Impeachable offense?
Y’know, if this story turns out to be true, I’ll be just about ready to call for Bush’s impeachment over it:
While Minuteman civilian patrols are keeping an eye out for illegal border crossers, the U.S. Border Patrol is keeping an eye out for Minutemen — and telling the Mexican government where they are.
According to three documents on the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations Web site, the U.S. Border Patrol is to notify the Mexican government as to the location of Minutemen and other civilian border patrol groups when they participate in apprehending illegal immigrants — and if and when violence is used against border crossers.
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman confirmed the notification process, describing it as a standard procedure meant to reassure the Mexican government that migrants’ rights are being observed.
“It’s not a secret where the Minuteman volunteers are going to be,” Mario Martinez said Monday.
Minuteman members were not so sanguine about the arrangement, however, saying that reporting their location to Mexican officials nullifies their effectiveness along the border and could endanger their lives.
“Now we know why it seemed like Mexican officials knew where we were all the time,” said Chris Simcox, founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. “It’s unbelievable that our own government agency is sending intelligence to another country. They are sending intelligence to a nation where corruption runs rampant, and that could be getting into the hands of criminal cartels.
“They just basically endangered the lives of American people.”
Out. Fucking. Rageous. Confederate Yankee says it again, so I don’t have to. Heads ought to roll over this one, and if this represents the Bushpublican (aka RINO) position on illegals, to hell with every last one of them. To hell — and straight back home come November. Even the Dems could do no worse than this.
(Via Hot Air)
- Entries
"...They are sending intelligence to a nation where corruption runs rampant, from a nation where corruption runs rampant, and that could be getting into the hands of criminal cartels that help get the drugs into the US that fund the CIA covert ops."
I really don't know what else to say about this. It's beyond appalling.
That's it, I'm done. Weak-willed, half-assed prosecution of the WoT. Spending like a drunken sailor. Campaign finance reform. Now this shit. There is no reason at all to vote for these scumbags anymore. Let them lose Congress, since they clearly don't know what to do with it.
At least we got Roberts and Alito, so it wasn't a total loss.
the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
1) I almost blew a gasket when I saw the story this morning
2) If the President actually knows about and/or authorized this, I'm going to press my representative to start impeachment proceedings
3) #2 is contingent on Bush actually being in the know about this. There are many factions in the government(State Dept, CIA) who are intentionally subverting the will of this administration.
I'm not naive; I know the president's position on illegal immigration. I just want to be certain of the facts before starting the process. Impeaching the president isn't something that I take lightly. Unlike Clinton's supporters, however, I hold people that I vote for accountable. If Bush is guilty, hang him by a Senate vote. I could get used to a year or so with President Cheney.
bwaaa
bwaaahhaaahhaaaa
bwaaahaaaahhaaabwaahhaaaaahaaaahaaaahwaaaa
ahh that felt nice.
wont. be. voting. republican. maybe
ya think ?
/snicker/
But I also won't bother getting out of my chair on election day. If every candidate is going to do the same shit anyway then I'll stay home, pour myself a drink, play some Grand Theft Auto and let the chips fall where they may.
I would like to know what involvement Bush has, if any, in this action. After six years of the CIA and State's not-so-clandestine revolt, I don't think there's any branch of the career civil service uncorrupted.
Interesting, Al...I didn't know you were such a prude.
But seriously, your comment points out the right's disengenous portrayal of the left. "Party of euthenasia"? hardly.
Convenience abortion? again, wrong- what we want is that it be left up to the morality of the individual, not the federal government. Because we live in a time of lessening integrity, you seem to think we can force some form of integrity and morality upon the US populace via the legal system.
But of course you know that's impossible. Just like with drugs, the more difficult and illegal it is, the more the black-market profiteers thrive and the more dangerous the situation becomes.
Gay marriage? What's you're problem? Let people be. You're not gay...so don't worry about it. What is the big horrible problem with gay couples being given the same legal status as heterosexual couples? I mean really...what's at risk here? Nothing.
Leave it up to the States. You'll wind up with a balance of states like Kansas and Montana that will be against, and Mass. and California that will be pro. What's the big deal? There are more important things than poking your nose into other people's sex lives.
Luckily, since most of the Right considers the first two murder and the third a contradiction in terms, and the country, despite the best efforts of the media and education systems, is leaning more to the Right all the time, these three issues are pretty much dead or dying.
Sucks to be a Leftard these days, doesn't it?
let me get this straight: you want the Federal government to control any aspect of life that the Christianists find unacceptable. You wholeheartedly support the melding of chuch and state, and would have Christian morality forced upon the American public via the federal legal system.
Fucktard.
No, I don't want a theocracy. I'll take a moment to note that for all the press blather to the contrary, theocracy (and fascism, but thats a subject for another day) always seems to be descending on America but actually landing on the rest of the world.
What I do want is to have my right to Life respected, the corollary of course, being that I have to respect that right in all others, even old people that the Left would like to put out on an iceberg, and really young people that female Leftwits are too weak or depraved to want to give birth to. I even (horrors!) have to respect the right to Life of journalists and politicians, as long as they continue to behave in a human manner.
Journalists and politicians would do well to keep that last phrase in mind. Inhumane behavior is a pretty good indicator that one has abrogated one's right to Life, and has a date with a noose.
As for gay marriage, unlike the vast majority of the Republicans and some of the Democrats, I'm not against it. You see, I've always considered monogamy to be a damned peculiar social construct, and gay marriage is the first step to legalizing polygamy. It would be nice to finally have enough women around the house to keep up with my, er, drives, if you know what I mean.
As a closing note, has anyone ever told you how fucking hilarious it is to see a Leftwit defend "states rights"? Pretty fucking funny, actually. What year do you think this is, 1860?
The closing lines sum it all up, I think.
Indeed.
Oh, and he's also a Pagan.
I think Randy, you may be something of an AGNOSTIC...but not an athiest.
I'll put it in scientific terms for you. Life=A: The ability to consume nutrients to produce energy: B: the ability to excrete wast: C: The ability to reproduce itself. I believe ALL of these conditions apply to a fertilized Zygotic cell. Life begins at conception, religious arguments aside. Are you in favor of defining the minimum limit of what is human? Is a potential human worth throwing away? That's what you are arguing for, when it boils down to it. The disposition of a human life that has had the temerity to come into existence as a result of "Accident". Human life is not that cheap, thank you! By that argument, if you disagree with certain views, for example, then off to the ovens with them, because obviously, if they don't measure up intellectually (By your standards), then they are subhuman and not deserving of life.
Quite simple- I'm not trying define what's human and what's not. That's not the argument.
The question is one of ownership. While in the womb, a mother "owns" her child. Now, I'll be the first to admit that after the second trimester, things get a bit squishy, and I don't support late-term abortion.
But within the first trimester, it is a woman's right to choose whether she continues or not.
"I believe ALL of these conditions apply to a fertilized Zygotic cell."
AS:
Guns don't kill people—CONDOMS DO!
It applies to the spinach salad I had for lunch...
...what's your point?
That is, without doubt, the most idiotic possible reading of my words anyone, anywhere, at any time in all of recorded history, could possibly make. You have just shown zero understanding of human rights, biology, and Paganism, (which, I might add is a fucking ridiculous made up religion followed mostly by "art fags" trying to look cool, unfortunately in all stages of their life) and honestly, after that little display, I can't see why anyone would try to correct your vast ignorance and inability to reason like a human being. But I'm feeling generous, so here goes.
I demand respect for Life. Why? Because all other Rights derive from it. Is this concept so foreign, so boggling, so amazing that you cannot grasp it? Can you not understand that without that axiom, that starting point, then no other Right means anything? If you can deny the child in the womb that basic Right, then no other Right is justified. Self-Defense? In the face of that unspeakable crime of murderous butchery? Please. Free speech? You demand Freedom of Speech when you condone murdering unborn babies?! Don't make me laugh. Freedom of Religion, Due Process, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, but you want to murder innocents in the womb?!? At least Genghis Khan was an honest butcher, but you? Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?
Have you no shame, sir? At long last, have you no shame?
Does your bullshit know no bounds?
First of all, I was just reading Alfred Russell Wallace's "The Malay Archipelago", published in 1868. He talks extensively on the "pagans" of New Guinea...and we all know what an "art fag" he and Darwin were.
God, you are a stupid little bitch.
Different people throughout time have offered different opinions of what constitutes an "innocent" toi suit their needs. Indeed, depending on your definition, there's abot-load of "innocents" festering at Gitmo right now.
So, Mr. Athiest, leave the Christian babble out of it.
As for as respect for life, you will find none who has more repect for life than Zorro. But, the answers are not as simple as your clean little mind would have them be...otherwise, this would not be a matter of international debate among the elders and scholars, who's asses you are not qualified to wipe clean.
I have no shame...but I have humility and integrity...and an open mind.
Fuck you, asshole. Who the fuck do you think you are, to tell me I'm not an Atheist? Who died and made you (snicker!) God?
Dumbass.
Pagan is a term to describe a non-Christian who worships other deities. Mind you, I was using the modern usage, and in that context, "pagan" is pretty much the purview of the "art fag", all black wearing "goth".
However.
If you had the brains of a garden slug, you could figure out that it's possible to be an Atheist (not worship nor believe in a deity) and still respect Life enough not to want to kill an innocent child in it's mother's womb. Or am I being too nuanced for you? Shall I find smaller words, or perhaps use shorter sentences? What do I have to do to get this concept through your incredibly thick skull?
A more dishonest sentence I've never seen from you. In fact, I can't remember a lie of greater infamy anywhere, at anytime, by anybody. I didn't think it was possible to respect you less. Thanks (I think) for opening my eyes to the possibility that you're even more vile than I had considered.
Obviously, we differ. Philosophy (particularly political and ethical) isn't the overcomplicated quagmire so many overeducated morons in so many universities have pretended it to be. That you're taken in by their pretentious twaddle doesn't suprise me a damn bit.
That you're enamored with Plato's idea of the Philosopher Kings doesn't suprise me either. How many times does that particularly small minded piece of nonsense have to be debunked in slaughter, poverty, and famine for you to learn the lesson?
Psychological projection is an ugly thing, isn't it? When are you going to get some couch time with a psychiatrist? Maybe get fitted for a nice, long sleeved white coat with all those sturdy leather straps and bright shiny buckles, I hear they're all the rage with Leftwits like yourself lately.
But plenty of cause to feel it, believe me.
More lies, or is it possible you simply don't know the meanings of the words you use? I haven't seen a single example of humility or integrity from you yet. What makes you think you actually possess these qualities?
Around these parts, we call that "gullible". Look it up, it's a real word.
To put it not quite as politely as she has: If all you whiny assholes would sit down and write your Congresscritter and Representative, not to mention the President, maybe Republicans would start behaving like conservatives again, instead of RINO's.
Just how many actual letters have you written yet? Hmmm? They open all snail mail, you know, so as not to miss any campaign contributions. Email, not so much. Blogs, I don't even think they read, at least not one with this little traffic.