Submitted by:
Macka12345

---

---

Subscribe to this Author

---

Paste this code into your site to promote this story!
<a href="http://www.breakthematrix.com/Iraq-War/Open-Borders-Prove-War-On-Terror-Is-Superficial" onClick="document.images["breakTheMatrix"].src='http://www.breakthematrix.com/badge/badge.php?cid=8676';return false"><img name="breakTheMatrix" src="http://www.breakthematrix.com/badge/badge.php?cid=8676" border="0" /></a>

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20080523.html

The American people were led to believe that America's fine men and

women in uniform were sent halfway around the world to Iraq and

Afghanistan to fight a "war on terror." Of course, everyone now knows

that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on September

11, 2001. I am sure that most everyone also remembers that the vast

majority of the terrorists who participated in those attacks were from

Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Yet, Saudi leaders continue to enjoy the

coziest of relationships--and, dare I say, friendships--with President

George W. Bush.

Does anyone besides me remember when Bush said that countries had to

decide whether they would be friends with either terrorists or the

United States, but that they could not be friends with both? Well,

Saudi Arabia has probably financed, supported, and befriended more

terrorists in the Middle East than any other nation in the world

(except perhaps Red China), yet they continue to be "friends" with the

United States.

Another glaring inconsistency regarding the "war on terror" is the

fact that for some seven years since the 9/11 attacks, our nation's

borders and ports are as open and porous as ever. These open borders

make the argument that "we are fighting them over there, so we won't

have to fight them over here" look absolutely disingenuous--even

laughable.

If foreign terrorists want to bring the fight to America's streets

again, they still have plenty of opportunity to do so. In fact, we

have no idea how many potential terrorists have already slipped across

our borders and are right now living among us. Furthermore, we have no

idea how many potential terrorists continue to pour through these wide

open sieves that we call borders.

How can this administration look the American people in the eye with a

straight face and claim that it is fighting a "war on terror," while

it does almost nothing to secure our borders and ports? As Marcellus

said in Shakespeare's Act 1 of Hamlet, "Something is rotten in the

state of Denmark." Amen. Something is also rotten in Washington, D.C.

Besides, why should al Qaeda attack us now? The U.S. occupation of

Iraq is the best recruiting tool they ever had. Do the American people

not realize (I think most of them actually do) that, thanks to our

protracted occupation of Iraq, al Qaeda might actually be stronger now

than it was when we invaded that country in 2003.

If the Bush administration was serious about fighting a war on terror,

it would absolutely, resolutely, and immediately seal our borders and

ports. It is nothing short of lunacy to send our National Guard forces

to Iraq for the purpose of protecting that country's borders, while

leaving America's borders wide open!

Not only does the Bush administration not secure our borders and

ports, it wants to provide a "path to citizenship" for illegal aliens.

It allows tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens' education,

social services, and medical care. It offers birthright citizenship

for illegal aliens. And it prosecutes and imprisons Border Patrol

agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean for shooting (but not seriously

enough to prevent his escape back into Mexico) a known illegal alien

and drug trafficker.

No wonder the flood of illegal aliens has skyrocketed since George W.

Bush became President of the United States.

And is there anyone who does not understand that a John McCain

Presidency will be more of the McSame? A McCain White House promises a

100-year occupation of Iraq along with continued open borders and

ports. Plus, McCain will also push forward with his plans to grant

amnesty to illegal aliens.

In addition, when it comes to illegal immigration, amnesty, etc.,

there will be no relief from an Obama White House. Both Barack Obama

and John McCain are pro-open borders, pro-amnesty twins.

Instead of fighting a "war on terror," the Bush administration (and

numerous administrations before it) is allowing our troops to be used

as the personal militia of the United Nations and for the commercial

benefit of international corporations.

Remember, soon after our troops invaded Iraq, President Bush

explicitly reported that the reason for the invasion was to defend

"the credibility of the United Nations." But this has been the pattern

of White House behavior ever since the U.N. was created back in 1945.

Presidents from both parties have repeatedly injected U.S. troops into

copious conflicts and wars, all for the purpose of enforcing and

augmenting the policies of the United Nations.

In fact, the last constitutional conflict that the U.S. military

fought was World War II. Virtually every war since has been a U.N.

manufactured and manipulated conflict. The war in Iraq is no

different.

I ask the reader, If you were President, and you sincerely believed

that you were fighting a war on terror, and that you had to take the

drastic action of sending other men's sons and daughters to fight and

die in order to wage this war (not to mention the prospect of

potentially bankrupting the country to fight it), would you be so

careless or indifferent as to not close the borders to the threat of

terrorists who might actually decide to attack us? I doubt that there

is a reader who would not agree that anyone who took such a task

seriously would--at the very minimum--do this.

So, I repeat: the fact that George W. Bush refuses to seal our borders

and ports proves that whatever else he thinks he is accomplishing in

Iraq, he is disingenuous when he proclaims that he is fighting a "war

on terror." (Again, the country that had the closest connections to

the 9/11 terrorists was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. If fighting the

terrorists was the focus, why did Bush not attack Saudi Arabia?)

And that means John McCain is disingenuous when he says he wants U.S.

troops to stay in Iraq for 100 years so "we won't have to fight the

terrorists over here" while, at the same time, promoting amnesty for

illegal aliens (which does nothing but promote even more illegal

immigration).

No, my friends. The real war is not a "war on terror." The real war is

a war against constitutional government, personal liberty, and

national sovereignty. It is a war against the fundamental principles

of America's Founding Fathers, that America should be a friend and

trader with all, but engaged in entangling alliances with none. It is

a war against the Bill of Rights. It is a war against the Spirit of

'76, the spirit that says America is a free and independent country,

subservient to no international entity or interest. It is a war

against the principle that would put America first. It is a war

against the very heart and soul of everything this country has stood

for ever since our patriot forebears stood on Lexington Green and

Concord Bridge. And this war is not being waged from Baghdad or

Tehran. It is being waged from Washington, D.C.

Read »

Created 27 weeks 3 days ago
Made popular 27 weeks 2 days ago