Terrorists, 'Big Surprise' for US, Theft-Vancouver Airport, Security, Borders, Immigration Enforcement, Drugs, A Failed European Policy

Iraqi insurgents threaten attack inside United States -- 'Big surprise' planned: 'We will give Americans a taste of what civilians in our country go through'

Iraqi insurgents threaten attack inside United States Ned Parker, AFP with files from The Daily Telegraph, Jan. 4, 05

[. . . . ] But the Islamic Army has shown a willingness to bend when it has felt its political ends are being met. It chose to spare French journalists Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot in December after holding them captive for four months.

Why? Think. But of course, France which was desperately trying to keep America from Iraq, has had a very different relationship with Saddam Hussein than the Americans--remember the UNSCAM-oil-for-food scandal, and the whole greedy bunch.




Airlines note theft by baggage handlers at Vancouver airport -- after Canada's Auditor-General's report -- nothing on the security front. The talk of $7.7 billion? It's more BS.

Airlines note theft by baggage handlers at Vancouver airport Jan. 4, 05

VANCOUVER, British Columbia (AP) — Theft by baggage handlers is a "significant problem" at Vancouver International Airport, a newspaper reported.

The Vancouver Sun said it obtained an internal Royal Canadian Mounted Police report detailing the theft through a public records request.

"Several airlines have noted significant problems with theft from passenger luggage prior to its arrival at the luggage carousel," the report read. "Recent thefts have resulted in a number of arrests and employee terminations."

The internal report, a "strategic threat assessment" used to help the force set priorities for the 2004-05 fiscal year, was prepared by the RCMP's criminal-analysis section. [. . . . ]

Richmond RCMP spokesman Cpl. Peter Thiessen said [. . . .] "The bigger problem is the luggage theft by organized groups on the public side of things," he said. "That's a far larger problem than anything by the airline employees." [. . . . ]

How to be an illegal -- Mexico government publishes guide to assist border crossers

How to be an illegal

[. . . . ] The Mexican consul general of Phoenix, Carlos Flores Vizcarra, said the reality is many migrants will try to cross the border illegally, and the book appears to be a means of protection.

"This is nothing new. It's a way to put it in very simple terms so people will understand the risks," he told the paper. "The intention is out of concern for human rights. People are doing it anyway. We cannot ignore that there is a very big migration between our two countries, and people who are coming to work need to understand the risks." [. . . . ]

Get serious about immigration enforcement

Get serious about immigration enforcement Dec. 30, 04, Dallas Morning News, Heather Mac Donald.

[. . . . ] Nothing compromises our domestic defense against Islamic terrorism more than our failure to control who enters the country. The alien-smuggling trade is the "sea in which terrorists swim," explains David Cohen, the New York Police Department's deputy commissioner for intelligence and an ex-CIA expert on al-Qaeda.

Yet fear of offending the race and rights lobbies has trumped national security at DHS. This spring, for example, Asa Hutchinson -- the department's undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security and now a contender for the top job -- shut down a successful border-patrol initiative to catch illegal aliens.

A specially trained team had apprehended about 450 border trespassers in several Southern California cities. The Los Angeles Times, La Raza and every other advocacy group for illegal aliens protested that the arrests were racially motivated and that they were "scaring" illegal aliens.

The White House promptly called the team off, and Mr. Hutchinson appeased the race hustlers by denouncing the initiative as "racial profiling." He followed up with a memo to every U.S. immigration, border patrol and customs agent declaring that "preventing racial profiling is a priority mission of this department." [. . . . ]

Drug prohibition is a terrorist's best friend

Drug prohibition is a terrorist's best friend Ted Galen Carpenter, National Post, January 4, 2005

Under pressure from Washington, Afghan President Hamid Karzai is urging his people to fight narcotics as ferociously as they fought the Soviet occupation in the 1980s. Such a struggle seems destined to undermine the campaign against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Karzai and his American patrons can prevail against the country's opium growers or its terrorists, but not both.

Afghanistan has been one of the leading sources of opium poppies, and therefore heroin, since the 1970s. Today, the country accounts for more than 75% of the world's opium supply. It is clear that some of the revenues from the drug trade -- at least 10% to 20% -- flow into the coffers of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

That is obviously a worrisome development. But it is hardly unprecedented. For years, leftist insurgent groups in Colombia, principally the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and right-wing paramilitaries have been financed largely by that country's cocaine trade. [. . . . ]

The harsh reality is that terrorist groups around the world have been enriched by prohibitionist drug policies that drive up drug costs, and which deliver enormous profits to the outlaw organizations willing to accept the risks that go with the trade.

[. . . . ]




Radical Islam in The Netherlands: A Case Study of a Failed European Policy

Radical Islam in The Netherlands: A Case Study of a Failed European Policy Manfred Gerstenfeld, Institute for Contemporary Affairs, Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. v, No. 14, Jan. 2, 05

On December 23, 2004, the Dutch Ministry of the Interior published a 60-page report entitled From Dawa to Jihad. Prepared by the Dutch general intelligence service (AIVD), it describes radical Islam and examines how to meet its threat to Dutch society.

Among the close to one million Dutch Muslims, about 95 percent are moderates. This implies that there are up to 50,000 potential radicals.

Since September 11, 2001, phenomena such as the growth of radical Islamic groups, polarization between Muslims and the surrounding society, limitations in the process of integration, and Islamist terrorism have increased in The Netherlands.

The capability of Dutch society to resist the threat of radical Islam is considered low, though recently a greater desire has become apparent among the Dutch population to become more resistant. Also within the Dutch Muslim community resistance against radical forces is low. The moderate organizations and individuals are not able to counterbalance the radical forces.

An earlier AIVD report dealt with Saudi influences in The Netherlands, mentioning a number of mosque organizations that originated from Saudi missions and financing. The Amsterdam Tawheed mosque, which in the past has put extreme anti-Semitic statements on its website, is linked financially, organizationally, and personally with the Saudi Al Haramain Foundation. Several other mosques are supported financially by Saudi charities.

The Dutch report places the blame for the origins of the problem squarely on the deeply-rooted ideology of fierce opposition to the Western way of life among certain Muslim groups. It does not claim that the problem of radical Muslims would disappear if there were peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Israel and Jews are not mentioned in the report. [. . . . ]

Lengthy and worth reading in its entirety.

Flag Flap-Jolly Roger for PM & What For Nfld? Why Fish Gone, Taking Liberties

Risky tiff -- Newfoundland's rage makes centrists quake

Risky tiff -- Newfoundland's rage makes centrists quake Paul Jackson, Calgary Sun, Jan. 4, 05

Prime Minister Paul Martin hasn't realized when he plays games with Premier Danny Williams and Newfoundlanders these days, he is playing with fire.

Yet, during his first year as the purported leader of our nation, the shipping tycoon can't be said to have faced up to reality on many occasions, if any.

Since 1976, when Rene Levesque's Parti Quebecois swept to power, Quebec has been the "faultline" in Confederation.

[. . . . ] Williams has put Martin and crew on notice Newfoundland is neither going to be ignored nor pushed around anymore. [. . . . ]

The update: I heard that Mr. Williams is going to give in on the flags; Mr. Martin demanded it as a condition of continuing negotiations.

Do not miss the importance of flags to Prime Minister Martin.

Jolly Roger better flag for Canada Steamship Lines Judi McLeod, Canadafreepress.com, Jan. 5, 05




Where Have the Fish Gone? -- A Fresh Look at the Ocean

Where Have the Fish Gone? -- A Fresh Look at the Ocean Debbie MacKenzie, September 19, 2003

There are 77 slides and below each is text. Very good.




Taking liberties -- "Mr Monderman’s thesis feels right to me — that by creating the illusion of security you relieve the citizen of the need to make his own judgments."

Taking liberties Jan. 1, 05

Wired magazine ran an interesting featurette last month about a fellow called Hans Monderman, who’s been a highway engineer in northern Holland for the last three decades. A year or two back, he had an epiphany. As Wired’s Tom McNichol puts it, ‘Build roads that seem dangerous, and they’ll be safer.’

In other words, all the junk on the streets — signs for everything every five yards, yellow lines, pedestrian crossings, stop lights, crash barriers, bike lanes — by giving the illusion of security actually makes driving more dangerous. The town of Christianfield in Denmark embraced the Monderman philosophy, removed all the traffic signs and signals from its most dangerous intersection, and thereby cut the number of serious accidents down to zero. These days, when you tootle towards the junction, there are no instructions from the transport department to tell you what to do; you have to figure it out for yourself, so you approach it cautiously and with an eye on what the other chaps in the vicinity are up to. [. . . . ]

The Trudeau Legacy: Nurses Lose Licences-Bilingualism, Natives-Status, Bud: Looming Aboriginal Disaster

Nurses at Montreal English hospital fail French test, lose licences

The Office de la langue francaise recently warned the use of French in the workplace is in a "precarious" state in Quebec and Premier Jean Charest has hinted at a crackdown

The purpose of the language laws in Quebec and Canada has not been to make English speakers bilingual so that they may operate in French; the object has always been to garner jobs for those whose first language is French--to turn Canada into a French speaking country, one where citizens must speak French. If English speakers question the promotion of the French language or the expense and unfairness of it where 75-80% of the population are not French speakers, they are termed "racist", "anti-French" and their chances of not advancing or not working are even better.

In what country in the world does such a small percentage of the total population have so much power that the majority language group is not able to apply to work for their own government because of this language policy -- the promotion of French policy?

Haven't you figured that out yet? The bafflegab is BS about the near-death of the French language -- as if Celtic and other languages have not died away throughout history. What is intrinsically valuable to most Canadians about the survival of French? Nothing! Unless we are French Canadian. And therein lies the rub.

If Canadians don't see the efficacy of French in their lives--lives increasingly needing Spanish, Hindi, Mandarin, Arabic, et cetera--what is the point? To whose benefit is this forced upon Canadians by 20% of our population? Why should we be forced? Why can Canadians not choose a second language--any second language -- which makes learning so much easier?

Because Quebec wants it and whatever Quebec and Acadian Francophones want is what the rest of us get.

Nurses at Montreal English hospital fail French test, lose licences Brian Daly, The Recorder and Times (Brockville) / CP, Jan. 4, 05

MONTREAL (CP) - Two nurses at an English hospital have had their licences revoked after failing a written French test even though Quebec faces a nursing shortage.

Elizabeth Davantes, 47, and Eulin Gumbs, 43, who both speak French, say they'll look for work outside Quebec after losing their jobs recently at the Jewish General Hospital. Quebec's language watchdog and the provincial nursing federation require that all nurses, even those in English hospitals, pass a written French test.

[. . . . ] "Quebec is my home. My family lives here, my kids live here. But I cannot support myself on nothing."

[. . . . ] The Office de la langue francaise recently warned the use of French in the workplace is in a "precarious" state in Quebec and Premier Jean Charest has hinted at a crackdown. [. . . . ]

I know of one instance, years ago, where someone certified to work in Quebec applied and was refused. Upon being told he must "apply for permission to apply", he said that's because I am an English speaker and you don't want Anglos returning to Quebec. The response? "That's right -- but you didn't hear that from me."




Canada still pays for Trudeau blunders -- Even questioning the bilingualism program--promotion of French--is akin to treason


Canada still pays for Trudeau blunders -- Even questioning bilingualism program is akin to treason January 2, 2005, Ted Byfield, Calgary Sun

It's perhaps fitting that in the year that marked the 20th anniversary of Pierre Trudeau's retirement as prime minister, one of his most cherished programs is being quietly pronounced a failure.


A poll conducted for Heritage Canada found that only children buy into bilingualism.

[. . . . ] Ottawa is about to direct another $750 million into the bilingualism program, whether it works or not.

[. . . . ] When in 1967 [Trudeau] took over as prime minister, the national debt stood at $17 billion. When he quit in 1984, he had inflated it to a hitherto unthinkable $200 billion. He had assumed, that is, that government spending and borrowing was essentially limitless.

His fellow Quebecer, Brian Mulroney, had much the same assumption and took it beyond $400 billion. But then the lenders, chiefly Americans, balked and blew the whistle.

Trudeau was wrong again, and the next two generations will pay the price.

We are only now beginning to experience the consequences of his third great initiative, the Charter.

My own suspicion is that it will prove the most calamitous of all. [. . . . ]

Trudeau ever leading a peaceful, secure country that worked was the calamity; he fit the zeitgeist -- and Canada is stuck with what he and his Liberals wrought. I am so fed up with the media's Trudeau hagiography.

I don't want a controlling government, activist justices and bilingualism as something no-one dares discuss -- except to praise it. One language group and one political party have run the show too long. Enough, already!




Ottawa, First Nations seek to redefine Indian status -- Current law will result in 'legislated extinction,' warns Phil Fontaine

Ottawa, First Nations seek to redefine Indian status Bill Curry, CanWest, Jan. 3, 05

[. . . . ] According to briefing notes presented to Mr. Scott when he became Indian Affairs Minister in July, the department urged the Minister to tackle the contentious issue and recommended options ranging from expanding First Nations rights and benefits to include Metis and some non-status Indians or doing away with the notion of status altogether. [Forget that last one; it is not going to happen.]

The internal briefing notes, which were obtained by CanWest News Service through Access to Information legislation, warn the main challenge facing the government is that Metis and non-status Indians are increasingly building a legal case for access to government treatment on par with status First Nations. [. . . . ]

Meanwhile, those with status are rapidly losing that distinction because of a legal provision that a child born into a family that has had two generations of marriage between a status person and a non-status person is not recognized as an Indian. [. . . . ]

Shat on a turtle -- and -- Indian Time

The Times of Winnipeg -- "Liberalism: The Haunting Fear Someone, Somewhere, can help Themselves"

Just go and read both.

Shat on a turtle Raskolnikov, Dec. 17, 04

A few weeks back I posted a story about a rad-indian friend of mine who feels that colonialism and Whitey are to blame for all indian woe, even the horrors of living tax-free and getting all education paid for.

This friend -- let's call him by the same moniker I give all forlorn indians tilting at windmills, Eh Guevara -- is in town for the holidays, visiting his ex and two of his five children ( the other three, from two different mothers, are on some rez in Ontario). He stopped by last night (an unexpected drop-in while I was watching ESPN Classic hockey; few would survive such gall), and after some strained greetings we sat down and he allowed me the joy of listening to him talk about how his art gallery ( this quarter's ambition; last quarter he wanted to be a rapper; previously he was going to be: an actor ("Adam Beach is a sell-out indian. He should be demanding that studios make an accurate movie about the history of AIM"; a lawyer; the first indian to perform open-heart surgery; and finally a film director of his own), how his art gallery was definitely in the planning stages and when it opened it was going to be the best Aboriginal art gallery in Canada.

Not that he was an artist. Just a patron. . . .

Indian Time

Indian Time Raskolnikov, January 04, 2005

Grab a snack, this is a long one.

This started off as a small-scale reply to what I felt was a silly and condescending article. A little while later I was fully enraged and in battle mode.

See my rebuttals in italics. [. . . . ]

Thanks to Kate Milligan of Western Standard / The Shotgun and Small Dead Animals.



Bud Talkinghorn: The looming Aboriginal Disaster

Phil Fontaine, the Grand Chief of the Canadian Indian Federation, is not serving his constituents well. His constant playing of the victim card is not going to get his people out of their dilemma--one marked by poverty, rampant substance abuse, and unemployment. Instead of taking the approach of newly-landed immigrants and attempting to intergrate with the business cultural community of Canada, he wants to keep them unassimilated. If the native culture had proven to be economically feasible, I would say, "fine"; but it isn't. Staying on reserves (many extremely isolated) will only perpetuate this reliance on the taxpayers' largesse. With their numbers growing way ahead of the general population's, there will come a time when that welfare will have to be reduced drastically. There have been hints that the Prime Minister wants to bring the Metis into the welfare orbit, thus hastening the time that this reduction will occur. There is a tipping point where the Liberals' spendthrift ways will lead to their absolute defeat. Mulroney's Conservatives can attest to that type of drastic heave-ho. [Isn't Mr. Mulroney beginning to look good in comparison with what has followed him? NJC ]

The entire federal native policy is riddled with political correctness. Andy Scott hasn't the courage to expose the absurdity of many Indian policies. Even the suggestion that native-run education is an obvious failure has to be couched in muted pronouncements. Learning Slavy, or Northern Cree might be a culturally sensitive thing to do; however the real world of commerce couldn't care less. They want people highly literate in one (or both) of Canada's official languages. Mainly, it is the very inward-looking philosophy that keeps the natives in a powerless position. It is about time that Scott developed some backbone and told Fontaine to get with the realities of modern life, before we lose another generation of native children.

© Bud Talkinghorn

Defend What is Best for Children; Defend Marriage

Children have the right to be raised in homes where both role models, mother and father, are present and research conclusively proves this situation is best for children. The Government should not be undermining these rights or pushing this radical redefinition that will have such an adverse impact on our future. Such a fundamental change should only be decided by the voters.

Now is the time to defend marriage, Canada!

Sign the National Marriage Petition!

Is same-sex marriage a simple matter of minority rights, as the Government and most of the media believe?

Or is it a costly social experiment on the backs of our children?

As social scientists join their voices with pro-family organizations to warn about the potentially dire effects of same-sex marriage on children, the family, and society, we believe the issue warrants careful examination by every Canadian. [. . . . ]

Help Spread the Word

Within a few weeks, the Government of Canada will be introducing legislation that could drastically weaken the family. If passed into law, the bill to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide will have profound, unintended, negative impacts on society. It will disenfranchise our children's children of their natural right to a mother, a father, and a stable family environment. And it will endanger that environment that research shows is best for children.

As a concerned Canadian, I have signed the National Marriage Petition to help preserve marriage I encourage you to go to this Web site, http://www.marriagepetition.ca , to learn more about how same-sex marriage threatens the family. This site also has suggestions on additional things you can do to defend marriage.

Brief Background

Marriage in Canada is under attack from activist judges and from the Government who are pushing to legalize same sex marriage.

[. . . . ] The Prime Minister has said that he will allow a “free vote” in Parliament, however all 39 Cabinet Ministers and 28 Parliamentary Secretaries will be required to vote for the Government Bill. The other parties in the Government coalition are expected to support this legislation and at least most of the Conservatives will vote against it. That means that there will be intense pressure on the Government backbenchers to ignore the views of their constituents and vote along party lines or abstain from voting because a majority of these Liberals will have to vote for the Government’s bill for it to pass. So much for a “free vote”.

Make no mistake. Radically changing the definition of marriage by allowing same sex individuals to “marry” will profoundly affect – and threaten – our future as a nation. Because this action has such profound consequences for future generations, it should only be decided by the electorate by referendum in accord with the 1992 referendum Act. Section 3 of this Act provides that the government may “obtain by means of a referendum the opinion of electors on any question relating to the Constitution of Canada”.

It is essential that Canadians make this clear to the Prime Minister.

Links to News Articles
Parliamentary Actions: Candidates voting records on marriage and C-250

Some 'rights' are just plain wrong, IMMIGRANTS, NOT CANADIANS, MUST ADAPT, COUNTRY OF CHOICE

Some 'rights' are just plain wrong

Some 'rights' are just plain wrong Tom Brodbeck, Jan. 2, 04, Winnipeg Sun

Rights are being handed out so liberally these days, it's difficult to know what a real human right is any more.

The traditional definition would probably include such basic rights as protection from discrimination, the right to a fair trial, freedom of expression and religion, and the right to peaceful assembly.

It's the type of rights most fair-minded and rational people would agree are critical in a free and healthy democracy.

Unfortunately, courts have gone far beyond that traditional definition in recent years in their interpretation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

And it seems people today have the "right" to do and expect just about anything.

There really is no such thing as a natural human right.

"We've gone so far the other way, bent over backwards to not offend anyone, that I am now being offended. But it seems that no one has a problem with that" [. . . . ]

It is the Canadian and American Judeo-Christian heritage that has prompted our generosity and our tolerance, the very principles that have encouraged us to accept others' differences--allowing immigrants and refugees to enter our country when the countries from which they fled do not have the tolerance to accept our differences. Think Saudi Arabia -- in fact, most of the Middle East and Southeast Asia. How many Christian churches can you count? Which countries are tolerant of our Judeo Christian tradition? NJC



A citizen's view -- IMMIGRANTS, NOT CANADIANS, MUST ADAPT John Mayer website

I'm tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. I'm not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Canada. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand.

This idea of Canada being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Canadians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom. We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!

We are, in the main, Christians, not Buddhists, Muslims or Islamics because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.

If the Maple Leaf offends you, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our government gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But once you are done complaining, whining and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Canadian freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

If you agree-- pass this along; if you don't agree -- delete it!

I figure if we all keep passing this to our friends it will
also, sooner or later get back to the complainers, let's all try.

Indeed! My sentiments exactly.



COUNTRY OF CHOICE

Will we still be the Country of choice and still be Canada if we continue to make the changes forced on us by the people from other countries that came to live in Canada because it is the Country of Choice????

Think about it ... All I have to say is, when will they do something about MY RIGHTS?

I celebrate Christmas, but because it isn't celebrated by everyone, we can no longer say Merry Christmas, now it has to be Season's Greetings. It's not Christmas vacation, it's Winter Break. Isn't it amazing how this winter break ALWAYS occurs over the Christmas holiday?

We've gone so far the other way, bent over backwards to not offend anyone, that I am now being offended. But it seems that no one has a problem with that.


IMMIGRANTS, NOT CANADIANS, MUST ADAPT

Paul Harvey says:

"I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December.

I don't agree with Darwin, but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher taught his theory of evolution.

Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game.

So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

"But it's a Christian prayer," some will argue. Yes, and this is the United States of America, a country founded on Christian principles.

According to our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1. So what would you expect---somebody chanting Hare Krishna?

If I went to a football game in Jerusalem, I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer. If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad, I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer. If I went to a ping pong match in China, I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha.

And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother me one bit. When in Rome... "But what about the atheists?" is another argument. What about them?

Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs.

Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer.

Unfortunately, one or two will make that call. One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do.

I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations. Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights. Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating and to pray before we go to sleep.

Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.

God help us.

And if that last sentence offends you, well..........just sue me. The silent majority has been silent too long. It's time we let that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard, that the vast majority don't care what they want.. It is time the majority rules!

It's time we tell them, you don't have to pray. You don't have to say the pledge of allegiance, you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him. That is your right, and we will honor your right. But by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away. We are fighting back....and we WILL WIN!

God bless us one and all, especially those who denounce Him. God bless America, despite all her faults, she is still the greatest nation of all. God bless our service men who are fighting to protect our right to pray and worship God. May 2005 be the year the silent majority is heard and we put God back as the foundation of our families and institutions.

Keep looking up...... In God WE Trust. If you agree with this, please pass it on. If not, delete.

Here, you may still protest -- peacefully. Just do not try to change our world. NJC