More on Immigration

Given the energized political environment we are in, this immigration thing will be the hot topic for quite a while. It, along with a couple of other hot buttons may throw us into a state of chaos and possibly even war, (if it gets REALLY ugly), but I think the letter I'm about to post gives a more historical approach to immigration. I read this and knew I had to share it:

Written in response to a series of letters to the editor in the Orange County Register:

Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one, suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the people now in question aren't being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry.

Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer.

Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.

They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.

Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought alongside men whose parents had come straight over from Germany, Italy, France and Japan. None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people. When we liberated France, no one in those villages were looking for the French-American or the German-American or the Irish-American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up anothercountry's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here.

These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.

And here we are in 2006 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I'm sorry, that'snot what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900s deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.

And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty, it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.

Rosemary LaBonte

 

War, an ugly subject….

I finally decided that it was time for another blog on this site.  It's been a while.  Today's topic stems from an article about Michael Berg, father of Nicholas Berg.  For those of you who don't know who Nick is, he was an American contractor in Iraq beheaded on international TV by al Queida.  The beheading was broadcast through out the world on television and can probably still be found on the internet.  I've seen it, its not pretty but I'm not sure when war or killing was ever pretty.

 Anyway, Michael Berg, father, in an article on the web announced that he blamed Bush,  Rumsfeld, and Gonzales for the death of his son.  That is just CRAP!!!!  I have seen the footage and none of those people were holding the knife.  I'm pretty sure that the terrorists were never directed, paid, or asked by anyone in the current administration to behead Nick Berg.

 "But its in response to the attacks by Bush against Iraq" you might say.  Well, we target terrorists, criminals, and people who would do us harm.  We do it in a way as to stop or kill them immediately.  We do as much as possible so that they do not suffer.  We do not target innocent civilians and if that happens, the soldiers that do it are punished.  Soldiers who have committed degrading acts against the terrorists in Abu Gharib (sp?) are being punished because of those acts.  We, as Americans, do not subscribe to the antics that are rampant with terrorists.  That's why we call them terrorists.

We are not at war with Iraq.  Let me clear this up.  We are at war FOR Iraq.  Iraq is the collection of individuals native to that region who have been under the control of a malevolent dictator and have lived in fear for years because of the sadistic things that he and his vile son's have done.  People died for their pleasure but no one hears or portrays those stories.  

We are at war with the regime that was in power that would terrorize and kill so many people.  That is who we attacked this week and it was one of their leaders that we killed. A known terrorist!  A known criminal against the free world!  A known killer among his own people!  That's who died.  That's who some of our people are defending.  

Things may have been different IF the persons kidnapped were soldiers and they were executed in a manner befitting a soldier.  Not a civilian beheaded on national television.  Not tortured but killed in response to the events happening.  These people are not warriors.  They are not soldiers.  They are cowards.  They are criminals.  They are disgusting excuses of human beings.  They hide behind civilians.  They kill innocent people.  Their attacks against America have not been against military installations.  They have not been against other combatants.  They have KILLED INNOCENT PEOPLE!!!!!!

 Mr. Berg, I can empathize with you about the death of your son.  But realize, there are bad people in this world.  You may have wanted to reconcile with al-Zarqawi but you know what, he would probably have spit in your face.  He sees no distinction between you or any other "infadel" in the world.

War is an ugly business but as long as there are bad people in this world, we will have to fight them.  That's why we have an army.  That's why we have police.  There are bad people, both foreign and domestic, and the army and police do what they can to keep the world safe for you to stand on your soap box and denounce those same people that defend your freedom. 

 I support the militia that defends my freedoms.  I support the president that directs the military and government.  He may not do an "excellent" job but I do think that he has responded with some really crappy situations the best he can.  This world is getting worse and he's doing his level best to make it better for everyone.  Regardless of how good or bad of a job he does, he is still my President.  I voted for him and am proud to have done so.  Someone has to do the job and given the alternatives, I will support President Bush good or bad.  I don't think he does anything for a malevolent purpose.  If he did, I would not support him but I do believe he has the American people's and the world's best interest at heart.