Roswell], proposed a bill in the House last September that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to prevent all illegal border crossings into the United States - using whatever means necessary. Called the “Secure the Outside Perimeter (STOP) Act of 2005”, the Price bill is now part of the House version of “immigration reform”.

We will leave the fact that securing the homeland seems to an obvious duty of the head of the Department of Homeland Security for another day.

The House bill has become known as an enforcement only bill. It should be called “enforcement finally”…using the hopeful assumption that it actually would be enforced if passed into law.
Congressman Price should be commended for his plain language approach and we should all be grateful that the majority of our Cobb County congressional representatives voted “YES” on the House legislation.

As John O’Sullivan writes in National Review, the absurdity of the argument that voters want “something” done about illegal immigration should not go unchallenged. What most voters want is border security –now- and an end to rewarding lawbreakers, both employers and aliens.

We should all be asking ourselves why the President has sided with the majority of Democrats on illegal immigration and border security and how that strategy is going to somehow save the Republican party.

As someone who studies illegal immigration and is proudly not a member of any political party, I ask myself that one every day.

Maybe one must spend more time in Washington D.C. to understand this very odd situation.

A WAKE UP CALL FROM LUKE AFB, AZ

2006-07-12T17:38:00.000-07:00

A certain lieutenant colonel at Luke AFB deserves a big pat on the back. Apparently, an individual who lives somewhere near Luke AFB wrote the local paper complaining about a group of F-16s that disturbed his/her day at the mall. When that individual read the response from a Luke AFB officer, it must have stung quite a bit.

The complaint: "Question of the day for Luke Air Force Base: Whom do we thank for the morning air show? Last Wednesday, at precisely 9:11 a.m., a tight formation of four F-16 jets made a low pass over Arrow-head Mall, continuing west over Bell Road at approximately 500 feet. Imagine our good fortune!
"Do the Tom Cruise-wannabes feel we need this wake-up call, or were they trying to impress the cashiers at Mervyns' early-bird special? Any response would be appreciated."

The response: "Regarding 'A wake-up call from Luke's jets' (Letters, Thursday): On June 15, at precisely 9:12 a.m., a perfectly timed four-ship flyby of F-16s from the 63rd Fighter Squadron at Luke Air Force Base flew over the grave of Capt. Jeremy Fresques. Capt. Fresques was an Air Force officer who was previously stationed at Luke Air Force Base and was killed inIraq on May 30, Memorial Day.

"At 9 a.m. on June 15, his family and friends gathered at Sunland Memorial Park in Sun City to mourn the loss of a husband, son and friend. Based on the letter writer's recount of the flyby, and because of the jet noise, I'm sure you didn't hear the 21-gun salute, the playing of taps, or my words to the widow and parents of Capt. Fresques as I gave them their son's flag on behalf of the President of the United States and all those veteransand servicemen and women who understand the sacrifices they have endured.

"A four-ship flyby is a display of respect the Air Force pays to those who give their lives in defense of freedom. We are professional aviators and take our jobs seriously, and on June 15 what the letter writer witnessed was four officers lining up to pay their ultimate respects. The letter writer asks, "Whom do we thank for the morning air show?" The 56th Fighter Wing will call for you, and forward your thanks to the widow and parents of Capt. Fresques, and thank them for you, for it was in their honor that my pilots flew the most honorable formation of their lives."

Lt. Col. Scott Pleus
CO 63rd Fighter Squadron
Luke Air Force Base, Arizona

Florida Town to Root Out Landlords Who Rent to Illegal Immigrants

2006-07-10T06:17:00.000-07:00

This article was published in my hometown newspaper and is about a neighboring town, Avon Park, FL. Interesting. I'm proud of this guy!

Published Monday, July 10, 2006 The Lakeland, FL Ledger
Monday, July 10, 2006

Avon Park May Shut Door on Illegal Immigrants
By ABBY GOODNOUGHThe New York Times

AVON PARK -- Tom Macklin, the mayor of this city deep in Florida's citrus belt, heard the idea on talk radio and latched on with relish. A city up north, Hazleton, Pa., planned to root out and punish landlords who rented to illegal immigrants, fining them $1,000 for every such tenant. Macklin, whose own small city has swelled with immigrants from Mexico, Haiti and Jamaica over the past decade, swiftly proposed the same for Avon Park.

AVON PARK -- Tom Macklin, the mayor of this city deep in Florida's citrus belt, heard the idea on talk radio and latched on with relish.A city up north, Hazleton, Pa., planned to root out and punish landlords who rented to illegal immigrants, fining them $1,000 for every such tenant.

Macklin, whose own small city has swelled with immigrants from Mexico, Haiti and Jamaica over the past decade, swiftly proposed the same for Avon Park."It was almost as if I was sitting in church at a revival and he was preaching to me," Macklin said of Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton, whom he heard promoting that city's Illegal Immigration Relief Act on a radio show last month. "If we address the housing issue -- make it as difficult as possible for illegals to find safe haven in Avon Park -- then they are going to have to find someplace else to go."Like Hazleton's proposal, Avon Park's would deny business permits to companies that knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

The ordinance, which states that illegal immigration "destroys our neighborhoods and diminishes our overall quality of life," would also make English the official language of Avon Park, removing Spanish from all city documents, signs and automated phone messages.The proposal has some of Avon Park's roughly 8,800 residents exalting, others fuming and still others -- including those who rent rooms or apartments in the scruffy Golden Age Villas, west of the abandoned train tracks -- plain scared.

The City Council passed it, 3-2, on the first reading and is likely to adopt it July 24."We just wouldn't be able to stay here," said Armando Garcia Cortes, 45, who said he came to Avon Park from Veracruz, Mexico, to pick oranges and fix roofs. "They're going to see the farmworker population here drop. We would all be leaving."John Koch, who sells glassware and model cars at the Broken Spoke Flea Market on Main Street, said that would be fine."I think it's long overdue," Koch said of the proposal. "If you don't put a cap on it, it just gets out of hand.

"Both Macklin and Barletta said they were forced into drastic measures by the federal government's failure to crack down on illegal immigration. Both said that tightening the nation's borders would be the best solution, but that with Congress still divided on immigration policy, they had to take action.

"When you have people begging you to do something, there comes a breaking point," said Barletta, whose family settled in Hazleton when it was a thriving coal center in the early 1900s. "I feel very confident that what we're doing is not only legal, but the right thing to do. I can't sit back and watch my city being destroyed.

"Both mayors, white baby boomers who grew up in the 1960s and '70s, speak wistfully of the days when nuclear families were the only occupants of single-family homes in their towns, every resident paid taxes, and English was the only language heard on the streets. Macklin said the City of Charm, as Avon Park has long called itself, no longer met that description, despite the gazebo and shuffleboard courts on Main Street, several dainty lakes and ubiquitous live oaks.

"When people come to our area," he said, "they see degrading neighborhoods, homes falling down among themselves, four or five vehicles parked in yards. There's a perception for those that come to this area -- looking to perhaps expand a business, move here -- that it might not necessarily be where they want to be.

"Macklin, a Republican whose City Council is nonpartisan, said he had been bombarded with positive feedback since proposing the ordinance in late June, even getting e-mail messages from California and Illinois. But some residents have called him racist, and others, like Joe Wright, a dairy farmer who said two-thirds of his work force was Hispanic, said the ordinance would be unenforceable and unconstitutional.

"It's going to be impossible to police," said Wright, whose dairy, outside the city, has many employees who live in Avon Park. "Are they actually going to have their zoning people and policemen racially profile every Hispanic-looking person? I mean, this just has a very chilling effect.

"Macklin said he expected opposition from citrus growers and cattle farmers, many of whom say that they hire only workers with Social Security cards, but that they cannot be sure the cards are authentic. The law would punish only those who knowingly hired or rented to illegal immigrants, he said.But Mary Bauer, director of the Immigrant Justice Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the proposal violated several laws, including the Fair Housing Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

"The real problem is that it's obvious the effect of this will be to discriminate against immigrants and Latinos generally," Bauer said, adding that the center might sue if the ordinance passed.

Individuals and Groups that Encourage, Assist and Profit from Illegal Immigration Revealed

2006-07-06T05:36:00.000-07:00

The following website lists individuals and groups who don't want to see a halt to illegal immigration:

http://www.thedustininmansociety.org/info/illegal_alien_lobby.html

They are too numerous to list on this page! So go to the website.

See and listen to a compilation of written and live recorded statements by elected U.S. officials and politicians, college professors, and pro-illegal alien activists whose objective is to take control of our country "by vote if possible and violence if necessary!" These speakers are not the "lunatic fringe". They are some of the most powerful Latino leaders and politicians in America, whose allegiance is to foreigners of their ethnic group, not to the United States.

USS Intrepid to Be Renovated

2006-07-06T05:25:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK (AP) - The USS Intrepid is steeped in history: the aircraft carrier took part in major battles and withstood repeated kamikaze attacks during the Pacific War, and later saw duty in Korea and as a recovery ship for NASA.
For the last 25 years, Intrepid has served a quieter purpose as a floating military museum, docked in the Hudson River.
Now, the aging ship will be renovated, a process expected to be outlined Thursday. Officials were scheduled to announce that the USS Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum will close this fall for an extensive overhaul, a process expected to last 18 months to two years.
Gov. George Pataki confirmed the renovation plan Wednesday night, saying in a statement that it would "add additional support to the grandeur befitting Intrepid's legacy" as an "American icon and an awesome reminder of the sacrifices of generations of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines."
The 27,000-ton carrier, nearly 900 feet long, would be towed to a drydock for repairs - most likely the former military ocean terminal in Bayonne, N.J., said Peter Shugert, a spokesman for the Army Corps of Engineers.
The work also would include dredging 13,000 cubic yards of riverbed mud and upgrading pier 86, where the ship is moored, he said.
All warships undergo periodic overhauls and refurbishing due to the effects of salt water corrosion, whether from constant motion or simply sitting idly in port. Intrepid officials had hinted a year ago that the ship needed some work after 25 years at the same location.
The ship has become one of the city's most popular tourist attractions since real estate millionaire Zachary Fisher saved it from the scrapyard in the late 1970s and moved it to pier 86, next to the cruise ship terminal on Manhattan's West Side.
Over the years Intrepid's deck has become filled with an impressive array of historic aircraft and other war artifacts. It wasn't known what would happen to those aircraft, ranging from a Russian-built MiG fighter to an American SR-71 high-altitude spy plane, during the renovation.

New Feature Added to Weblog - Will Notify You By Email When New Material Is Added to Weblog

2006-07-03T20:34:00.000-07:00

The last item on the left-hand column of this blog has been added to enable you to receive automatic notifications when new material is added to "Torch of Freedom" weblog. Please type in your email address and hit "Subscribe me!". We hope that you enjoy this blog and will continue to visit the site.

Your Tax Dollars at Work - The ACLU Gloats Over the Flag Amendment Defeat

2006-06-28T16:52:00.000-07:00

This article from the ACLU website deserve no further comment:

ACLU Praises Senators for Rejecting Flag Amendment, Says Bill of Rights Stands Strong and Intact
(6/27/2006)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: media@dcaclu.org

WASHINGTON – The American Civil Liberties Union today applauded the Senate for rejecting a proposed Constitutional amendment to ban flag “desecration.” The amendment, S.J. Res. 12, fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for passage.
“The Senate came close to torching our constitution, but luckily it came through unscathed,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “We applaud those brave Senators who stood up for the First Amendment and rejected this damaging and needless amendment.
“America prides itself on tolerance and acceptance; it is essential that we not amend our founding document to allow censorship, even when the speech in question is reprehensible,” Fredrickson added. “Today the First Amendment and, indeed, the entire Bill of Rights remain untarnished and more meaningful than ever. It is our hope that the Senate will now move on to the real problems this country faces.”
The ACLU noted that flag burning remains an isolated and rare occurrence, even with the resurgence in political protest prompted by the war in Iraq. The vote was projected to be the closest it has ever been in the Senate – and it was with the margin of defeat of only one vote. Proponents hoped that election year pressures would swing the vote their way.
Opposition to the amendment has always been ideologically and politically diverse. Former Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell said in a 1999 letter, “The First Amendment exists to insure that freedom of speech and expression applies not just to that with which we agree or disagree, but also that which we find outrageous.” In addition to Powell, former Senator John Glenn and former Reagan Defense Department official Lawrence J. Korb had spoken out against the proposal. Veterans Defending the Bill of Rights, Veterans for Peace and Veterans for Common Sense had also been vocal in their opposition.
“Today is a victory for the First Amendment and all Americans who cherish the freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights,” said Terri Ann Schroeder, ACLU Senior Lobbyist. “We are thankful, that with the help of thousands of veterans from around the country that the Constitution has survived yet another round of election year politicking.
“The constitution has somehow survived once again, unfettered and unstained by the political powers that be and that is reason to celebrate,” Schroeder added. “Allowing a ban on flag desecration would have compromised the very freedoms that our Founding Fathers struggled so hard to attain. By wisely voting down this amendment, the Senate has done its duty as protectors of our Constitution.”
For more on the ACLU's concerns with the Flag Desecration Amendment, go to: www.aclu.org/flag

A Second Look at Veteran Priorities

2006-06-19T13:06:00.000-07:00

By D.A. King, Washington Times, February 26, 2006
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20060225-101555-7193r.htm

In 1966 my friend Fred was sent to Vietnam and survived a year as a door gunner on a U. S. Army "Huey" helicopter gunship. You won't hear it from him, so I will tell you that Fred had one of the most dangerous jobs possible in that long ago and divisive war. While Fred's ship went down more than ten times in action, he came home without a scratch.
Welcome home Fred Dague -- and thank you.
Unlike Fred, in 1970, after observing my 18th birthday in Marine Corps boot camp, I was fortunate enough to draw duty in sunny southern California.
We both kept our promises to our nation.
Like our fathers, as young recruits, both Fred and I were promised lifetime free medical care by our government as a benefit of our service.
We are learning that this is not our father's America.
As "50 somethings," Fred and I have both applied to the Veteran's Administration for those promised medical benefits.
In 2004, both of our applications for that promised free health care were denied.
The response from the VA reads in part: "Each year, the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs determines which priority groups will be enrolled in the VA health system ? you are not eligible for enrollment or VA health care for most conditions."
Fred and I have been placed in the "Priority Group 8g" [www1.va.gov/visns/Visn02/vet/benefits/table.html] which means that we applied after January 2003, earned over $31,000 last year, and have no service related ailments -- thereby disqualifying us for the free medical care we were promised as young men.
Priority Groups are the result of the federal government's budgetary shortages. Veterans without service-connected health problems are now held up to a means test to determine eligibility for VA medical benefits. For now, we can both make do without the promised care, but many of the approximately 200,000 other category 8g veterans cannot.
So much for the promise. So much for priorities.
For Fred, myself and the other vets who are denied or offered limited medical care from our government, these priorities are difficult to accept while we watch millions of illegal aliens not only demanding, but receiving taxpayer funded free medical care at American emergency rooms and clinics.
There is no "means test" for the free health care provided for anyone -- from anywhere in the world -- who can illegally cross our intentionally unsecured borders and get within 250 yards of an American emergency room. It's the law.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1985 (EMTALA) is a law that is vigorously enforced.
We are taxpayers, Fred and I, so to us, it is a little more than ironic that as veterans, we are paying for health care for millions of illegal aliens while we are not eligible for that same promised free care from our own Veterans Administration.
The Medicare Prescription Drug Modernization Act of 2004 included one billion dollars to help reimburse American hospitals for the federally mandated health care that they must provide to illegal aliens. It included nothing to help Priority Group 8g veterans.
Priorities indeed.
Because illegals and their criminal employers seem to have a better lobby than American vets in Washington, our nation is keeping the promise to the illegal aliens. This definitely is not our father's America. We are no longer certain it is our America.
With millions of illegal aliens pouring into our republic each year and tens of thousands of brave young American troops defending borders all over the world, we cannot help but question which of the promises being made to our future vets will be kept.
We can't help but wonder how giving illegal aliens and their employers amnesty -- no matter the label used -- will discourage more illegal immigration. It clearly didn't twenty years ago.
The same people who have decided which promises to keep have also made a decision on which of our laws are enforced. Not that anyone asked, but if it is a matter of priorities, in our search for a better life, Fred and I would much rather see the laws that apply to border security and illegal immigration enforced ? and the VA Priority Groups ignored.
If it is a matter of priorities.

Mr. King is president of the Dustin Inman Society, a Georgia-based coalition of citizens dedicated to educating the public on the consequences of illegal immigration.

On the Web: (http://www.TheDustinInmanSociety.org)

The American Dream?

2006-06-16T15:08:00.000-07:00

Think something like this isn't happening? Scary, it is happening as you read this...

We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado (a Democrat). In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Recently, there was an immigration over-population conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, "Mexifornia", explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal - was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." "Here is how they do it," Lamm said:

"First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy." Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion.France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans." Lamm went on:

"Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

"Third, we could make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: "The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multi-cultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together." Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology'. I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity.I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions.Greece fell. "E. Pluribus Unum" -- From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus'. instead of the 'Unum,' we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits. Make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity'. I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking.Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology'. I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity'. American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America.

Take note of California and other states - to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace", "Freedom is slavery", and "Ignorance is strength".

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream .

Thought provoking? Tell a friend about this Weblog.

Author of the foregoing piece is unknown.

Letter to the Editor AJC - Illegal Immigration

2006-06-11T12:27:00.000-07:00

This letter was posted in the AJC today, June 11, 2006, by a friend of mine in response to "Illegals look at housing with caution." News, June 4

State legislators made right move

Looks like our Georgia legislators got something right with the immigration bill if it's already making illegal immigrants think twice before setting down roots in our state.
But what's just as amazing in your story is the boldness of illegal immigrants in displaying their names and faces. And they advertise the fact they fraudulently bought Social Security cards - a felony. They know the federal government is a giant wimp that will do nothing to deter this ongoing crime.
Real estate agents and mortgage companies who do business with illegal immigrants are actually violating the law. It's a felony to encourage an illegal immigrant to stay in this country, and by selling them a house, isn't that encouragement?
But our old Uncle Sam has become deaf and blind, hasn't he? Poor ole codger. It's a wonder he gets anything right.

LOUISE STEWART

Norcross

Thought for the day - or maybe a lifetime ...

2006-06-11T11:16:00.000-07:00

"The highest patriotism is not a blind acceptance of official policy, but a love of one's country deep enough to call her to a higher plain." - George McGovern

The Amazing Vagaries of War

2006-06-10T13:42:00.000-07:00

By: James E. Stoll, 6/10/2006

I am 75 years old and a U.S. Navy veteran of the Korean Conflict. Having served during one, I abhor the need for war.

The son of one of my favorite nieces, by marriage, is serving his second tour of duty with the U.S. Army in Iraq. He is 28 years old and he is already an old man. Yesterday, I received a report that a second member of his unit was killed in action, or murdered, as you choose to say it, in Iraq. Naturally, he was killed by automatic weapons fire from inside a building adjacent to the street that his squad was patrolling. No “innocent” Iraqi men, women and children were “murdered in cold blood” as a result of response action initiated by the remaining members of his squad, because there was none. The applicable “rules of engagement”, would not permit such action, in this type of situation. So, his living squad members gently carried his dead body back to their barracks for “processing”. There has been no mention yet of his dying on the evening news, and his death did not evoke any accolades from his commander in chief. He will simply become another statistic, number such and such, and the contents of a flag-draped box to be sent home to his loved ones. His name will soon be forgotten by all except those who loved him and will miss him at home.

Yesterday it was also reported that one Iraqi man and three Iraqi women were killed some days ago, in Iraq, for no known reason other than that they were in the same building with Al Zarqawi and his spiritual advisor, when two 500 pound bombs fell on their heads from two U.S. warplanes circling at 12,000 feet overhead. That attack was ordered by senior commanders, on longstanding authorization from their Commander in Chief, The President of the United States. No one has expressed any confirmed knowledge of how many “innocent” men, women and children were in the building at the time of the attack. The President of the United States made a special announcement of the action from Camp David, with glowing praise for the results of the mission and glowing accolades for the two brave airmen who had executed this action with such speed and efficiency. They will probably get a medal. No mention was made regarding the “innocence” of the other man and three women who were also killed. Nor was any mention made about any violation of “the rules of engagement” pertaining to this action, even though it was totally a one sided event.

Several months ago, another Marine was cut in half when an improvised bomb, buried in the earth beneath a city street, exploded beneath the lightly armored vehicle in which he was riding, while on an early morning patrol in Haditha, Iraq. Twenty-four reportedly “innocent” men, women and children were killed during the response action mounted by the remaining members of the dead marine’s unit, in the aftermath of the explosion. For whatever reason, the response action taken by the dead marine’s comrades has been labeled a “massacre” and a “horrible atrocity”, by media outlets of questionable integrity around the world, by elected leaders of our government, by American news commentators, by a host of “expert”, and ”former” anything you can think of, and by the Prime Minister of Iraq, all babbling about how these young Marines must be charged with cold blooded murder and, if convicted, either executed or jailed for life. On last Sunday, I watched and listened, on national TV, as three separate panels of selected “experts” on everything, charged, tried and convicted these young marines, even though other news media had reported that an investigation of the action would not be complete for between 6 and 8 weeks and that the families of the “innocent” victims would not allow investigators to exhume their bodies, for the purpose of gathering forensic evidence.

Even a cursory examination of the above three actions indicates that “The Rules of Engagement” for airmen, senior commanders and the remote commander in chief are significantly different from the “Rules of Engagement” for squad leaders and foot soldiers in direct line of fire on the ground. If the rules were the same, then the two airmen, the commanders who gave the order to attack, and the commander in chief who authorized the order, should be charged with the same “horrible atrocities” as are being demanded against the young marines in Haditha. I agree that the world is a better place because Al Zarqawi and his Spiritual Advisor are dead. But what about the four other people who were killed with him, three of them women? Is the world a better place because they died too, or don’t they count?

I know that no one, including me, is going to recommend that The President of the United States should be charged with heinous crimes. This is war, and he did what he had to do. But his actions, in response to the mad-dog activities of Al Zarqawi, were identical to the responses of the young marines, in Haditha, to the mad-dog activities of the person who buried the bomb beneath the roadway. Kill everyone in the area. Whether you do that with two 500 pound bombs, from 12,000 feet, or with automatic weapons and grenades on the ground, makes no difference of substance, other than that it is a lot safer and costs a lot more money doing it from 12,000 feet.So, as a respected and well recognized leader in our nation, or as just a common citizen, if you have an ounce of human decency left in your soul, you must stand up and publicly demand that The President of the United States pardon everyone who was involved with the events in Haditha, remove all reference to those events from their records, give them an honorable discharge from the service, if they so desire, and send them home to their loved ones. They have suffered enough, at the hands of their own countrymen and countrywomen. He should tell anyone who disagrees with those decisions that they are simply not negotiable. This is war and the same rules apply to everyone, regardless to which side you are on or what your stature and your responsibilities might be.

The Haditha Conspiracy

2006-06-09T14:03:00.000-07:00

By: James E. Stoll, 6/03/2006

Let’s suppose that you are one of those fearless elected leaders of this nation who voted to send our children to a God forsaken place in the world, to fight a war with a political agenda, in a land that is populated by a people who believe it is their God-given duty to blow themselves up in the midst of crowded markets, or other gathering places, with the sole purpose of killing as many innocent men, women and children as possible. A land where one cannot distinguish friend from foe. Let’s also suppose that you are one of those fearless leaders who approved the “rules of engagement” for America’s forces, knowing that the enemy’s only rule is the oldest rule in the history of warfare: “Do whatever it takes”.

As you contemplate the much reported “horrible atrocities” committed by our valiant warriors in a war they did not choose to fight, while sitting in your comfortable easy chair, in your air conditioned office, with hot coffee and fresh donuts available on demand, surrounded outside by concrete barriers and protected by your own private police force, why don’t you try to envision yourself as one of those warriors, living as they live, enduring as they endure, fighting their battles as they fight them, in the place where you sent them, under rules in which they had no say in the writing.

It is 6:00 AM and your company has been ordered to patrol a small city named Haditha, in the midst of an area that is known to be a hotbed of insurgent activity, to seek out and destroy as many insurgents as you can locate. Your company, consists of 16 marines, ages 19 and 20, led by an “experienced” Staff Sergeant, age 21, who is the senior rated person in the patrol and therefore, in command. You are traveling in two lightly armored Humvees, which are known to have a soft underbelly. Each member of your company is wearing full body armor, carrying automatic weapons, rocket propelled grenades and hand grenades. Each member also carrys 60 pounds of ammunition, medical supplies, emergency rations, water and radios, in the event that their vehicle is disabled and/or they are forced to fight on foot. It is early and rather cool this morning, just under 110 degrees. But, God it’s hot under all this friggin’ gear. You are soaking wet.

As you penetrate deeper and deeper into the maize of the city, on its narrow dirt roadways, you realize that you are subject to surprise attack from any direction, including the rooftops. There is virtually no one visible on the street, but it’s early and all seems calm. Then suddenly, hell erupts all around you. A huge explosion, smoke, fire and debris everywhere. Your Humvee is ripped apart and disabled. Your comrade, sitting across from you is cut in half, his blood and body parts splattered all over you and your compartment. You, and your comrades who are still living, are now sitting ducks. An IED, buried in the dirt roadway, has exploded. Did the civilians know the IED was there? Of course they did. Would they warn you? Of course not. You’re mad and scared and you didn’t notice the temperature as it passed 115 degrees F.

Fearing a trap, by an enemy with a history of almost always fighting with civilians, women and children as human shields, you know that your company must respond quickly, if you hope to stay alive. But wait. First, your “experienced” Sergeant must ascertain what level of force is permissible in this situation, under the latest rules of engagement. You can attempt to withdraw on foot, using the remaining operable vehicle as cover, knowing that, if you are successful, your company will likely be labeled as cowards in the face of the enemy. You could exit the vehicles and approach the buildings on either side of the street on foot, knowing that you and your company would be little more than targets in a shooting gallery. Now you see another vehicle pull into the middle of the street behind you and stop, blocking your retreat. Then, shots ring out from a building on one side of the street and the die is cast. You know you are in a trap and the only alternatives left are to either kill or be killed. So be it. The only rule of this engagement is now : Stay Alive.

The Sergeant in command orders the operable vehicle to move tight against the buildings from which the shots were fired, with that squad exiting the vehicle to take cover against the wall of the buildings. He orders the survivors of your squad to exit your vehicle and take cover against the building wall on the other side of the street. Both squads assign sharpshooters to watch the roofs on the opposite side of the street. The vehicle blocking the street behind you suddenly starts to back up and both squads cut it to shreds, until it stops, killing all of its passengers. The squad on the side of the street from which shots were fired are now ordered to start kicking in doors, first spraying the inside space with automatic weapons fire and then throwing in grenades before entering the rooms. The insurgents, who planted the IED and set the trap, have all melted away, out the back doors, taking their guns with them. Your company is left holding the bag with one dead marine and a bunch of dead civilians, women and children who had been used, as cover, by the insurgents.

You know now that the object of the engagement was never to kill one company of Marines. It was intended to trick you into believing that you were in a trap, forcing you to take actions based on that belief, thereby causing you to commit what could later be proclaimed by the masses, the media, and friendly government figures around the world, as a massacre, to be condemned by all as a “horrible atrocity”. Image conscious U.S. leaders will then finish the job by either executing the valiant warriors who were suckered and had fought only to save themselves, or by jailing them for the rest of their lives.

Quit trying to be so apologetic and think about it. Your problem is that you cannot believe that a people like these people exist. Until you do, our valiant warriors will forever face triple jeopardy, wherever you send them: The environment, the enemy and their nation’s respected leaders. There is no honor in defeat. There is no justice in victory. War is Hell.