We seriously have to look at who we allow to immigrate to our nation. There is so much malignant orthodoxy out there that is diametrically opposed to the liberal democracy and free society it is becoming a choice between maintaining our free society or accomodating self destructive philosophies with open border policies.

It seems to me so fruitless to go on these domestic pugetive "terrorism" witch hunts, keeping an eye on new immigrants we feel have not the nation's best interests at heart...they simply should never have been allowed to come here in the first palce.

I see a day when the monied Mullahs of militant Islam will make a 3rd attempt at global jihad and we will be forced to fight them but until that day comes, I don't think it wise to allow their disciples to weaken our resolve internally (to remain a free western culture in the mean time.

WL Mac Red, that day's coming fast. The Black Crescent is rising over Western Democracy.

Historically immigrants vote Liberal once they become citizens. Wide open immigration translates into Liberal voters. Case in point, when Canada was facing near defeat to the seperatists, Chretian fast tracked 1000's of Quebec immigrants through citizenship court to enable them to vote. Case in point, Canada is the ONLY country in the world to grant citizenship (ever) to refugees. Does anybody out there wonder if the rest of the world knows something that we don't about the high risk this policy poses to a country's national security? 100's of 1000's of new Canadians admitted to this country every year who NEVER have to undergo immigration background screening but who will still become Canadian citizens after only 3 short years and who will vote Liberal for the rest of their lives after that. Votes equal power and that's all that matters to Liberals.

The Hewitt piece is lengthy and you may not have time to read it all ..

Isn*t this the best real meat of anything you may have seen by informed and respected columnists?

======== **

MS: But all the people who complain and whine about Gitmo all day long don’t care about countries like Iran violating the Geneva Conventions. Iran can violate them with impunity, and so will continue to do so. And I’m very concerned.

Iran, you talk about the chronology, Iran respects far fewer of the basic courtesies between states than the Soviet Union, or the Chinese Communists, or any other traditional enemy of the United States has ever done. And the fact of the matter is that we respond weakly every time this happens.

[Appeasement = TG ]

The absolute low point of the Cold War was nothing to do with America’s relations with the Soviet Union, but was Jimmy Carter’s completely disastrous behavior, vis-à-vis Iran in 1979. And the British are in effect reenacting a Carter strategy, 28 years later.

HH: Do you…I noted that you quoted at Nationalreview.com, Speaker Gingrich’s suggestion on this program yesterday, Rush even played it today, that first, blow the gasoline refinery, and then stop the tankers. Do you think there’s a chance in the world the Brits will adopt such a strategy?

MS: No, and I think the thing about it is that if you were to propose that either in the House of Commons, or in the United States Congress, people would regard you as an extremist. You would be accused of escalating the situation.

Now I think you could make the case that in fact, you don’t even need to do as Newt was talking about with you, which is to threaten them privately with it for a week. I mean, you could make the case that they should just do it.
==========================

I mean, Iran surprises us all the time. It seizes sailors, it takes out hit contracts on British subjects like Salman Rushdie, it blows up community centers in Argentina, it seizes the U.S. Embassy.

Iran doesn’t threaten to do that, it just gets on with it and does it. And maybe there’s a case to be said for well, maybe we should just do something against Iran.

Maybe we should just take out that refinery, and they can wake up to it, and see it smoking when it happens, and then they’ll realize we’re serious.

Amen and Amen, [Non- Appeasement.] = TG

PS. Iran only has the one refinery and when Iranians are walking instead of driving, their ire will be directed at Acmahdinejad and the Mullahs.

They will realize the Brits / West had no other option. ... Oh I know, every action breeds re-action, yadda, yadda [ Sorry, Garth*s influence].= TG

The only reason GB/Blair haven't nailed Iran yet is because they want their sailors safely returned home. If sailors are harmed, I believe all hell will break loose. Oh yeah, Rosie said it's a conspiracy to attack Iran.

If I were Brits, I would immediately take strong measures to compromise Iran's ability to trade, and thus access hard currency ($US for eg), which they need for their military/nuclear program. Seize their assets, board their ships on high seas, but nothing too militarily provocative, for now. Frankly I am sick of West having to play by "rules" while Iran pulls off stunt after stunt. They must feel pain this time and every time thereafter; otherwise, they will keep doing this nonsense.

Uncivilized Islamic savages understand the sword only, that's how they rule their subjects, and that's how their subjects rule their breeding cattle(aka womyn).

Negotiations are a sign of weakness to these neanderthals. The Iranians are already causing lots of death and destruction in Iraq, and exporting terrorism worldwide - so what does the West have to worry about? It's not like they could do much more damage, it's not like they have nuclear weapons yet.