Why does, ‘Who is an American?’ mean nothing?

Remembering September 11th, 2001

Take yourself back to September 11th, 2001 and recall where you were at 9 am on that fateful morning. Look at the photograph above and reflect on what you were told or heard that brought you to a television screen. Do you remember your emotions as you watched in stunned disbelief with the rest of America as events unfolded.

Do you remember seeing people jump from the tower’s windows to certain death, and the north side of the Pentagon in flames? Do you remember the legion of rescue workers doing anything possible in Washington, D.C. and New York to render aid with no expectation of reward other than knowing they were saving lives - and more often than not giving their own? Do you remember the brave souls, those American patriots that gave their lives heroically in Pennsylvania, in the finest traditions of United States citizenship, to protect many more American citizens from certain death? They willingly made the ultimate sacrifice as honorably as our soldiers who would follow in the War on Terror. First one tower, and then the second tower collapsed, extinguishing the lives of thousands of intelligent, talented, and dedicated human beings.

Do you remember feeling an empty disbelief followed by a visceral disgust that there could be an organized group of defective human beings called "Muslims" willing to commit an atrocity of this magnitude on innocent people? Slowly, most Americans came to realize they had been at war for decades with a cult called Islam that claimed the legitimacy of a religion.

For a short period of time, during “the Innocent Days,” there were only patriots - no liberals or conservatives, no Democrats or Republicans, no Christians, Jews or Agnostics. Who was President of the United States or Mayor of New York was not important. Who was an American meant everything.

In the weeks that followed, three prominent types of Americans emerged from that fateful day. One had a prideful resolve, not felt since Pearl Harbor, demonstrated both in the midst of the crisis and during the aftermath. They were called, "Americans."

Another type immediately began to disgrace their citizenship by seeking ways to profit, blame, cast doubt, stir unrest and project guilt for the attack onto the current or a previous Administration, and various United States corporations. To this day, collectively they are called "liberals" or "Democrats," interchangably. A third group, distinct from the "Americans" and "liberals," worked tirelessly following September 11th, 2001. Their goal was to exploit the attack on the United States for personal gain. They are what we call, "politicians."

How will September 11th, 2007 be remembered? Consider the alternatives.

REMEMBERING SEPTEMBER 11th, 2007

Consider two alternative scenarios for the first fourteen days following September 11th:

1. What if the FBI or the President had announced that they were going to immediately begin screening all aviation travelers (get over it or don’t travel), screen libraries for people checking out books on bomb-making (for the safety of families and children in schools), develop an intelligence dossier on every Muslim in America, and follow every possible terrorist lead regardless of any possible offense to any artificial subset of society? What if the President announced that pilots would hereafter be armed for the defense of the aircraft and protection of their passengers (no choice), and all cockpit doors would be fortified (get over it or don’t fly)? What if the President had announced that soft targets throughout the country vulnerable to terrorism, such as water systems, harbors, airports and nuclear plants, would be dramatically hardened with additional security? What if the President had announced that valid passports would be required to enter the United States of America at any Port of Entry? What if the President promulgated an Executive Order that anyone entering the USA illegally after September 11, 2001 would be considered a terrorist until such suspicions could be proven unfounded? What if the President announced that all Islamic males who were in America legally, and who were not U.S. citizens, must register within 30 days? Those that did not register would be considered terrorists. What if the FBI rounded up all non-citizen Islamic males illegally in the United States and deported them without recourse due to a proclaimed national emergency?

2. Alternatively, what if the President or the FBI announced that there was no serious threat of terrorism and no policies would change?

Which alternative would have been rational or irrational in the immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001? Which choice would have angered you?

Now consider the Hurricane Katrina, Rita and Wilma alternatives:

1. What if FEMA or the President announced that they were going to staff, operate, supply, coordinate, fund, rescue, rebuild and transport everyone and everything associated with the relief effort, beginning at the instant devastation was certain, as rapidly as they could respond, even if it meant bypassing federal law, state law and elected local governments, and all relief organizations?

2. Alternatively, what if FEMA or the President announced authoritatively that disaster recovery and the welfare of the citizens of every state was, by law, the primary responsibility of individual states, and only secondarily would the federal government assist? What if the President announced that he would respect the inherent sovereignty of state governments first, and would only respond upon written request of State Governors, working in cooperation with civilian relief agencies, after a comprehensive damage assessment had been completed, relief needs were known, and a state-level relief infrastructure was implemented?

Which of those choices would have angered you in the weeks following the hurricanes?

Now ask yourself, why is national defense (our lives, our families, our children, our jobs, our culture and our value systems) somehow less important to Democrats and liberal Republicans, and the Main Stream Media than hurricane-related property damage on the Gulf Coast of Mexico?

Why is the defense of our nation from another terrorist event, protection of our economy, preservation of our manufacturing and technological advantage, safeguarding other forms of industry and particularly jobs, and protecting our sovereignty at the border somehow evil in the eyes of liberals – all of whom hide behind various labels of Party affiliation? You know who they are.

Why is anything pro-American viewed by Democrats and liberal Republicans as unfair, conceived in lies? Why are Congressmen and the media so willing to divulge classified information and give aid and comfort to enemies of the United States? Why do many politicians think that people of other nations are unworthy of freedom and United States citizens are unworthy of liberty?

Why are the deaths of American servicemen and women greeted with media celebration of milestones? How could liberals in Congress willingly vote to send our young men and women into war and then work tirelessly to insure their defeat, accusing the young soldiers of war crimes at every opportunity?

Why are strategic American military bases foolishly being closed across the country in the guise of cost-cutting? Liberals in Congress view their base-closure actions as a form of political sport, however future generations of Americans will come to realize that it was a cruel hoax, based on liberal anti-military sentiment, that caused whole geographic areas of the United States to become unprotected and vunerable to terrorism.

Why are advanced weapon systems and desperately needed troop equipment somehow unworthy of funding by Congress, but NO amount of money and speed of response would have been sufficient in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina?

Why are modern nuclear energy facilities, oil exploration and new oil refineries STILL blocked by Congress when new capacity would reduce United States dependency on foreign oil from such places as Mexico, Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia?

How many contradictions can be numbly ignored? Is it probable to surmise, even probable to conclude, that United States Congressmen are on the ‘take’ and so pervasively corrupt and consumed with self-interest that they are willing to sell out their own nation for campaign contributions that originate from foreign sources - from Mexico, China and Saudi Arabia - buying their votes to act against the national interests of the United States?

Why are the lives of “Joe 6-pack” and his family, and the lives of our servicemen and women worth so little? Why do Democrats and liberal Republicans see no need for a strong national defense, energy self-sufficiency, effective and inviolable border control that complies with existing laws, and competent foreign intelligence?

Why have the lives of 50,000 United States citizens been literally sacrificed to illegal aliens, with no end in sight? How many American families who have lost a son or daughter, husband or wife in the War on Terror would proudly proclaim that their family's sacrifice was for "open borders," which is the number one oxymoron of the 21st Century?

Almost seven years later and counting; why does ‘Who is an American?’ mean nothing to those who with authority to protect our borders, and particularly Congress and the Bush Administration? It would appear self-interst is stronger than a politician's sense of duty.

Is anybody listening?

Prominent politicians and media elites have refused to listen to a huge majority of United States citizens, choosing instead to rule rather than govern. Liberal state governors, legislatures and politicians in Congress steadfastly refuse to embrace their own responsibilities of United States citizenship, which should include a defense against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

For decades, these same liberal luminaries have been intent on demonstrating that allegiance to the United States is not important and a world government would be preferrable. However, they fail to understand that it is the American "heart" which has made the United States great. The American heart is that individual nucleus of loyalty to a faith of personal choosing, country and family. It is the American heart that forms the core of our nation's excellence, initiative, integrity, moral character, voluntary charity, duty and responsibility of citizenship.

Why, then, is it not reasonable to compare politicians with a large, ugly and odiferous snail, going nowhere slowly, doing nothing constructive, serving no useful purpose, feeding off the fruits of fellow citizens, pathologically seeking power, and leaving behind an unmistakable trail of corruption and slime so plainly visible that every legal United States voter should be able to trace them in November, 2008.

Only one question remains. How many registered voters really have an aberrant fetish for slime? Voters face some difficult decisions in 2008. The choices seem limited to two choices, a liberal Republican or an extreme socialist Democrat? Neither choice will return conservative "citizen legislators" or sanity to Congress anytime soon. Neither choice will seal the nation's borders, develop domestic energy resources, return excellence to education, protect citizens from crime and terrorism, resurrect manufacturing in the United States and create jobs, and put an end to the incessant taxation and growth of government.

Being an equal opportunity offender, it appears to be a ‘given’ that either Senator Hillary R. Clinton (the Queen of corruption) or Barrack Hussein Obama (the closet Muslim) may become the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party in 2008. This comes on the heels of such patriots as presidential candidate Senator John Kerry in 2004 and ex-Vice President Al Gore in 2000. Given the narrow outcome of recent elections, it would appear that too many United States voters have demonstrated their penchant for collectivism, or too many ineligible people are voting.

Not to be outdone on the Republican side, Mayor Rudy Guiliani, a closet advocate of amnesty for illegal aliens, has said he will secure our nation's borders but at the same time renounced enforcement of immigrations laws as they apply to illegal aliens currently in the United States. Governor Mitt Romney has a bicoastal reputation for changing his position on important issues on each tidal change and lunar cycle. While either Rudy Guiliani or Mitt Romney would be excellent administrators in the Office of the President, and Hillary Clinton would be an excellent Czar with all that implies, and John Mccain would be a formidable Caesar, and Senator Obama would be an outstanding advocate of all things racial and Muslim, at this point in history the United States needs a conservative leader. Where are the viable alternatives of Newt Gingrich, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo when we sorely need them? And what about Fred Thompson who spent a year "gaming" the system saying he couldn't make up his mind? If it takes that long for Fred to make a decision, to light his own fuse, we are left wondering if Fred is a conservative firecracker, as he wants to portray himself, or a "dud."

Why does, ‘Who is an American?’ still mean nothing to the 'front runners' in both political parties? Why do liberals in general, and politicians and academicians in particular, all of whom feed at the public trough (in elected office, or whose life is taxpayer funded), think of themselves as elite emmisaries of a world- or hemispheric-government without personal allegiance to the United States of America? As Ann Coulter observed, if liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. Neither are good choices for the White House.

As the real United States citizens begin to focus on the merits of the candidates for the presidency of the United States in 2008, maybe we should avoid those candidates with an emphasis of, “Who am I?” (front runners) and focus instead on the words and actions of the second tier of candidates, those who emphasize, “Who are we?”

We are Americans.

We are Americans and we will never forget.

We are not Mexicans. Nor are we members of the Cult of Islam dedicated to the annihilation of Christians and Jews. Nor do we advocate for one race at the expense of all other Americans.

We are Americans, not the North American Union.

No fence, no campaign contributions, no votes. Yes, that's my final answer.

Too subtle?

Red State Patriot

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

Posted September 13, 2007 11:26 AM
Read more on Articles - Red State Patriot ~ Immigration and Border Control ~ NAU & New World Order