Lester Maddox was a staunch segregationist who was elected governor of Georgia in the 1960s. Black riots were occurring all over the country. When a black riot took place in Augusta, Georgiaq, Lester Maddox stated that if any policeman did not SHOOT looters on sight, he personally would take away that officer’s badge.
The riot ended suddenly. Only one looter was shot. He was in a liquor store he had broken into, lying on the floor. That pitcure appeared in outraged publications all over America, especially Time Magazine. But though Time tried to make the case that the poor man was only getting liquor to take home to his starving family, it wasn’t very successful.
While I was on Capitol Hill ther was a hurricane in Florida followed by massive looting. My boss, John Ashbrook, shared his senior staffer’s gift for subtlety, so he made a speech on the House Floor called, “Shoot Looters!” The main newspaper in his district attacked him violently, saying this was an irrational statement to make. After a flood of letters backing Ashrbook came in, they decided it must be some kind of organized protest by Ashbrook supporters, so they did a scientific poll of the district.
They pointed out, with some embarrassment, that Eighty-One Percent (81%) of district residents backed Asbrook: “Shoot Looters!” More than one letter to the paper said that this was the first time the writer had EVER agreed with Ashbrook on ANYTHING.
I first broached the idea of aq Platform Party to Jamie Kelso as we were riding back from the DC convention. He LOVED the concept,but we had one strong disagreement. As you will see in an article below, I believe in SHOOTING anyone who comes across our border illegally. Jamie said Americans would not STAND for such a thing.
I would give a months warning in every publication in Mexico, Canada, and elsewhere. I would put up huge signs in Englsih, Spanish, French and various Indian labguages to make it clear that the US border is a DEADLINE, complete with skull and crossbones for the illiterate.
My point is this: Any other form of enforcement would be subject to debate.
We must make it absolutely clear that the US border is not a game of hide-and-seek.
We can say that America is the world’s last superpower, but it is the only superpower in history which wants nothing but to protect its OWN borders and its own people’s interests.
But the Preamble Party says that, on THAT point, there is no room for compromise.
Kelso says that is too violent. I say that any other approach makes the border a game of hide-and-seek.
Shoot looters. Shoot border violators. Our border is no longer a game.
There is a major side benefit to this. The United States will no longer speak in George Bush whine. We will speak little and MEAN it:
“Speak softly and carry a big stick.”
A country that shoots anyone who violates its borders can tell OPEC to cut the crap and OPEC will cut the crap.
What do you think?
#1 by Shari on 09/13/2006 - 9:22 pm
Not Spam
Not Spam
If this actually was the law and enforced there would not end up a lot of shooting. Most Mexicans etc.are just poor people,not looking to be shot,they would stay home. They come because they are invited to. How about shooting those who do the inviting? I don’t know if a lot of Americans would be outraged anymore, we’ve seen so much. But the professional do-gooders would try as Time magazine did. A problem is all those millions here.
#2 by Kelly on 09/13/2006 - 9:37 pm
We are a nation at WAR!..Open borders to the hordes is absurd!..They should be detained as if they are potential enemy combatants and anyone disagreeing should be considered a possible sympathizer of the enemy..The indoctrination of being politcaly correct is absolutely wrong and undermines our soverign nation…All those aiding the illegals should also be considered possible enemy combatants…The nations that are behind the illegals should also be billed for everything it cost the united states via programs, detention in all forms, law suits for the innocent who have been killed by this INVADING FORCE!..This is not a game of hide in seek ,this is a war being fought on all fronts and should be considered as such…Let me also be clear that it would not take much for these terrorist to form into factions…With the ability and numbers to under cut the United States…Do we want this to turn into a possible Irqa?..Were as the true patriots of this country has to fight a insurrection with one hand tied behind our back?.. No we must gain the lead in this country in some form…Political correctness is KAPUT!..Do you hear me KAPUT!..We can not allow robot type minds to continue to lead free thinking minds…It is only slowing down the future of man kind…These narrow minded types praising how intellegent the are(?) is just as absurd as allowing an invasion of a country by another country.
#3 by Kelly on 09/13/2006 - 9:52 pm
On aside note…what is it with the media and its fasination with people who are over weight(fat asses) If they are so concerned then stop promoting a food pyrimad that apparentky is’nt working…If someone wants to be fat let them be fat…It isn’t up to the media to be everyones nanny…Thet are trying to overwelm everybody with this garbage they say is news…Wait a minute another report just in from a government study(their are fat people dwelling in these here United States) Its school lunchs…No wait its Mcdonalds…No wait its all that apple pie at the holiday dinners… no wait report just in its not school lunchs its the milk…Wait its genetic makeup…wait its…How about this you fickled f****, Try by starting to enforce the food companys to not put all that crap in the food that no one has any ideal what the effects might be…Then start a good healthy study as to why someone may or may not be fat…Wait a new study shows this may or may not or could have been but ended up being…(I got the point)
#4 by Dave on 09/13/2006 - 10:17 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
Posturing is deadly to real policy. All “border control” today is posturing.
Conversion to real policy need not be announced. It simply needs to be done.
Human will is something righteous. “Will” is never hoisted on its own petard.
Any enemy or opponent can detect it. No leader can “summon” it.
Righteous will in control of a weapon almost makes the weapon superfluous. The resulting corpse is the effect of something much greater, not the “cause” of something.
For example, that soldier’s body lying next to his caisson with his boots stolen off him says everything about the pending defeat of his army.
But it really had nothing to do with the battle at hand. It had to do with will and what will really is.
#5 by Mark on 09/13/2006 - 11:20 pm
NOt Spam
Not Spam
Okay, Bob, who is going to run for president and who are we going to get
to run in the congress? How do we make this actually happen versus just
talking about it?
#6 by joe rorke on 09/14/2006 - 12:01 pm
Great news! Looks like people are starting to get serious about what Samuel Francis warned us not so long ago.
I’ve also come to the conclusion that the “Craig Roberts” referred to in Bob Whitaker’s previous piece of perhaps two weeks ago is none other than my very favorite Paul Craig Roberts. Paul Craig Roberts is The Man. He is the “Craig Roberts” to whom Bob Whitaker was referring when he also mentioned the name of Patrick Buchanan. Paul Craig Roberts is The Man. He may not be at the forefront of fighting for his race but he is doing a great job of fighting for his country. I put him at the top of the line of all people I have discovered during the past 15 years. I don’t know where Bob places him. He won’t say. I’m not even sure what he was saying when he mentioned “Craig Roberts” along with Patrick Buchanan as being people he has known for decades. Nevertheless, I can find no fault whatsoever with Paul Craig Roberts. As Bob knows I love to find fault with people. Paul Craig Roberts gives me no opportunity. If he stands up against the neoconservatives and he stands up for America, that’s good enough for me. The lightwork can be handled later.
#7 by joe rorke on 09/14/2006 - 12:06 pm
Great news! Looks like people are starting to get serious about what Samuel Francis warned us not so long ago.
I’ve also come to the conclusion that the “Craig Roberts” referred to in Bob Whitaker’s previous piece of perhaps two weeks ago is none other than my very favorite Paul Craig Roberts. Paul Craig Roberts is The Man. He is the “Craig Roberts” to whom Bob Whitaker was referring when he also mentioned the name of Patrick Buchanan. Paul Craig Roberts is The Man. He may not be at the forefront of fighting for his race but he is doing a great job of fighting for his country. I put him at the top of the line of all people I have discovered during the past 15 years. I don’t know where Bob places him. He won’t say. I’m not even sure what he was saying when he mentioned “Craig Roberts” along with Patrick Buchanan as being people he has known for decades. Nevertheless, I can find no fault whatsoever with Paul Craig Roberts. As Bob knows I love to find fault with people. Paul Craig Roberts gives me no opportunity. If he stands up against the neoconservatives and he stands up for America, that’s good enough for me. The lightwork can be handled later.
#8 by Pain on 09/14/2006 - 1:16 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
“Shoot looters. Shoot border violators. Our border is no longer a game.”
That’s the humanitarian, compassionate approach.
When you actually carry out such a policy, you only need to shoot a few felons before the rest realize their crimes do not pay. When there are shooters with the looters, the looters stay at home and eat beans.
Think of it this way: genocide is mass murder. It is wore than mass murder since it is the quenching of a perfectly good bloodline of a billion people for all time. If fifty criminal invaders bite the dust on the long brown line headed north, a billion are saved.
Bob knows this, since he has the real, practical experience from hard-ball politics. He is more than a really nice man.