I'm sure it is not the first time, but Mexican soldiers and police have made entry into the U.S. Yes you heard it right! Mexican soldiers and police are making incursions into the U.S. to protect drug shipments and who knows what else.
If not for our dedicated Law Enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents, there would be more drugs in the country. Mexican Army Humvees apparently entered the U.S. and in the end, pointed assault rifles at our Border Patrol agents.
Keep close tabs on this situation folks. If the Mexican Army and Police can waltz across our borders unannounced, just think how easy it will be for a terrorist that wants to bring harm to innocent Americans.
Check out the NewsMax story
Help support the Minutemen watching our southern border. The Minuteman CDC
While you are on their page, check out the video of the Mexican Soldiers making a crossing into the U.S.
THIS IS ALARMING! Help support the Minuteman CDC.
Friday, January 27, 2006
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Teddy K
This is probably the best Ted stuff I have seen. I received it from NewsMax in an email. I hope they don't mind me using it here.
If you do not subscribe to NewsMax Magazine you should; even if you are a Liberal. Hey, Liberals should keep an open mind too!
You know, I'm glad old Ted is around because I would have nothing to laugh about if he were not around making an Ass out of himself.
******************************************************
Here's the funny crap about thou art the holy one Ted
******************************************************
Breaking from NewsMax.com
Ted Kennedy's Club Discriminated
When Ted Kennedy tried to chastise Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for his one-time membership in a group opposed to admitting more women and minorities to Princeton, the pot was calling the kettle black.
Sen. Kennedy still belongs to a social club for Harvard students and alumni that was thrown off campus nearly 20 years ago after refusing to allow female members, an investigation by the Washington Times reveals.
The book Ted Kennedy
doesn't want you to read -
Go Here Now.
According to the membership directory of the Owl Club, Kennedy updated his personal information as recently as September 7.
Ironically, the Owl Club, long reviled at Harvard as "sexist," was evicted from the campus in 1984 for violating federal anti-discrimination laws authored by Kennedy.
"It's a social club. It's like a fraternity."
But according to the Times, Harvard views organizations such as the Owl Club quite differently from fraternities and sororities, which are considered a form of housing and therefore are not coeducational.
Kennedy's hypocritical attack on Alito over his membership in CAP would come as no surprise to readers of the blockbuster new book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" by bestselling author Peter Schweizer.
In his book Schweizer discloses that while Kennedy has fought for the estate tax and spoken out against tax shelters, he has repeatedly benefited from an intricate web of trusts and private foundations that have shielded most of his family's fortune from the IRS.
One Kennedy family trust wasn't even set up in the U.S., but in Fiji.
Schweizer also reveals that while Kennedy has championed the development of alternate energy sources, he opposed a plan to build a wind-power generating facility to provide clean, cheap power to Cape Cod.
The reason: The wind turbines would be positioned off the coast from the Kennedy compound in Hyannis, in one of the family's favorite yachting and sailing areas.
Schweizer's "Do As I Say" has been touted as a must-read by Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and many others. Check out NewsMax's FREE offer for this book -- Go Here Now.
TO ADVERTISE
For information on advertising at NewsMax.com, please contact Corrine McNurlin via e-mail or call 888-766-7542.
TO SUBSCRIBE
If this News Alert has been forwarded to you and you would like a subscription, please visit: http://www.newsmax.com/email.shtml
Sign up for NewsMax e-mail alerts today!
If you do not subscribe to NewsMax Magazine you should; even if you are a Liberal. Hey, Liberals should keep an open mind too!
You know, I'm glad old Ted is around because I would have nothing to laugh about if he were not around making an Ass out of himself.
******************************************************
Here's the funny crap about thou art the holy one Ted
******************************************************
Breaking from NewsMax.com
Ted Kennedy's Club Discriminated
When Ted Kennedy tried to chastise Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for his one-time membership in a group opposed to admitting more women and minorities to Princeton, the pot was calling the kettle black.
Sen. Kennedy still belongs to a social club for Harvard students and alumni that was thrown off campus nearly 20 years ago after refusing to allow female members, an investigation by the Washington Times reveals.
The book Ted Kennedy
doesn't want you to read -
Go Here Now.
According to the membership directory of the Owl Club, Kennedy updated his personal information as recently as September 7.
Ironically, the Owl Club, long reviled at Harvard as "sexist," was evicted from the campus in 1984 for violating federal anti-discrimination laws authored by Kennedy.
"It's a social club. It's like a fraternity."
But according to the Times, Harvard views organizations such as the Owl Club quite differently from fraternities and sororities, which are considered a form of housing and therefore are not coeducational.
Kennedy's hypocritical attack on Alito over his membership in CAP would come as no surprise to readers of the blockbuster new book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" by bestselling author Peter Schweizer.
In his book Schweizer discloses that while Kennedy has fought for the estate tax and spoken out against tax shelters, he has repeatedly benefited from an intricate web of trusts and private foundations that have shielded most of his family's fortune from the IRS.
One Kennedy family trust wasn't even set up in the U.S., but in Fiji.
Schweizer also reveals that while Kennedy has championed the development of alternate energy sources, he opposed a plan to build a wind-power generating facility to provide clean, cheap power to Cape Cod.
The reason: The wind turbines would be positioned off the coast from the Kennedy compound in Hyannis, in one of the family's favorite yachting and sailing areas.
Schweizer's "Do As I Say" has been touted as a must-read by Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and many others. Check out NewsMax's FREE offer for this book -- Go Here Now.
TO ADVERTISE
For information on advertising at NewsMax.com, please contact Corrine McNurlin via e-mail or call 888-766-7542.
TO SUBSCRIBE
If this News Alert has been forwarded to you and you would like a subscription, please visit: http://www.newsmax.com/email.shtml
Sign up for NewsMax e-mail alerts today!
Friday, January 13, 2006
HIllary Clinton & Harry Belafonte
Hillary Clinton will be doing a little fundraising with Harry Belafonte.
Is this her way of keeping herself in the forefront of the news? Mr. Belafonte recently expressed his support for Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez. He also called President Bush "world’s greatest terrorist.” The last time I checked, I don't think I saw Chavez on our best friends list.
I guess washed up singers and actors need to find some way to draw attention to themselves. Hillary Clinton appearing with these left wing radicals only shows her true colors. By standing with Belafonte, she makes it known that she is not out to help this country but only herself. I will not go so far as to say that Belafonte and his washups are committing Treason but....giving aid to an enemy is in fact treason isn't it?
Well Mr. Belafonte, Danny Glover, Hillary Clinton and your group of left wing washups, go live in Venezuela. If you can big a big shot there then so be it...good riddance!
America does not support your idiotic outlandish views of the world. It only seems that way because of the liberal pandering drama creating media. As far as Hillary is concerned she is the biggest unethical carsalesman I have ever seen.
Good Day
Is this her way of keeping herself in the forefront of the news? Mr. Belafonte recently expressed his support for Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez. He also called President Bush "world’s greatest terrorist.” The last time I checked, I don't think I saw Chavez on our best friends list.
I guess washed up singers and actors need to find some way to draw attention to themselves. Hillary Clinton appearing with these left wing radicals only shows her true colors. By standing with Belafonte, she makes it known that she is not out to help this country but only herself. I will not go so far as to say that Belafonte and his washups are committing Treason but....giving aid to an enemy is in fact treason isn't it?
Well Mr. Belafonte, Danny Glover, Hillary Clinton and your group of left wing washups, go live in Venezuela. If you can big a big shot there then so be it...good riddance!
America does not support your idiotic outlandish views of the world. It only seems that way because of the liberal pandering drama creating media. As far as Hillary is concerned she is the biggest unethical carsalesman I have ever seen.
Good Day
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Police Search Divides Justices
The Supreme Court heard arguments relating to the 4th amendment. Do police officers have to knock and announce their presence when they arrive at your house with a search warrant?
This issue is nothing new to the justices of the Supreme Court. They have made many rulings over the years in regard to this issue. As it stands, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, the police must first knock and announce their presence at a residence. They must then wait a "reasonable" amount of time to allow the resident therein to answer the door. A recent case from Detroit is being argued because it is alleged that the police deviated from this. The argument in this case is that even though the police blundered when they just entered the residence in question, the illegal narcotics they found should not be surpressed from evidence.
Previous rulings also state that if the police think that evidence is or may be destroyed, they may make entry (exigent circumstances exception). A judge also has the authority to issue a "no knock" warrant. (Some States) In a ruling from a couple of years ago, the suspect was in his shower when the police arrived with their warrant. They knocked, announced and when they received no response, they made entry into the home. They ultimately found the suspect in his shower where he could not have possibly heard the knocking and announcing. The ruling of the Appeals court was reversed saying that the police acted properly. (U.S. V Banks)
Justice O'Conner was again the potential swing vote in this current case. She was leaning toward ruling against the police. This is a critical issue as we are witnessing confirmation hearings for Judge Alito. If the rule of Law is followed, the court may find in favor of the Petitioner in this case (Hudson V Michigan 04-1360)
As a Police Officer, the thought of announcing my presence and waiting for a response alarms me. Why do I need to put myself needlessly in jeopardy of injury or death to wait for a suspect to arm himself in anticipation of my entry into his residence. Additionally, if I am at the point where I have a search warrant in hand, the suspect's goose is generally cooked. It is not entirely simple to obtain a search warrant. Do we have to knock and announce to allow the suspect to get rid of evidence of a crime they are committing or have committed or to arm themselves to commit acts of violence against the police?
Contrary to popular belief, the police are not out there to be injured or killed. They are in a dangerous position however; protecting your rights to be free from criminals and their violent acts against society.
I believe strongly in the rule of law. It is that foundation on which our country is built. The danger is that liberal thinking continues to protect those committing the crimes and further serves to victimize those whom the crimes have been perpetrated against.
Whatever the outcome, it is one on which we will have to pattern our behavior.
This issue is nothing new to the justices of the Supreme Court. They have made many rulings over the years in regard to this issue. As it stands, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, the police must first knock and announce their presence at a residence. They must then wait a "reasonable" amount of time to allow the resident therein to answer the door. A recent case from Detroit is being argued because it is alleged that the police deviated from this. The argument in this case is that even though the police blundered when they just entered the residence in question, the illegal narcotics they found should not be surpressed from evidence.
Previous rulings also state that if the police think that evidence is or may be destroyed, they may make entry (exigent circumstances exception). A judge also has the authority to issue a "no knock" warrant. (Some States) In a ruling from a couple of years ago, the suspect was in his shower when the police arrived with their warrant. They knocked, announced and when they received no response, they made entry into the home. They ultimately found the suspect in his shower where he could not have possibly heard the knocking and announcing. The ruling of the Appeals court was reversed saying that the police acted properly. (U.S. V Banks)
Justice O'Conner was again the potential swing vote in this current case. She was leaning toward ruling against the police. This is a critical issue as we are witnessing confirmation hearings for Judge Alito. If the rule of Law is followed, the court may find in favor of the Petitioner in this case (Hudson V Michigan 04-1360)
As a Police Officer, the thought of announcing my presence and waiting for a response alarms me. Why do I need to put myself needlessly in jeopardy of injury or death to wait for a suspect to arm himself in anticipation of my entry into his residence. Additionally, if I am at the point where I have a search warrant in hand, the suspect's goose is generally cooked. It is not entirely simple to obtain a search warrant. Do we have to knock and announce to allow the suspect to get rid of evidence of a crime they are committing or have committed or to arm themselves to commit acts of violence against the police?
Contrary to popular belief, the police are not out there to be injured or killed. They are in a dangerous position however; protecting your rights to be free from criminals and their violent acts against society.
I believe strongly in the rule of law. It is that foundation on which our country is built. The danger is that liberal thinking continues to protect those committing the crimes and further serves to victimize those whom the crimes have been perpetrated against.
Whatever the outcome, it is one on which we will have to pattern our behavior.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Overwhelming Majority supports Bush Wiretaps
This was a breaking news alert from NewsMax Magazine. I thought It was important to share:
1. NewsMax Poll: Bush Justified in Wiretapping
Americans overwhelmingly support President Bush's authorization to the National Security Agency to tap the private conversations of U.S. citizens to search for evidence of terrorist activity, an exclusive NewsMax.com poll reveals.
In one of the largest responses to a NewsMax poll ever, more than 150,000 people across the Internet have made their opinions known about this controversy.
And they resoundingly say that the President was justified in taking this action to protect America.
Here is a breakdown of the poll results for several key questions:
1) Has President Bush been justified in tapping the conversation of U.S. citizens?
Justified - 80%
Not Justified - 20%
2) Do you believe the President must have a court-approved warrant to conduct a wiretap?
Yes - 23%
No - 72%
Not Sure - 5%
3) Do you believe President Bush's claim that he undertook this action to protect America?
Yes - 83%
No - 17%
4) How would you rate media coverage about President Bush's actions?
Fair - 20%
Unfair - 80%
NewsMax continues to update its online poll. You can still vote - just Go Here Now.
1. NewsMax Poll: Bush Justified in Wiretapping
Americans overwhelmingly support President Bush's authorization to the National Security Agency to tap the private conversations of U.S. citizens to search for evidence of terrorist activity, an exclusive NewsMax.com poll reveals.
In one of the largest responses to a NewsMax poll ever, more than 150,000 people across the Internet have made their opinions known about this controversy.
And they resoundingly say that the President was justified in taking this action to protect America.
Here is a breakdown of the poll results for several key questions:
1) Has President Bush been justified in tapping the conversation of U.S. citizens?
Justified - 80%
Not Justified - 20%
2) Do you believe the President must have a court-approved warrant to conduct a wiretap?
Yes - 23%
No - 72%
Not Sure - 5%
3) Do you believe President Bush's claim that he undertook this action to protect America?
Yes - 83%
No - 17%
4) How would you rate media coverage about President Bush's actions?
Fair - 20%
Unfair - 80%
NewsMax continues to update its online poll. You can still vote - just Go Here Now.
Friday, January 06, 2006
U.S. Domestic terror plot foiled by Italian authorities
Three Algerians have been arrested in Italy for plotting a series of major attacks inside the U.S. The Italian Authorities used wiretaps much like those authorized in this country.
So why then are we not hearing about this? This story was apparently widely publicized throughout Europe but virtually not reported in the U.S. One of the only newspapers that published the AP story was the Philadelphia Inquirer. They put it on page A6 under the headline, "Italy Charges 3 Algerians." However, they left out of the article the fact that the information was obtained via wiretaps.
There seems to be a common denominator here. This information would bolster the use of wiretaps against terrorists. Therefore, that would reflect positively on President Bush. The fact that the story was largely not followed in this country leads me to believe that the left wing media is rearing their ugly collective head. Can you imagine a story that supported the President and his efforts to keep us safe from fanatic terrorist attacks? This is why wiretaps work. I am not afraid of the government listening to my phone calls. I have nothing to hide because I am not a terrorist and I am not planning to blow anything up. Don't let the fanatical liberals convince you that the government is going to run rampant. They are not actually going to care about that which you are gossiping about with your friends. Lets face it, If they are listening to you in the first place, you have done something to draw the attention and you deserve a second look.
So why then are we not hearing about this? This story was apparently widely publicized throughout Europe but virtually not reported in the U.S. One of the only newspapers that published the AP story was the Philadelphia Inquirer. They put it on page A6 under the headline, "Italy Charges 3 Algerians." However, they left out of the article the fact that the information was obtained via wiretaps.
There seems to be a common denominator here. This information would bolster the use of wiretaps against terrorists. Therefore, that would reflect positively on President Bush. The fact that the story was largely not followed in this country leads me to believe that the left wing media is rearing their ugly collective head. Can you imagine a story that supported the President and his efforts to keep us safe from fanatic terrorist attacks? This is why wiretaps work. I am not afraid of the government listening to my phone calls. I have nothing to hide because I am not a terrorist and I am not planning to blow anything up. Don't let the fanatical liberals convince you that the government is going to run rampant. They are not actually going to care about that which you are gossiping about with your friends. Lets face it, If they are listening to you in the first place, you have done something to draw the attention and you deserve a second look.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)