Liberals Defining The Moral High Ground

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
Why is it that liberals get to define the moral high ground? The UN’s economic refugees brought liberals out from under their usual moral rock:

During the immigration debates prompted by the coming election, the likes of Eleanor Clift and other liberal spokespersons often cite the poetry on the Statue of Liberty as confirmation that our nation is steeped in some type of open-door immigration policy. A little research proves that not to be the case.

XXXXX

So the "give us your huddled masses" was contingent on many things and is not quite what the liberals wish it to mean. From the 1903 posting of the poem forward, the laws became stricter and more restrictive. In short, the poem was not indicative of the immigration policy of the United States of America.​

Every American knows why that piece of scum in the White House is doing what he is doing, while Democrats like Harry Reid are crapping in their drawers at the sight of the United Nations being challenged.

NOTE: The New World Order crowd in Congress must still protect the United Nations against all enemies after the sewer rat is gone. The rat knows that he can do whatever it takes to empower the United Nations —— well-knowing that Democrats will back his play. Senator Reid also knows that he can count on RINO in the nest of traitors whenever the United Nations is challenged. It will be labeled humanitarian bipartisanship.

The worst of it is that sneaky liberals on every level are claiming the moral high ground for the United Nations under the pretense of defending the garbage in Emma Lazarus’ putrid sonnet. If it was not a United Nations program, you can be sure that nobody would be accepting, or defending, Muslims who make no bones about wanting to destroy America.

They all invoke the Statue of Liberty as though The New Colossus is law. It isn’t and never was:


Here are some excerpts of immigration law, first from 1903, then a more stringent addendum in 1918.

From the law of 1903 Sect 39:​

That any person who knowingly aids, advises, or encourages any such person to apply for or to secure naturalization or to file the preliminary papers declaring an intent to become a citizen of the United States, or who in any naturalization proceeding knowingly procures or gives false testimony as to any material fact, or who knowingly makes an affidavit false as to any material fact required to be proved in such proceeding, shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars, or imprisoned not less than one nor more than ten years, or both.

Anyone that entertains or teaches disbelief in or opposition to all organized government, …shall be excluded from admission to the United States.​

From the law of 1918, Section 2:​

That any alien who, at any time after entering the United States, is found to have been at the time of entry, or to have become thereafter ... a member of any one of the classes of aliens enumerated in section one of this Act, shall, upon the warrant of the Secretary of Labor, be taken into custody and deported.​

And from Section 3:​

That any alien who shall, after he has been excluded and deported or arrested and deported in pursuance of the provisions of this Act, thereafter return to or enter the United States or attempt to return to or to enter the United States shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of not more than five years ; and shall, upon the termination of such imprisonment, be taken into custody, upon the warrant of the Secretary of Labor, and deported.​

November 27, 2015
Poetry does not an immigration policy make
By James Longstreet

Blog: Poetry does not an immigration policy make

Naturally, media mouths on television are pushing for accepting Muslim women, children, and the elderly. This is why media sneaks not pushing for able-bodied Muslim men:

1. Unlike illegal aliens, United Nations refugees will become citizens because the UN says they are here legally.

2. Uniting families is the one American immigration law they all love. Once Muslim women, children, and the elderly are here they will simply send for their relatives. You can bet that the Supreme Court will uphold that law.

3. Economic refugees will dive into the public trough as soon as they step off the boat. American organizations and churches are prepared to show them the way as they do with illegal aliens.

4. Children, even the sick ones, will flood the schools as did the illegal aliens whose diseases killed American children.

5. They will get all free medical aid —— most especially the elderly who require the most medical aid.

One good thing is coming out of United Nations refugees. The American people are finally realizing something I knew decades ago.


It is the arrogance of traitors knowing they cannot be held accountable:

In addition to the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945, the sneaks who got this country into the UN knew what they were doing when they designed a foundation that was a masterpiece of betrayal. A foundation that would withstand every challenge when their descendants carried on. Treason became legal the minute the US became a member in an underhanded organization that was, and is, determined to tear down America. Membership in the UN meant that no American official betraying this country on the UN’s behalf could be prosecuted for treason.

Clerks & Presidents | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
 
Liberals cannot define something they lack


Which is exactly why they do their most important work, when redefining what words mean, or insisting words and phrases be no longer used. EXAMPLE..........Illegal aliens are now undocumented immigrants.

Want to win a debate with a lefty? Just put all the words and phrases back in to the English language that they have worked soooooo hard to remove, use them in the correct context and be articulate. Do that, and before long, everyone is saying, "oh yeah, I forgot about that," and the lefty argument goes up in smoke-)
 
Canadian Socialists are the only people who roll over for the United Nations as fast as our own UN-loving traitors:

Without ever intending to, newly-elected Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has saved the United States from the worry of 10,000 unvetted Syrian “refugees” being flown into Canada by the year’s end, from flooding over America’s unsecured northern border.

Ditto for the 15,000 Trudeau is bringing to Canadian soil in February.

What happens in Canada stays in Canada as far as Montana ranchers and farmers are concerned.

Montana Ranchers on Canadian Border Watch
By Judi McLeod
November 27, 2015

http://canadafreepress.com/article/77077

No jest on this one. Donald Trump is now facing the problem of which fence to build higher!
 
Naturally, media mouths on television are pushing for accepting Muslim women, children, and the elderly.
Widows and orphans are a subset of women and children:

195631_5_.jpg
http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-11/195631_5_.jpg

Americans keep being hectored to take "refugees" from terrorist-producing countries because to do otherwise would be "a betrayal of our values," as President Obama said on Monday.

XXXXX

Contrary to Obama's laughable reference to "the universal values" that "all of humanity" share, most of the world does not share our values, at all. They barely seem to share our DNA. As indignantly explained by the lawyer representing two Iraqis accused of child rape in Nebraska, America's views about women and children "put us in the minority position in the world."

Importing Terrorism and Other American Values
Ann Coulter | Nov 25, 2015

Ann Coulter - Importing Terrorism and Other American Values

Our spiritual leader’s “ . . . universal values . . .” is newspeak for United Nations values.

mrz112515dAPR20151125014517.jpg
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz112515dAPR20151125014517.jpg

Talking about newspeak, the sewer rat’s surrogates are hitting the talk shows claiming Americans go to war to fight for refugees. “That’s what they fight for.” is the biggest line of liberal garbage I’ve heard so far. The next thing I expect to hear is that Americans are chomping at the bit to go off and fight for United Nations refugees when the filthy spiritual leader objects to Americans fighting for their own loved ones. I recently touched on the crapola in another thread:

I doubt if I will ever figure it out. The best I can do is offer Hal a suggestion. Drop the liberal horseshit and defend the nation.​



 
Last edited:
Why is it that liberals get to define the moral high ground? The UN’s economic refugees brought liberals out from under their usual moral rock:

During the immigration debates prompted by the coming election, the likes of Eleanor Clift and other liberal spokespersons often cite the poetry on the Statue of Liberty as confirmation that our nation is steeped in some type of open-door immigration policy. A little research proves that not to be the case.

XXXXX

So the "give us your huddled masses" was contingent on many things and is not quite what the liberals wish it to mean. From the 1903 posting of the poem forward, the laws became stricter and more restrictive. In short, the poem was not indicative of the immigration policy of the United States of America.​

Every American knows why that piece of scum in the White House is doing what he is doing, while Democrats like Harry Reid are crapping in their drawers at the sight of the United Nations being challenged.

NOTE: The New World Order crowd in Congress must still protect the United Nations against all enemies after the sewer rat is gone. The rat knows that he can do whatever it takes to empower the United Nations —— well-knowing that Democrats will back his play. Senator Reid also knows that he can count on RINO in the nest of traitors whenever the United Nations is challenged. It will be labeled humanitarian bipartisanship.

The worst of it is that sneaky liberals on every level are claiming the moral high ground for the United Nations under the pretense of defending the garbage in Emma Lazarus’ putrid sonnet. If it was not a United Nations program, you can be sure that nobody would be accepting, or defending, Muslims who make no bones about wanting to destroy America.

They all invoke the Statue of Liberty as though The New Colossus is law. It isn’t and never was:


Here are some excerpts of immigration law, first from 1903, then a more stringent addendum in 1918.

From the law of 1903 Sect 39:​

That any person who knowingly aids, advises, or encourages any such person to apply for or to secure naturalization or to file the preliminary papers declaring an intent to become a citizen of the United States, or who in any naturalization proceeding knowingly procures or gives false testimony as to any material fact, or who knowingly makes an affidavit false as to any material fact required to be proved in such proceeding, shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars, or imprisoned not less than one nor more than ten years, or both.

Anyone that entertains or teaches disbelief in or opposition to all organized government, …shall be excluded from admission to the United States.​

From the law of 1918, Section 2:​

That any alien who, at any time after entering the United States, is found to have been at the time of entry, or to have become thereafter ... a member of any one of the classes of aliens enumerated in section one of this Act, shall, upon the warrant of the Secretary of Labor, be taken into custody and deported.​

And from Section 3:​

That any alien who shall, after he has been excluded and deported or arrested and deported in pursuance of the provisions of this Act, thereafter return to or enter the United States or attempt to return to or to enter the United States shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of not more than five years ; and shall, upon the termination of such imprisonment, be taken into custody, upon the warrant of the Secretary of Labor, and deported.​

November 27, 2015
Poetry does not an immigration policy make
By James Longstreet

Blog: Poetry does not an immigration policy make

Naturally, media mouths on television are pushing for accepting Muslim women, children, and the elderly. This is why media sneaks not pushing for able-bodied Muslim men:

1. Unlike illegal aliens, United Nations refugees will become citizens because the UN says they are here legally.

2. Uniting families is the one American immigration law they all love. Once Muslim women, children, and the elderly are here they will simply send for their relatives. You can bet that the Supreme Court will uphold that law.

3. Economic refugees will dive into the public trough as soon as they step off the boat. American organizations and churches are prepared to show them the way as they do with illegal aliens.

4. Children, even the sick ones, will flood the schools as did the illegal aliens whose diseases killed American children.

5. They will get all free medical aid —— most especially the elderly who require the most medical aid.

One good thing is coming out of United Nations refugees. The American people are finally realizing something I knew decades ago.


It is the arrogance of traitors knowing they cannot be held accountable:

In addition to the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945, the sneaks who got this country into the UN knew what they were doing when they designed a foundation that was a masterpiece of betrayal. A foundation that would withstand every challenge when their descendants carried on. Treason became legal the minute the US became a member in an underhanded organization that was, and is, determined to tear down America. Membership in the UN meant that no American official betraying this country on the UN’s behalf could be prosecuted for treason.

Clerks & Presidents | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
The premise of the thread fails as a straw man fallacy, made up of nothing but delusional conspiracy theories and partisan lies.
 
The premise of the thread fails as a straw man fallacy, made up of nothing but delusional conspiracy theories and partisan lies.
To C_Clayton_Jones: Here’s more for your enjoyment.

I have a suggestion to that I offer from time to time:

Change the Universal Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) so that no American can be ordered to fight for the UN.

It is my understanding that the commander in chief can make that change without consulting Congress. Do n0t hold your breath until the present commander in chief is gone.

If a president loyal to this country ever does make the change it should be so ironclad military personnel so inclined will have every Right to refuse to serve the United Nations without fear of being punished.

In the same vain, over the years I posted messages about Michael New. Michael New was court-martialed for refusing to serve the UN. He was loyal to the United States and was punished by the Clintons. Neither Bush the Younger nor the Chicago sewer rat gave New a pardon.


U.S. Convicts G.I. Who Refused To Serve Under United Nations in Balkans
Published: January 25, 1996

U.S. Convicts G.I. Who Refused To Serve Under U.N. in Balkans



NOTE: In 2007 the US Supreme Court refused to hear Michael New’s appeal. President Bush could have overturn his conviction and awarded Michael New an honorable discharge. If ever anybody deserved a pardon it was Michael New. A Bush pardon would have sent a message of hope to the American people; at least to those Americans who would defend this country. Even today, wouldn’t you love to see a media mouth compare Michael New to pardoning Marc Rich, Gitmo terrorists, and drug dealers.

In all of the years since 1995 -1996 Michael New received very little coverage for his courageous stand. (I cannot recall one report on television then or since.) Mainstream media obviously went into full cover-up mode for 20 years. The press can always find a way to make the worst criminal a cause célèbre, but electronic media always treated New like he never existed.

Here’s another one that is ignored by the media:


Expect Obama to re-sign the U.N.'s International Criminal Court Statute to demonstrate to the world that the United States is, indeed, a new member in the world community. Never mind that the document gives the ICC the power to prosecute U.S. military and private citizens for whatever the Court defines to be "crimes against humanity." For years, U.N. delegates have accused the United States of "crimes against humanity" for refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

Obama to put world ahead of America
Posted: January 17, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

Obama to put world ahead of America

And I’ll wager that no military recruiting officer will ever tell a prospective enlistee that he or she might be ordered to serve the United Nations. If recruiters are asked, I’m certain they will fudge their answer one way or another. Once you’re in the military it won’t matter what you were led to believe before you signed up. Refuse a direct order and your ass is mud —— unless you’re a Muslim refusing to fight against Muslim brothers.

My advice to young Americans thinking about a career in the military is for them to get a legal document, signed by the president, stating that they will not be punished if they refuse to serve the United Nations Sadly, the only way to give this issue the importance it deserves is for conscription to be considered again.

A simpler way to make the United Nations problem disappear is to withdraw from the UN and let those countries so full of hatred for the US stew in their own juices. You can bet they will think twice before attacking America after the UN goes belly up. It’s even possible they won’t want to.

Lay my UCMJ suggestion on Democrats and you’ll hear so much caterwauling you’ll need earplugs to drown it out. They oppose the war against terrorism when it means America defending itself unilaterally, while they do not oppose Americans dying for the UN.

Not one of the Democrats who opposed the war in Iraq while seeking their party’s nomination for president in 2004 ever included military UN peacekeeping missions in their anti-war pronouncements. John Kerry’s comments were so cleverly worded he fooled himself into thinking he had scored brownie points with voters. I remember he said: “America should never go to war because it wants to, but only when it has to.”

Most voters understood “. . . only when it has to.” would have been decided by the UN had Kerry won the election. Neither Kerry nor any other Democrat ever said otherwise.

Career military people acknowledged up-front that defending the country is where the rubber meets the road for most Americans. Presidents can sign UN treaties, senators can ratify them, international-minded judges can interpret them for the UN’s benefit, and the press can make it all sound wonderful. None of those things will con the majority of Americans into fighting for the UN.
In any event, Americans should only fight to defend their country against clearly-defined menaces like Islamic fundamentalism (think 9/11) and Communist expansion by force (think worldwide Communist domination) rather than being manipulated into fighting against a philosophical threat determined by liberals. When Americans do go to war, they should fight a total war and to hell with the UN’s feelings.

Let me close with Marine Lt. Col. William Richard Higgins:


In light of his sensitive position, Higgins' assignment to Lebanon was "a case of gross mismanagement," former national security adviser Robert C. McFarlane said in an interview shortly after Higgins' capture in February 1988. Another high-placed Defense Department official who had dealt extensively with Higgins, called his late-1987 assignment to a U.N. peacekeeping force in Southern Lebanon "a huge security lapse . . . absolutely, colossally stupid."

He Knew Too Much, Say His Colleagues
By Frank Greve, Inquirer Washington Bureau Inquirer staff writer Marc Duvoisin contributed to this article
Posted: August 01, 1989

He Knew Too Much, Say His Colleagues

Col. Higgins was captured and hanged. Col. Higgins is unique in that he was in the US Marines and in a United Nations peacekeeping force. His duel loyalty was only "a case of gross mismanagement," because he knew a lot about sensitive information. Bottom line: There is nothing wrong with the average soldier dying for the United Nations while wearing an American military uniform.

United Nations traitors championed Higgins in an attempt to sucker Americans into viewing service to the UN the same as they view serving the country. It would is a big mistake to integrate the two positions.

From what I understand about Col. Higgins, he had no conflict serving the UN as well as serving the country in the US Marines. There’s the rub. Higgins did it voluntarily. That is why the UCMJ should be amended as I suggested above.

In addition, any American who wants to serve the United Nations is free to do so, but they should not embroil the US military in their political beliefs. Choose one or the other —— not both.

Once our government gets into a United Nations-POW situation the Left jumps on the opportunity to play the patriotism card, knowing that most Americans will not tolerate anyone murdering our military people. The UN then benefits from American anger as Americans are moved closer to believing that serving the US and serving the UN are one and the same.
 
My advice to young Americans thinking about a career in the military is for them to get a legal document, signed by the president, stating that they will not be punished if they refuse to serve the United Nations.
France is fighting for the United Nations. How long will it be before a president drops all pretenses of sovereignty and orders our military to fight under the United Nations flag?

The United Nations said unknown attackers fired rockets at a U.N. peacekeeping base in Kidal in northern Mali on Saturday, killing three people inside, in the latest sign that the West African country's Islamist insurgency is intensifying.

French troops and the 10,000-strong U.N. force are struggling to stabilise the former French colony where Islamist militants attacked a hotel in the capital on Nov. 20 and killed 20 people, in their bloodiest attack yet in the country's south.

Sat Nov 28, 2015 12:04pm GMT
Suspected jihadists kill three at U.N. base in north Mali
BAMAKO | By Tiemoko Diallo

Suspected jihadists kill three at U.N. base in north Mali

I expect UN-lovers will be outraged because most people are not outraged over an attack on the United Nations. The same lack of outrage from the American people happened in Iraq in 2003 when 17 people, including top UN envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, were killed after a truck bomb exploded outside UN headquarters in Baghdad.

UN Special Representative in Iraq, Sérgio Vieira de Mello, was killed along with 20 other UN employees. At the time the headlines screamed UN HQ Attacked in Baghdad, and variations on that theme.

UN-loving media liberals jumped on the bombing like bedbugs jump on a boarding house mattress. The press instinctively knew how to writeup the incident without any guidelines from the UN’s public relations office. At the time, I wondered how the press knew the truck bomb was aimed at UN personnel since a lot of foreigners were known to hang around the hotel?

The sickest reporting were clips of the UN flag flying (“fluttering” according to some) over the smoking ruins? Talking heads made the Canal Hotel sound like Fort McHenry. Give me a break on that one. The media did a lot of sorry things in recent decades, but that one was as sick as it gets. Were we all supposed to place our hands over our hearts and sing the Star Spangled Banner to the UN house flag?

UN Declares War On Grasshoppers | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Bottom line: Fight the war against Islam, but do not do it for the United Nations.
 
4. Children, even the sick ones, will flood the schools as did the illegal aliens whose diseases killed American children.
A short time ago, diseases imported by the scum in the White House got some coverage in connection to the illegal alien invasion. It did not take long for the government to order the networks to drop all reporting on illegal aliens being responsible for the deaths of American children. In fact, illegal aliens still pouring in are no more disease-free than were the first waves. Now comes United Nations “legal” refugees carrying diseases.

1st terrorism, now unvetted aliens blamed for TB surge
Posted By Bob Unruh On 12/14/2015 @ 8:56 pm

1st terrorism, now unvetted aliens blamed for TB surge

The United Nations is so protected by media it is impossible to nail those filthy bums for anything, but it is possible to make every UN-loving elected official accountable. Democrats unanimously support everything United Nations garbage dump on this country, everything from United Nations law, to open-borders, to environmental horse manure. But voters still have a chance to find out how Republican wannabes running for Congress stand on the United Nations.

Never forget that is was Democrats who stood foursquare behind importing diseases. See this thread for a bit more about importing diseases:



In the same vein, our scum-soaked spiritual leader is close to handing the nation’s security to the United Nations. Make no mistake about the TPP. United Nations judges will decide every conflict:

But under the TPP, the sultan of Brunei, the billionaire autocrat who rules his TPP country under Shariah law, could sue for billions of dollars if CFIUS denied his bid to buy a company providing security to U.S. ports and airports.

He would bring his case before a foreign tribunal that could force taxpayers to award him compensation for “lost profits,” under the terms of the agreement.

The tribunal, staffed by three unelected lawyers hailing from anywhere in the world, would have the power to second-guess the U.S. government on what constitutes a threat to national security.

Obamatrade's fine print reveals security threat
Posted By Curtis Ellis On 12/14/2015 @ 9:39 pm

Obamatrade’s fine print reveals security threat

NOTE: Republicans like Paul Ryan are behind the TPP.
 

Forum List

Back
Top