Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rally for militarized border set (Calling all Arizona FReepers)
Tucson Citizen ^ | 4 March 2004 | Luke Turf

Posted on 03/04/2004 3:32:16 PM PST by Spiff

Edited on 05/07/2004 5:38:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

A state representative and a retired Border Patrol chief are among expected speakers Saturday at a rally to support militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border. American Border Patrol, a Sierra Vista-based group that documents suspected illegal immigration in Arizona and broadcasts it on the Internet, organized the rally.


(Excerpt) Read more at tucsoncitizen.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; borderintruders; illegalimmigration; invasion; protest
I will be there and I hope to see many FReepers there. I already know a number have said they will be there. This is certainly the place for any Arizona FReepers to be Saturday afternoon. So, who else is planning on coming? Let's get a roll call and then we can see about where to meet up.
1 posted on 03/04/2004 3:32:17 PM PST by Spiff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1st Freedom 2A; 20yearvet; 356SC; 45ACP; 4mavet; abacab; Aerohawk; AHerald; Alexandre; Angelique; ..
Border Security PING!
2 posted on 03/04/2004 3:33:18 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

Border Petition Rally -- March 6 -- Tucson

NATIONWIDE CAMPAIGN - PETITION GOOD IN ALL STATES

100,000 Petitions for Troops on Border To Be Delivered to Federal Building

Plan to be there! Lots of parking!
(Many coming from outside Arizona)

[See larger map]

  • Americans to Gather at Tucson Park to Rally for Control of the Border (See Petition).
  • El Presidio Plaza Park near the Federal Building Reserved by American Border Patrol - Event starts at 2 pm.
  • Rally will conclude at 4 pm following a short march to the Federal Bldg. to deliver 100,000 petitions.
  • Mexican President Vicente Fox will be at the Bush Ranch on the same day.
  • To be broadcast on the internet using the ABP satellite van.
For Information, Call 1-800-600-8642

GET YOUR PETITIONS HERE

Download a full-size copy

El Presidio Park - Tucson


Join us at Tucson's El Presidio Park on March 6 to demand that the government defend the sovereignty of the United States by putting the military on the border. Plenty of low cost parking at street level, and in a spacious parking garage under the park itself.

Special Guest Speakers.......

Official Rally Logo Available


3 posted on 03/04/2004 4:49:58 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Good luck from the East Coast.
4 posted on 03/04/2004 5:55:22 PM PST by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Tucson is too far for us. But, we wish you well.

One of our neighbors is getting petition signatures for "Protect Arizona Now." Judging from the response he is receiving, I predict you will have a good turnout.

5 posted on 03/04/2004 6:01:47 PM PST by lakey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
bump for security
6 posted on 03/04/2004 6:03:11 PM PST by yonif ("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
I am not opposed to the military on the border, but the problem will never go away unless we comit to deporting those we find in the interior. Right now, if you can get past the border, you are home-free. This is wrong.
7 posted on 03/04/2004 6:03:17 PM PST by umgud (speaking strictly as an infidel,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Good luck, Spiff. I'll be looking forward for your report after the rally.
8 posted on 03/04/2004 6:08:34 PM PST by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff; PRND21; hchutch
OK, one more time: What capability would be gained by putting a soldier on the border that could not be gained by putting a civilian law enforcement officer on the same stretch of border?
9 posted on 03/04/2004 6:11:45 PM PST by Poohbah ("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Maj. Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: idratherbepainting
Uh-oh...

The Muse has descended and someone has been artistically inspired. Saturday is going to be good.
11 posted on 03/04/2004 6:30:12 PM PST by JackelopeBreeder (Proud to be a loco gringo armed vigilante terrorist cucaracha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
I'll be in the wrong half of the state. Be with you in spirit, though.
12 posted on 03/04/2004 7:04:14 PM PST by uglybiker (Evil Overlord Rule #86: Don't turn into a snake. It never helps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"What capability would be gained by putting a soldier on the border that could not be gained by putting a civilian law enforcement officer on the same stretch of border?"

None, it would be a net loss.

13 posted on 03/04/2004 7:07:27 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
OK, one more time: What capability would be gained by putting a soldier on the border that could not be gained by putting a civilian law enforcement officer on the same stretch of border?

The point of putting military on the border is to do something about border security now! There is not enough civilian law enforcement trained, equipped, and ready to guard a border. We've got troops guarding borders in other nations right now that could be here instead. Do we really need troops in Germany guarding the Fulda Gap from invasion by the Soviets? The military stays until civilian law enforcement and National Guard can be ramped up to take over. Military should still offer some assistance after that as necessary.

This is truly the role of the National Guard. We should NOT be deploying National Guard units to foreign operations. Their design is to guard the homeland and its borders, not to be deployed elsewhere.

14 posted on 03/04/2004 7:09:30 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
None, it would be a net loss.

In your opinion. And you're free to hold that opinion.

However, I've spoken to retired military commanders and Border Patrol agents who disagree with you. Former Chief Border Patrol Agent Bill King will speak at the rally in favor putting the military on the border.

Can I ask you, do you live near the border? Have you visited the border area to see the current invasion? There are people who are far more familiar with the current situation who may know a bit more than you do about it. Some of these people support putting troops on the border.

15 posted on 03/04/2004 7:17:25 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
God speed to you.
16 posted on 03/04/2004 7:21:02 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
I'm sure you have spoken to retired military "commanders" who would agree...there are more then a couple out there who still don't seem to understand role and capability of the military. Heck, there's more then a couple who would like to see the nation under a military dictatorship.

Oh, as a military officer I was activiely involved in border problems...the Coast Guard being the only military service with the legal authority and training to be involved with it.

I even had planning experience with our so-called allies on the other side of the border...the northern border where the greatest terrorist entrance threat exists. But you all have fun any way.

17 posted on 03/04/2004 7:22:01 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Spiff; hchutch; PRND21; CWOJackson
The point of putting military on the border is to do something about border security now!

Ah. It's not about actually doing something effective--it's just about looking like something is being done.

There is not enough civilian law enforcement trained, equipped, and ready to guard a border.

Actually, there is. It's just horrendously misallocated.

Do we really need troops in Germany guarding the Fulda Gap from invasion by the Soviets?

No, which is why we're moving them to Eastern Europe.

The military stays until civilian law enforcement and National Guard can be ramped up to take over. Military should still offer some assistance after that as necessary.

1. If that's your proposed CONOPS, they will always somehow be "necessary."

2. If you make an army into a border patrol, you will discover that, when a war breaks out, that you will have to send a border patrol to do an army's job.

18 posted on 03/04/2004 8:12:19 PM PST by Poohbah ("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Maj. Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
But you all have fun any way.

We will, I promise. It's not like we have a lot of choice.

Cochise County, where Spiff and I live, has only 120,000 residents. Last year the Border Patrol caught just over 180,000 illegal aliens here. They figure they caught maybe one in five. So something in the vicinity of 700,000 made it through here scot free.

Us locals did not get off scot free.

Home invasions, car-jackings, muggings, etc.

Our national park lands are now controlled by Mexican smugglers of drugs and humans.

The Mexican military is here on the border -- but they actively assist the smugglers. Very actively, as in laying down suppressive fire against our Border Patrol and local law enforcement to aid smugglers in their escapes.

Do we need tanks and artillery here? Not really, though it would give me a big woodie to call in the fire missions.

What we do need is the support troops:

UAVs and operators to fill in the gaps in the line.

Intel analysts to identify all the avenues of approach.

Linguists to bust up their communications.

MPs to handle detainees.

Clerks to process all the officially blessed paperwork.

Mechanics to keep the Border Patrol's vehicles functional.

Fort Huachuca, just eight miles north of the border, could provide all these resources. Think of it as a live environment training exercise with no need for any simulations. The troops would eat this sh!t up with a big silver spoon and beg for more.

Oh, while I'm at it, that little slur about military "commanders" won't cut it here. A very large slice of the population is retired Army -- from NCOs to general officers -- and our patience has disappeared.

19 posted on 03/04/2004 8:54:53 PM PST by JackelopeBreeder (Proud to be a loco gringo armed vigilante terrorist cucaracha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JackelopeBreeder
"Oh, while I'm at it, that little slur about military "commanders" won't cut it here."

Slur? Not a slur at all. If you have some so-called ex-commanders there who have no true concept of the role of the military and their capability, and not to mention the fact that they are already over stretched...it's not a slur, just pointing out the obvious.

But like I said, you all intertain yourselves to your hearts content.

20 posted on 03/04/2004 9:07:53 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Kind of reminds me of the people you see trying to drive a nail with a cresent wrench, or set a screw with a hammer. The just don't understand the relationship between the job and the proper tool.
21 posted on 03/04/2004 9:10:34 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Hey, GOOD FOR YOU GUYS!
Is this the grassroots watchdog group that was being threatened? They have some equipment and were going to get some helicopters too?
22 posted on 03/04/2004 9:23:54 PM PST by sfRummygirl ('The Purpose Driven Life' ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JackelopeBreeder
I hope you guys get a ton of folks. This is great.
23 posted on 03/04/2004 9:25:20 PM PST by sfRummygirl ('The Purpose Driven Life' ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Let me put this mathematically: 800 Border Patrol agents versus 700,000 fence jumpers. Does that seem a little one-sided, maybe?
24 posted on 03/04/2004 9:30:47 PM PST by JackelopeBreeder (Proud to be a loco gringo armed vigilante terrorist cucaracha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JackelopeBreeder
Sure does. Then add into that the fact that our northern border is many times larger then the southern. And the annoying detail that the two largest Islamic Fundlementalist enclaves outside of the Arab world are sitting in Canada just a few miles from our border...in a nation that pretty much ignores them.

Add to the mix the facts that the 9/11 terrorists and the gent trying to smuggle a car load of explosives down to LA came through those enclaves and the northern border poses the greatest terrorist threat between the two borders.

Now policing the northern border, with the many miles of northern wilds, mountains, lakes, rivers is one hell of a problem.

All very good reason for increasing the ranks and capabilities of the border patrol for sure.

25 posted on 03/04/2004 9:35:41 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Now policing the northern border, with the many miles of northern wilds, mountains, lakes, rivers is one hell of a problem.

How many invaders make it across the Canadian border every year? Does it amount anywhere in the millions?

All very good reason for increasing the ranks and capabilities of the border patrol for sure.

I agree. Increase the capabilities and ranks of the Border Patrol. But, until then, shall we just leave the borders wide open?

26 posted on 03/04/2004 9:43:16 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
"How many invaders make it across the Canadian border every year? Does it amount anywhere in the millions?"

Enough to fly two planes into the world trade center and one into the Pentagon.

"How many invaders make it across the Canadian border every year? Does it amount anywhere in the millions?"

Psssst. I hate to break this to you sparky but our military folks, including our reserve and guard elements, are over stretched as it is...they're in need of serious relief themselves. A minor little fact that must of been over looked by the local "commanders".

27 posted on 03/04/2004 9:47:02 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Bless you guys! Wish I could be there! Sigh. Take pics, lots of pics.
28 posted on 03/04/2004 10:08:01 PM PST by ETERNAL WARMING (SHUT THE DOOR IN 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Enough to fly two planes into the world trade center and one into the Pentagon.

True. So let's avoid a similar incident along with the slow motion terrorism and body count caused by our wide open southern border.

Psssst. I hate to break this to you sparky but our military folks, including our reserve and guard elements, are over stretched as it is...they're in need of serious relief themselves. A minor little fact that must of been over looked by the local "commanders".

Are you attempting to belittle me with your weak-ass mockery or the more knowledgeable former military types who have weighed in on this subject? Psssst , Chief, I've got 2 retired U.S. Army colonels (o ne a combat veteran) right here in my little town on the front lines of this invasion who could easily go toe to toe with you on this subject. And they're just the ones that I have on my speed dial.

As for the only legitimate point that you have yet raised, I'm aware that our armed forces are stretched right now. But we should not leave the homeland unguarded no matter what.

Columnist Mike Blair did some research and found, among the many troop deployments around the globe, the following numbers of U.S. troops in foreign countries:

Portugal 3,000
Italy 11,190
Great Britain 11,207
Japan 40,159
So. Korea 38,565
Turkey 2,008
Germany 69,203

Now, I know a lot of these have been redeployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. But we only need a battalion or two down here. They sure had no problem finding 500 marines to send into Haiti to deal with a problem there. I'm sure we can spare a few from guarding someone else's borders to come and guard our own.

29 posted on 03/05/2004 1:08:26 AM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
"Are you attempting to belittle me with your weak-ass mockery or the more knowledgeable former military types..."

Naw, you and your military "commanders" are doing a good enough job on your own.

30 posted on 03/05/2004 1:12:03 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Oh, you might want to consult some of your military geniues there and ask them the effective radius that a couple of Battalions can cover, and don't forget the logistics types that you will need to support them...then compare that to the Mexican border.
31 posted on 03/05/2004 1:14:29 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Oh, you might want to consult some of your military geniues there and ask them the effective radius that a couple of Battalions can cover, and don't forget the logistics types that you will need to support them...then compare that to the Mexican border.

The BP has most of the border effectively covered. We need rapid reaction troops to cover the hotspots. We need intel, surveillance equipment, processing, etc. And you're not taking into account the psychological effect this action would have on potential border intruders. If we acted half way serious about securing our borders most potential intruders would not even make the attempt.

32 posted on 03/05/2004 1:27:08 AM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
"And you're not taking into account the psychological effect this action would have on potential border intruders."

LOL! And you're not taking into account the psychological effect it would have on our already over stretched military, active duty and reserve/guard.

33 posted on 03/05/2004 1:32:21 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Looking forward to your after report!
34 posted on 03/05/2004 2:16:25 AM PST by JustPiper (The fly cannot be driven away by getting angry at it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
History, Chief. They were fleeing in droves long before Ike's troops came through.

“When the Operation kicked in, 4,800 illegals were arrested the first day. Arrests stabilized to about 1,100 per day. Note that this was accomplished by a govt. force of ONLY 700 men! The figures as to how many illegals were actually deported are disputed, but it was certainly in the hundreds of thousands — with a 6-figure number also for those who fled back to Mexico to avoid being rounded up.”
More details can be found here: http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/OO/pqo1.html

Surprising how, 50 years ago, the same problems existed that are plaguing the Southwest today. A roundup enacted by a strong leader did not ruin the local economies nor foment chaos in Mexico (though the latter would be best for its citizens today, IMHO).

Just like the terrorists have redefined war Mexico has redefined invasion. In each case doing nothing equals giving up, and failure is not acceptable. If there's any chance civil assembly/protest/whatever may help get the CinC to stop acting like McClellan waiting for the breeze to blow just right and perform his sworn duty then these people have the right, yea, the civic duty to do so. The smugglers and their corrupt, uniform-clad protectors have lately taken to shooting into our side of the border and crossing over with impunity. These citizens, especially those in Cochise County, deserve some real help.
What law enforcement they have available is really stretched thin.
35 posted on 03/05/2004 4:17:40 AM PST by NewRomeTacitus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NewRomeTacitus
Heck, all you need are a few more border patrol officers. According to ol' Spiff there: "The BP has most of the border effectively covered. We need rapid reaction troops to cover the hotspots."

Since the border patrol apparently has most of the border already effectively covered you just need to fill in the gaps with some more border patrol and maybe a few more local cops for these hot spots. No need to bother the military for a couple of hot spots.

36 posted on 03/05/2004 11:13:58 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Spiff _ I plan to be there and I will also be at the PAN table across from the TCC today at the Sean Hannity book tour. Let me know what you'll be wearing so I can introduce myself. Take it easy.



37 posted on 03/05/2004 1:51:36 PM PST by sasafras (sasafras (The road to hell is paved with good intentions))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lil'freeper
Ping.
38 posted on 03/05/2004 5:10:55 PM PST by sauropod (I intend to have Red Kerry choke on his past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
I suggest you head on down to El Paso, look across the river there (at Juarez) and ask yourself one question:

"Do I really want that here?

A militarized border is a must. Your premise is faulty.

39 posted on 03/05/2004 5:13:13 PM PST by sauropod (I intend to have Red Kerry choke on his past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
A militarized border is for the old Soviet Union...we don't need it.
40 posted on 03/05/2004 10:27:58 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Your typical active duty soldiers already spends WAY too much job on non-training activities. This is a distraction our military does not need. Let us defend the nation where the threats ORIGINATE -- overseas in forward operating bases. Putting soldiers on the Rio Grande during the War on Terror would be analogous to putting soldiers on the James River during the Indian Wars -- it's the wrong place at the wrong time to respond to the relevant threat.

Having a small number of military attached to the Border Patrol (similar to the way they are attached to the CIA and other agencies) might be helpful. A militarized border patrol that would take enlistees right out of high school and worked under the DOD or Homeland Security Department subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice might also be an option. With the Border Patrol's current entry standards (it's not that easy to get in!) you simply could not find enough bodies to man both borders.

41 posted on 03/06/2004 12:46:53 AM PST by American Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
I'll be the guy in the white South East Arizona Republican Club shirt, black jacket, electronic bullhorn, and carrying a full-sized effigy of a Border Patrol Agent with a large "Bush/Kolbe Amnesty" knife sticking in his back. You can't miss me.

Glenn Spencer called my neighbor, who is also a FReeper, and asked her to speak at the rally. Glenn also tried to call me last night but I wasn't home when he called.

See you there.

42 posted on 03/06/2004 5:30:16 AM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Good luck today. Thanks for doing this.
43 posted on 03/06/2004 9:51:05 AM PST by texastoo (a "has-been" Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
It is essential to protect our borders.

We don't need to have our military in Haiti or any other country. But with the enemy infiltrating this country (even Geraldo Rivera presented info about terrorists sneaking across the border), we do need to protect our borders.

44 posted on 03/06/2004 10:06:51 AM PST by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
I live too far away to attend, but was watching the Bush and Fox newsconference a short while ago...and Bush said Mexico and the US were 'more than neighbors, we're partners'. Everything was folksy, friendly. Why does that make the hair on the back of my neck stand up? We're being sold a bill of goods. Erase the border. That's what this is really all about.
45 posted on 03/06/2004 11:03:07 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud
I agree.
46 posted on 03/06/2004 11:57:49 AM PST by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
The only troops you will ever see on our Souther border, are the ones to protect the undocumented workers from the irate citizens. I wish this were sarcasm.
47 posted on 03/07/2004 12:10:59 PM PST by itsahoot (The lesser of two evils, is evil still...Alan Keyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
This is truly the role of the National Guard

Nope, the National Guard is the state Militia, controlled by the Governor, to defend his state, from all attacks, including those of the federal government. Remember state's rights?

As governor, (1930)"Alfalfa" Bill Murray challenged the oil industry, newspaper interests, and the state of Texas. To enforce his programs he relied on the National Guard. During his tenure as governor, he called out the guard forty-seven times for duties ranging from policing ticket sales at University of Oklahoma football games to patrolling the oil fields and guarding the Red River Bridge. It was truly said that he "fought the depression with the National Guard".

48 posted on 03/07/2004 12:30:29 PM PST by itsahoot (The lesser of two evils, is evil still...Alan Keyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
Governors used to protect the interests of their respective states PER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT without hesitation. Now they generally behave as if they are forced to comply with their respective parties desires or presidential mandates. The Guard, as far as I know, does not have to go where the president says if a governor has more need of them at home. Our southern border states have more need of them over minding foreign interests for administrative policy.
49 posted on 03/07/2004 4:35:29 PM PST by NewRomeTacitus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
OK, one more time: What capability would be gained by putting a soldier on the border that could not be gained by putting a civilian law enforcement officer on the same stretch of border?

Not a darn thing. Also can you imagine the drop in recruiting? I know I'd never have joined if I thought I'd be stuck along the Mexican border.

50 posted on 03/07/2004 4:40:01 PM PST by HoustonCurmudgeon (PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson