Congress MUST investigate DHS and it's Ties to the SPLC. Enough is ENOUGH!!

by patriotwatchdog 3/25/2011 9:33:00 PM

  For the past several years, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been in bed with an organization that "hates" patriotic Americans, hates the Constitution, and hates the rule of law. According to the SPLC, the FIRE Coalition is the largest "nativist extremist" group in the country. I won't even begin to list all the lies they have promulgated about our organization in their so-called "Intelligence Reports," but suffice to say, there's not much intelligence there to report with. I could go into greater detail, but a lady in Washington State said it very well Thursday in a letter to the Pottawattamie County Emergency Management Agency (PCEMA) for their outlandish "Operation Closed Campus" exercise. God Bless you Lynn for telling it like it is. When you're done reading Ms. Stuter's letter, read Tom DeWeese's report that he presented on Feb. 17, 2011 in the House Judiciary at a briefing coordinated by the FIRE Coalition and Patriot Coalition for the House Tea Party Caucus and House Immigration Reform Caucus.

I will be personally delivering this message to House & Senate Tea Party Members in Des Moines, Iowa on Saturday at the Conservative Principles Conference hosted by Congressman Steve King, (IA-5).

Jeff Lewis, PatriotWatchdog

National Director, FIRE Coalition & Patriot Coalition



From: "Lynn M Stuter"
Subject: GN: Operation Closed Campus; Pottawattamie County, Iowa; March 26, 2011
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:36:06 -0700

My letter to the "exercise team", Operation Closed Campus.
Lynn Stuter

From: Lynn M Stuter
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 2:30 PM
Subject: Operation Closed Campus; Pottawattamie County, Iowa; March 26, 2011
Note:  this e-mail is being sent to all individuals listed as the "exercise team" in Operation Closed Campus; additionally all known interested parties.  This e-mail will be distributed nation-wide with a link to the Operation Closed Campus document.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
If you are not aware, existing United States law requires that individuals, known to be in this  country illegally, be removed back to their country of origin; illegally defined as anyone who is not a citizen of the United States and has entered this country without obtaining the documents required to do so legally.  Such individuals are known, generally, as illegal aliens and will be referred to as such  here.  They are not undocumented immigrants as an immigrant is someone who has obtained the documents required to be in the United States legally and can produce those documents upon request.  Please noteillegal alien does not denote a race, color or creed.
Below is a recap of existing United States law regarding individuals who enter this country illegally, ie, illegal aliens, and those who aid and abet their illegal entry and continued residence in the United States:
8 USC Sec 1325 ­Illegal entry …shall be subject to civil and criminal penalties, can be fined and imprisoned.

Section 1324a Hiring, Harboring, Transporting any illegal alien …guilty of a felony punishable by 10 yrs jail + $2,000 fine per illegal alien + forfeiture of property.

Section 1324c Law officers have authority to make arrests …all officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws shall have authority to make arrests for violation of any provision of this section.

Section 1644  …no local ordinance, rule or measure shall stop law enforcement officers from enforcement of the section.

Title 19, USC 1459, Section (f) & (g)­illegal entry(f)  Civil penalty of $5,000 for the first violation, and $10,000 for each subsequent violation(g) Criminal penalty liable for a fine of not more than $5,000, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both.

Either we have rule of law, as established by the United States Constitution, or we have anarchy and chaos.  Would you not agree?
In the document you have distributed, noted above, you acknowledge the presence of illegal aliens in the jurisdiction over which you exercise a fiduciary responsibility.  Your obligation, under law, is clear – illegal aliens must be deported.
That such is not happening, across the United States, is the subject of growing anger in an America where government policies have resulted in a situation where Americans are losing their jobs, their homes, their ability to provide for their families.  As Americans are not able to get jobs, they are watching employers pay illegal aliens under the table; thus not only hurting Americans but also exploiting the illegal aliens.
While the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies acknowledge the presence of approximately 12,000,000 illegal aliens, that figure is actually almost four times that figure, closer to 45,000,000.  These illegal aliens are given access to social programs in existence for the purpose of helping need Americans.  As such, the undue stress of illegal aliens accessing these programs means Americans, who truly need these programs, are denied due to budget constraints.
On average, 26 Americans die every day due to crimes committed by illegal aliens.  In four months more Americans die at the hands of illegal aliens than died on September 11, 2001.  Where is the outrage?
Every illegal alien who commit a crime on American soil costs the American taxpayer, on average, $1,600,000 per crime. 
Your proposed exercise makes a very clear statement that you, individually and collectively, support policies that are anti-American, anti-United States Constitution, and flaunt the law, to say nothing of being proposed out of what appears to be gross ignorance of the realities of the illegal alien invasion of the United States.
And who you, individually and collectively, target as the "perpetrator" is anyone who 1) believes in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights; 2) believes in the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms; and 3) believes in the rule of law established by the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Such does not speak well of any one of you and certainly brings into question your right, your fitness, to the position you now hold.  And personally, your contention is offensive.
The whole of this exercise smacks of the policies of the bigoted, race-baiting, anti-American organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center, with which the Department of Homeland Security has a long and certainly incestuous history.
Among discerning Americans, it has long been known that SPLC policies are intended, first and foremost, to fill the SPLC coffers.  To that end, the SPLC has engaged in a campaign of fear-mongering and race-baiting.  Nothing fills the coffers like fear!  At the same time, the amount of money, time, and effort the SPLC allots to defending those truly living in poverty is miniscule to non-existent.  To say that the SPLC is a fraud would not be inaccurate.
The DHS has, over the past several years, published policies that cement its incestuous relationship with SPLC doctrine, right down to claiming that anyone who voted for Chuck Baldwin, Ron Paul or Bob Barr in the last presidential election was some kind of dangerous domestic terrorist; anyone who believes in the United States Constitution to be a white racist with supremacist proclivities; and that anyone who opposes the continued presence in this country of 45,000,000 illegal aliens to be "nativist" defined as anyone who does not agree with the SPLC's open borders stance.  And while the SPLC labels organizations pandering to whites as white supremacist, it has no problem with organizations that pander to perceived minorities.  That, of course, is totally out of sync with the equal rights afforded every American by the Bill of Rights.
In the case of illegal aliens, most Americans do not oppose legal immigration; but they do oppose the illegal entry into this country of anyone, no matter the race.  While the view of these Americans comports with the United States Constitution and existing laws, agencies such as DHS and race-baiting organizations like the SPLC are careful that distinction is left out of the equation. 
While there has not been one school shooting that incorporates the exercise scenario you propose, there have been many school shootings in which the perpetrators had been or were currently on prescription anti-depressants.  And the shooters took their angst out on those they perceived as the problem including parents who were teachers.  If "real life" is your goal, there is no history that supports your "exercise scenario". 
Your exercise scenario does however, serve to further antagonize the growing divide being purposely agitated between whites, blacks and Hispanics; your exercise serves a destructive purpose, not a constructive purpose.  In other words, your exercise scenario falls right in line with SPLC/DHS propaganda.
That you purposely dis-invited one participant when a complaint was made, further clarifies your spurious intent.
As an American citizen who believes in the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and rule of law, I call on you to change your exercise scenario.
Lynn M Stuter
Washington State

Currently rated 3.0 by 5 people

  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Related posts


Powered by BlogEngine.NET
Theme by Mads Kristensen

About the author

FIRE Coalition FIRE Coalition
FIRE Coalition is a nationwide coalition of individuals and groups dedicated to Federal Immigration Reform and Enforcement.

E-mail Us Send mail


<<  July 2015  >>

View posts in large calendar


    Recent comments

    Sign in