Skip to comments.Felipe, U.S. Marine: "Now I can earn my citizenship."
Posted on 01/02/2003 7:03:41 AM PST by SJacksonEdited on 04/22/2004 11:47:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
NEW YORK -- Three years ago, on the night of his 19th birthday, my wife and daughter and I took my stepson to dinner. The restaurant was one of Manhattan's best. But none of us at the dinner remember even tasting the food. This was not just a birthday celebration. Felipe had decided about a month earlier that he was going to quit college to join the Marines. The very next day he was heading off to boot camp. Dinner went down hard that night.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Is that with double s? :-)
The Journal just had to get this dig in, even if it has to use this brave young man to do it.
The 9/11 crew of murderers were immigrants too, Mr. Asman. And many Americans, both native and foreign-born, think it makes sense to be very careful about who let into our country - that we should separate the Felipes from the Mohammed Attas, rather than let just anyone cross our borders indiscriminately.
But to paraphrase Felipe, we're all in it together now. Neutrality is not an option when all those who favor freedom have been targeted. I'm just glad Felipe realized freedom was something worth fighting for three years ago.
I am very proud of all of our military, and I think this is an excellent article.
Note the authors comments:
I had brought Felipe and his mother to the U.S. from Nicaragua in 1988. Because of enormous snafus with the INS, Felipe had turned 18 without having his papers for citizenship approved. The INS had misplaced documents that had been sent to them two years earlier by my wife.
Our first priority should be securing our borders. But the INS is a mess from top to bottom. As I understand it, 15 of the 19 hijackers shouldnt have been given visas, but they knew they system.
Felipe, here legally and attempting to become a citizen, apparently has endured years of frustration following the rules.
Group of Sixty to Seventy Marines at Attention,
Prints and Photographs Division
(negative of lantern slide)
On January 2, 1933, the United States Marines Corps withdrew from Nicaragua. It trained and left behind a powerful National Guard in a country beset by struggle between liberal and conservative forces centered respectively in the cities of León and Grenada.
Founded by the Spanish in the early 1550s, the two cities became competing poles of power. Their militant rivalry often left Nicaragua subject to outside interests even after the country gained independence from Spain in the early 1800s.
British and U.S. interests in Nicaragua grew during the mid-1800s because of its strategic importance as a transit route across the Central American isthmus. With the advent of the California gold rush, Nicaragua proved a popular interoceanic shortcut. Cornelius Vanderbilt's steamship company transported supplies and prospectors from the Atlantic, along Nicaragua's San Juan River, then across Lake Nicaragua to the Pacific.
John M. Letts wrote of his 1849 travels through Nicaragua:
. . . arrived at Lake Leon. The appearance of this lake as it opened to our view was peculiarly striking. It is shut in by lofty mountains, which tower up in innumerable peaks of volcanic origin . . . the smoke curls gracefully out, commingling with the clouds . . .
We passed along down to Mat[e]ares, a small town situated on an eminence overlooking the lake, and inhabited by descendants of the African race. We breakfasted on chickens, frijoles, tortillos[sic], eggs . . . and after an hour's detention started for Managua. We passed through a delightful region of country, the soil, in many places, highly cultivated, bearing the impress of thrift and industry, I had not before seen in the country. Fruits grow in abundance, cattle had an unlimited range, and were the finest I ever saw; the country was broken, the mountains towering up to the clouds, and some covered with perpetual snow; but at their base were vales watered by mountain rivulets, and shaded by groves of orange and fig, seeming a retreat fit for the angels.
John Hill Wheeler,
United States Minister to Nicaragua,
studio of Mathew Brady, photographer,
between 1844 and 1860.
America's First Look at the Daguerreotypes, 1839-1862
In 1856, at the invitation of Nicaraguan liberals, a Tennessee filibuster named William Walker invaded Nicaragua with a small armed force and the hope of extending the southern U.S. slave culture overseas. He enjoyed initial success, however, when he presumed to establish himself as president of Nicaragua, Walker was routed by the joint efforts of Nicaragua's opposing political factions, Vanderbilt's steamship company, the British government, and other Central American republics. Walker narrowly escaped their capture only to surrender himself to the U.S. Navy the following year.
In 1897, President William McKinley appointed the Nicaragua Canal [Walker] Commission to reexamine the logistics of a canal route through the Isthmus of Nicaragua. The commission estimated the cost of construction at $118,113,790 not including interest and administration. However, when Nicaragua's President Zelaya invited both Germany and Japan to compete with the United States for construction rights, the U.S. built through Panama instead.
Beginning in 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt framed the Big Stick Policy to forward U. S. interests and to restrict European influence in the Americas. In 1909 this corollary to the Monroe Doctrine impacted Nicaragua. Responding to the execution of two of its citizens, the U.S. landed four-hundred marines on Nicaragua's shore. In a 1912 effort to retain power, conservative forces requested aid and the U.S. landed 2,700 marines. Thereafter, the U.S. maintained a presence in Nicaragua almost continually until 1933.
Why yes I have (USMC, Desert Shield/Storm 90/91), so the author can take this little dig and shove it up its arse.
On this day in 1942, the Japanese army occupies Manila in the Philippines. After just twenty-seven days of fighting, all of Luzon Island is under Japanese control.
Why do you ask? Because he shoots down the question that you and so many of your friends are fond of asking (Will you send your child into war)?
David Asman obviously gets it. Freedom is what we (and yes, I said we - because we are all in this thing together) are fighting for. Too bad so many folks don't feel the price is worth it.
I live in Queens, NY which has probably the largest number of new immigrants than any other county in the US and the largest number of different home countries than any other immigrant community in the US.
If the INS were any good, I can think of hundreds of people in my neighborhood who would be right back on the plane home. The amount of people committing insurance fraud alone is staggering.
Perhaps in the insulated world of suburban Virginia unchecked immigration produces only sweetly-smiling young George Washingtons.
For those of us who actually live in the heart of it, it's decidedly a mixed blessing.
When did I paint with a broad brush?
Did you even read my post?
Knock out, bruh!
Mr. Bush and his neocon advisors took the easy way out. Instead of confronting ISLAM head on, he went to pick on a dead horse. Yes, he may be able to drop bombs on Iraq, but what is new? We have been doing that for ten years.
For some reason the White House advisors have confused Moslem Terrorists with Saddam? First focus on Bin Laden! Get his head on a stick, then get the rest of the worthless militant Moslems including, Abu Sayyaf, Qaddafi, The Sudan Junta, Lots of Pakistanis, Indonesians, Chechnyians, Egyptians, Yemenis, Saudis.....The list goes on and on. Saddam is no way on top of the Militant Islamic Fanatics list.
And when you get done fighting, then go ahead and make sure that's put into the Constitution. Those rights are not guaranteed to you.
You may come in as a student, but only after writing an assay saying that you do not approve of militant Islam!
Of course, it's OK to deal with the religious exclusion of the Constitution though. Make up your mind. Which way do you want it? Kill a "freedom" that is not enumerated in the Constitution or one that is directly noted in the Constitution? And if you do go after religion, then where do you stop?
I'm no fan of militant Islam. And as opposed to dealing with it that way, how about defining for them what they haven't defined. Militant Islam in general and Al Qaeda in particular (along with Abu Sayyef, Hamas and the other groups) are nation-states. By defining them as such, we are free to make war upon them under relations between nations.
Some may say that I've read too much science fiction, but let's face it. We're living in "the future." Corporate and organizational entities are virtual nations and nation-states. Let's treat them as such. It will certainly allow us to declare and wage war appropriately - and without all the mitigating bull squeeze that you and your friends have continually come upw with.
Get his head on a stick, then get the rest of the worthless militant Moslems including, Abu Sayyaf, Qaddafi, The Sudan Junta, Lots of Pakistanis, Indonesians, Chechnyians, Egyptians, Yemenis, Saudis.....The list goes on and on.
You seem to forget that there must be a starting point. And that things must proceed in an orderly fashion. Dead horse? There'll be plenty of dead horses if Saddam can finish his nefarious plans to develop WMD and start giving them to the more elusive elements out there. How would you like a more successful Richard Reid who has a portable nuke or a vial of plague as opposed to Nike's new Air Plastique 2003 shoe on?
As for the others you mention, let's get real. If Qaddafi or the Paks or the Egyptians were in the on deck circle instead of Iraq, you'd be whining just as loudly about Saddam. You - along with the rest of the leftists - aren't satisfied unless you're beating up on the Administration.
I'm not going to say that they're perfect - far from it. Strip-searching 85 year-old grandparents (like mine, for example) who are trying to fly from Chicago to Baltimore for Thanksgiving dinner is not the way to win friends and influence people. And it certainly isn't the way to catch the bad guys - all of whom look more like Apu on the Simpsons than Clara Peller or Fred Sanford.
And finally, as for Bin Laden, it's pretty hard to put so much pink vapor on a stick for the world to see; not to mention just as hard to produce a body. You sound like someone who's read too many comic books: "Ra's Al Ghul can't be dead, because there's no body. He got away and is relaxing in his Lazarus Pit waiting for another chance to strike out against Batman."
This is simple. Get done with the first job before us: Saddam. Eliminate his avenue of trade with the terrorists. Then go after the others, whether it's Abu Sayyaf, the House of Saud, the Yemeni Cartel, the Colombians, Indonesians or anyone else for that matter. I'm certain there's a game plan. And like the fans of any of the football teams playing this weekend, you do not need to know what that game plan is. You, like the bad guys, will find out what it is in the fullness of time.
The fullness of time is right now. Osama, Mullah Omar, Dr. El Zawahiri, Abu Sayyaf,.... Get busy producing heads on sticks. Get busy finger printing all these Moslem SOBs in this country. Get busy closing, and guarding our boarders. Get busy recruiting and training thousands of Arabic speaking spies that should infiltrate the fifth column of Moslems in this country. Leave that stupid dictator on the back burner until we finish the real immediate problem that we have on our hand. We, and he know damn well that we can drop bombs on him anytime we feel like it. That should be the end of our policy toward Iraq. If we dont have success getting Osama in the middle of caves, how do you imagine we are going to be successful getting Saddam in the middle of cities of millions of hate filled people.
That matter may be a little difficult when you've vilified all of them, and scared them into not wanting to even talk to the government.
Leave that stupid dictator on the back burner until we finish the real immediate problem that we have on our hand.
Saddam is the immediate problem. Let's say we follow your faulted logic. What do we do, drop everything that we've already set in motion to follow your own game plan? I'm sorry, but the field generals and coaches that are already in place are not doing the worst job in the world with the gamebook they are playing with. And no, you don't have a "right" to look at the gamebook while the game is in progress, home team fan or otherwise.
We, and he know damn well that we can drop bombs on him anytime we feel like it. That should be the end of our policy toward Iraq.
So we should let him go ahead and produce nasty weapons to give to the bad guys so they can strike us while we're in the midst of catching them? Sorry - I don't think that's the best way to go.
If we dont have success getting Osama in the middle of caves, how do you imagine we are going to be successful getting Saddam in the middle of cities of millions of hate filled people.
Sorry to tell you this, but we got Osama. Osama's dead. It's a little difficult to produce a body that's been atomized into so much pink vapor mixed with cave rock. He's not Dr. Doom or Magneto. He won't come back to fight The Fantastic Four or the Justice League after building himself an exoskeleton or some other such comic book rot to contain his "powers and life essence."
I wish you were correct, but our Pentagon just announced last month that the hate tape sent by Osama was the real Osama's voice. You may dream about our success all you want, however, the facts are 1) Osama, Dr. Zawahiri, Mullah Omar, Abu Sayyaf, Qadafi, the Saudi money flow, the Egyptian underground Islamic movement, The Pakistanis Militants, The Yemenis/Afghanis/Somalis/Sudanese Moslem warlords are all in business. The only success we had so far is to relocate the Taliban; that is hardly the results that would be worth pounding my chest with pride over. We are the greatest and only superpower, and yet we are unable to ask Saudi Arabia to stop the money flow that is funding this hate. Unless, and until our leadership recognize that the Moslem fanatic movement is hate movement cultivated by many Moslem states. Yes, again the government of many Moslem states are up to their ears in plotting against us, and we are simply playing diplomatic game with them. I wish Bush would take the same hard line he is taking against Saddam with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Chechnya, Uzbekistan, Lybia,
You don't want to go to war - you think that any aggressive moves we make are wrong. Your comments have shown that in the past. If it was the Saudis or Indonesia or Pakistan or France, you'd be screaming from the rooftops about how bad it was.
Let's face it. You have no desire to see us go after our enemies, no matter who they are. Your only concern is to close the borders and turn the US into a Monroe Doctrinesque society, all to ourselves, and the rest of the planet be damned - even if they decide to come into our homes against us.
Go fiddle, Nero. The rest of us will make sure that Rome doesn't burn.
With our absolute control of Afghanistan, Yemen, and Kuwait, did we change the hearts of the militant jihadists? The first opportunity for our military wondering outside of their armed camp, they get shot at, and suffer casualties. The simple reason that we have 25 million dollars price on Osama bin Laden, and we are unable to get him, is because his Islamic appeals to his fellows Moslems is more stronger then the infidel's 25 millions. They hide him, and protect him. DO I think that Saddam may have a similar scheme and a similar cooperation from the Tekriti villigers? You damn right he will! So how are the poor US soldiers going to go door to door looking for him? Well, just like the Israelis did in Ramallah, they opened tapped doors, and got killed. Then they learn, and blown the house with kids in it, and got blasted for being savages all over the world media? Our aims here of killing a Dictator that have been in power for that many years, and has a large network of bunkers, and escape plans is very misguided. Our best hope is for one of his security people killing him, other wise, we are going to have a big dangerous job.
You know, the only reason we are not dumping on N. Korea is because we are concerned about them killing some S. Koreans and Japanese. How is it that we don't care about the lives of the Jews? Or a better question how is it that militant Jewish leaders don't care about the death of their own people en mass in this unprovoked attack on a mad man, Saddam? The way I see it, we have already scared the sh#t out of him, at this point, we MUST not place him in a corner where he has no option but take as many people with him. We should open a window of opportunity for a negotiated deal. The negotiation must be allowed to be led by nonbelligerent party like the UN, Germany, Japan, Australia,....The SOB has been in his box for ten years, why poking at a hornet nest? Yes political leaders have gas masks and better protection than the rest of the population. The testosterone of these leaders also play a factor in playing this game of death. Evil leaders like Kim, Saddam, the Sudanese strongman, Qaddafi, .need to be confronted and dislodged, but not to the extent of mass hysteria, or door to door search.
Isolating these tyrants works. In addition to helping the opposition may work. Yes we have been doing just that for decades against Castro, and he held on. But also if we pushed him into a corner like we are planning to do with Saddam, he may cause lots of unnecessary killings too. At the end, which is better having this communist piece of sh#it ruling this Island all these years without the devastation of massive killings, or bombing the infrastructure of that island, and going door to door looking for bearded bum. May be women in positions of power are better for us since they dont have this testosterone problem?
All these Washington "Talking Heads", are doing a disservice to the US. Our State Department is an occupied territory of influence peddlers! The White House advisors are mostly ignorant jerks! How difficult is it to tell the stupid king of this stinking desert: LOOK, IF YOU PROSELYTE IN OUR PRISONS, YOU MUST ALLOW US TO DO THE SAME IN YOUR COUNTRY. IF YOU WANT US TO RESPECT THE WAY YOU DRESS, YOU MUST RESPECT THE WAY WE DRESS, IF YOU WANT TO BUILD MOSQUES ALL OVER OUR COUNTRY, YOU MUST LET US BUILD CHURCHES, AND SYNIGOGUES ALL OVER MECCA. Now, is that too unfair? or too difficult a concept for the White House or the State Department to come up with? WE can also say, if you do not agree, we will demolish all the Mosques that used any Saudi funds!
These losers destroyed the WTC, causing our economy to suffer a trillion dollar loss or more, and when we asked for fingerprinting visitors, they immediately retaliated saying WE WILL ASK THE AMERICANS TO BE FINGERPRINTED! Now for more than thirty years these ragheads have been building mosques and proselytizing in our cities openly, one administration after the other, and no one ever thought of approaching them with the concept of a TWO WAY STREET!
Ross Perot said once, and I am going to say it again, I wish we had politicians that say to the foreigners: "I am not for sale at ANY PRICE!!"
Robert Strauss, got two millions to help these losers soften their image? He does not care if his country goes to hell, as long as he got some money? Where is our media? They should pounding on Bob Strauss doors calling him TRAITOR, they should be pounding on Kissinger's door, and George Mitchell's door demanding to know who they work for, and shame them as traitors! If I was in president, on Sept 12/2001,
I would have taking over Saudi Arabia, throw all these ragheads in prison, and pump free oil untill I get one trillion dollars worth, then I would leave that stinking desert to some democratically elected government. You can't cause us to lose one trillion dollars, and we are the strongest nation on earth, and we just simply take it the a##, because you paid some influence peddlers in Washington a few million dollars to lobby for your crown!!
You also don't seem to understand that he's tied to AQ and Hamas and the other terror organizations. He's behind a fair amount of their tech. Where do you think they can find an open air market to buy and sell weapons, the South Bronx?
Let the coaches coach. They've got a game plan. Among other things, this will weaken the Saudis.
And another thing - you talk about poking a hornet's nest, North Korea has the third largest standing army on the planet and they're all sitting a few miles north of the DMZ!
Worrying about SK & Japan? Damn right! Let's not forget one billion Chinese just a short hop away. Israel can take care of itself. SK can't. And Japan is hamstrung by accords tied to the end of WWII.
Let's be honest here. You keep pointing to ol' Muammar over in Tripoli. Hell, there's less evidence pointing at him than at Saddam! You either don't want a war at all, or you're so wrapped up in trying to play Monday morning quaterback on Friday that you don't want to let the coaches and players get in the game and win it!
We're misguided? Please. The road to victory leads through Baghdad and Saddam. Then we can turn our attention to the others. Let's deal with Saddam, now, before he gets mobile nuclear capability and starts peddling WMD off to the highest bidder (i.e., Al Qaeda).
If we go after the others first, we may knock down two or three of 'em, and then have Saddam staring us in the face in three years with four nukes sitting on boats in Miami Beach ready to go. No, I'd much rather deal with him today, thank you very much.
Osama's dead. The others have reservations in Hell. We have but to provide the transportation.
We can afford to separate the Felipes of the world from those less worthy of the name of US citizen.
His dig was directed at those who think, contradicting the WSJ editorial page, that uncontrolled, random immigration is an outdated policy.