Views From Kennewick

Saturday, March 03, 2007

In Defense of the Constitution

News & Analysis
007/07 March 3, 2007

CAIR: Admits Officials Have Ties to Islamist Terrorism

In a stunning revelation, Corey Saylor, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) government affairs director, on 2 March admitted that convicted Islamic terrorists were CAIR officials when they committed terrorist acts against the United States:

A Bitter Pill To Swallow

In an article carried by, Saylor is responding to questions about Ghassan Elashi and Ismail Royer and their ties to the leader of Hamas and activities in support of overseas terrorist organizations. While Saylor first said that Elashi and Royer were not working on behalf the group, he was later quoted:

"Some people try to hold us responsible for the actions of people that are associated with our organization. That's absolutely don't hold all of Enron responsible for what Ken Lay did."

For those North Americans that ever had any questions about CAIR's ties to Elashi and Royer, and, by association, tied directly to Islamist terrorists, those questions have been answered by CAIR's own spokesman.

Saylor seems to have forgotten that Enron folded like a cheap tent when the criminal activities of its leadership were exposed.


Blogger Note:
Now that CAIR has admitted it's nepharious bullshit, it's time this repugnant organization force if necessary. It's time the Sedition and Treason Act are put to good use, and I can think of no finer starting point than CAIR. Good Americans should stand up and demand CAIR be dealt with for previous acts of any sort that in any way directly or indirectly aided and abetted terroristic activities. Including their so-called humanitarian charities.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Are they really citizens? I say no.

Before you go and look up the constitution let me just quote the pertinent portion, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

So I am aware of what the constitution says, but I also know that there are interpretations and exceptions. For instance the children of foreign diplomats born here are not citizens. And children born to enemy forces in hostile occupation of the US are not citizens.

And what do both of these exception groups have in common? The parents clearly have no intention of becoming US citizens.

Bingo! Neither do the parents of illegal immigrants, or they would have tried to enter the US legally so as not to jeopardize their application of citizenship. By the very nature of crossing illegally, illegal immigrants have refused to be subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

And further, in the case of Mexican illegals, I say they are part of an occupying force because the Mexican government is instructing them firstly in how to safely and illegally cross our borders, and secondly in how to live when they arrive. They may not be considered hostile or enemy, but they certainly are an occupation force of a foreign nation. Will they raise their children as Americans with Mexican heritage, or as Mexicans living in a foreign land?

I don’t think children of illegal immigrants are children of the US.

(253) 857-9151
" Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.