American Flag Blog

The word is that Neil Young, who has often figuratively wrapped himself in the American flag through 40 plus years of rock ‘n roll, has recorded a song in which he calls for the impeachment of president Bush for “lyin.” But for all his American flag waving, he still can’t shake his liberal Canadian roots.

The “lyin” Young refers to is the tired claim by liberals that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. So as liberals stick their heads in the sand, Iran is now challenging the United States directly labeling us a “decaying power” and charging that America wil not have the “stamina” to face off against a nuclear Iran.

At issue here is the refusal of liberals to acknowledge the “weapon of mass destruction” revealed to us by the events of 9/11. The Muslims who happily frolic on a pleasant Sunday afternoon burning American flags in a Tehran park don’t do it because they resent American imperialism. They burn American flags because the foundations of Islam are diametrically opposed to the foundations of American liberty.

The “weapon of mass destruction” we face is the relentless aspiration of Islam to wipe the infidels (that’s us) from the face of the earth. The narrow view taken by liberals that Iraq is the sole issue misses the point. The fight is on and it can’t be contained by borders and nations.

That should have been a point driven home to every American by the fact that the nineteen hijackers of 9/11 were from several different countries and came here in a slow and calculating way via places like Young’s native Canada. Instead of trashing Bush, perhaps Young should sing a song berating Canada for embracing the destructive force of Islam by exporting terrorists to the U.S.

As predicted, the ACLU is attempting to exploit a ban on American and Mexican flags in a San Diego public school. When Oceanside Unified School District in San Diego banned both Mexican and American flags from school property last week, the ACLU cried foul.

They claimed that banning the flags amounted to a violation of First Amendment free speech rights. Their goal in this case is not to protect the right of American citizens to wave the American flag but to convince a court to rule that students who are in the U.S. illegally have the same constitutional rights as students who are U.S. citizens.

Creating a case in Oceanside would be difficult because there had already been a violent confrontation over the immigration issue and the school board superintendant was legitimately trying to calm the situation. But even before the Oceanside ban occured, the ACLU was quietly involved with another San Diego district.

Fallbrook High School student Malia Fontana showed up at school on March 31st with a small American flag hanging out of a rear pocket and it earned her a demerit in her file. Fontana’s motivation was not patriotism but rather, defiance. Several other kids had been asked to put away flags earlier in the week, so Fontana and her mother together decided that she should carry an American flag to school in the back pocket of her jeans, in much the same way that a mechanic carries a greasy rag.

The difference between Fontana and the other kids, who were not punished in any way other then being asked to put the flags away, was that she initially refused to comply and the ensuing argument earned her the black mark. This from a kid who wrote an eight grade paper detailing the virtues of a Bill of Rights for children (that’s where children don’t have to abide by their parent’s rules).

Was Fontana deliberately fishing for the punishment in order to give the ACLU some red meat? Judging by the ACLU’s response, it seems entirely possible. They came down hard on the school board, demanding that they recognize the free speech rights of the students by way of an official policy or face a federal civil suit to be filed on behalf of, you guessed it, Malia Fontana. And you can bet that the ACLU’s definition of free speech rights will extend to students who are illegal immigrants.

It’s ironic that the ACLU is using the American flag, an object they hold in contempt, to further their goal of the destruction of the country the flag stands for.

One great thing about Michelle Malkin’s blog is that she always has great photos to illustrate her points.

One of yesterday’s posts is entitled “The Signs You Didn’t See” and makes the point that the media isn’t showing these signs carried by illegals because the signs don’t help make the case for amnesty. The two shown here I thought were especially interesting and worthy of comment.

First, the sign suggesting that the American flag is responsible for the murder of Indians, Chicanos and Latinos is utterly beyond belief. The American flag of course, represents not only the American people, but the American Ideal. This woman is at once condemning America as murderous while demanding that America allows her to stay.

While surfing around the cable channels the other night, I saw two different pro-illegal immigration people who said the same thing using only slightly different words. After failing to defend amnesty and open borders from a legal perspective, they both said the (illegal) immigrants are humans and twelve million humans can’t be illegal.

Now we know that those two people did not just pull those highly ridiculous statements out of thin air. International Socialists, Islamic terror organizations and others who want to see the destruction of the United States are not only united on this, but they have talking points.

And there are other agendas at work here as well. Last night, New York City Councilman Charles Barron appeared on the O’Reilly Factor. At the tail end of the debate, Barron revealed that, and I’m paraphrasing, open borders will put and end to white privilege and power. In other words, he wants people of color to flood into the U.S. unabated, not to offer hope to oppressed refugees, but to overwhelm the white population. Barron, who is an African-American, revealed a racist agenda that no white man in his position would dare speak about.

Politicians like Barron, who throw their own twisted racist spin into the mix, only threaten to stir violence in an already overheated situation.

The sudden appearance of American flags at this weekend’s pro-illegal immigration rallys should not be accepted as a reflection of the attitudes of the marchers. The same people were all too happy last week to wave the Mexican flag and shout anti-American slogans. Rather, the abundance of american flags were no doubt supplied to the marchers by treacherous organizers who cynically believe the American public can be easily cowed.

The huge numbers of illegals hitting the streets should serve as a bracing slap in the face to America that the situation may turn ugly. As Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington says, “What we are seeing in the streets is a naked assertion of power. This isn’t really about immigration — it’s about power.”

Polls show that an overwhelming majority of Americans are offended by the aggressive and arrogant behavior of illegals, which suggests that the American people may not be so easily cowed. Most Americans understand that people who bypass our immigration laws by sneaking into our country should not get away with demands to be accorded the full rights of citizenship.

The concept is simple. If I get into your car and drive it off, that doesn’t make it mine. So the debate is not over whether illegals have a legitimate claim on American soil. They do not. But rather, do the American people have the will to stand up and take back the huge portions of our country that are being stolen on behalf of Mexico.

My apologies to all the decent, honest and commited lawyers, but it looks like the villainous attorneys at the ACLU are not the only lawyers who are willing to hasten the demise of our great country.

Early in the week, the Oceanside Unified School District in San Diego banned the display of both the Mexican flag and the American flag. Observers all around the country, myself included, were outraged that the school board would disgrace the American flag by declaring both flags deserving of equal treatment within the borders of the United States.

Now that the ban is about to end, District Superintendant Ken Noonan has revealed the true source. While Noonan continues to maintain that his primary concern was avoidance of violence and the safety of the students, he also stated that the school board’s legal counsel advised that they could not ban only the Mexican flag, so they included the American flag.

Bear in mind that 650 or so illegal Mexican students walked out of district schools last week in “protest” and more than a third of them were suspended for engaging in disruptive or violent behavior. The reaction of the school district, or more specifically, the lawyer for the district, was to cave and treat the Mexican kids as if they posessed all the rights of U.S. citizens.

Noonan says that if faced with the same set of circumstances again, he would do exactly the same thing. What a shame. The Oceanside Unified School District needs a superintendant with a little more backbone.

Ban Mexican flags, not American flags, from school property and face the bogus legal challenges. Ultimately, the goal of the ACLU to confer the rights of U.S. citizenship upon illegal Mexicans will be decided either by the courts or by Congress. The ACLU, in their quest to decimate the legal foudations of the United States, is not about to let this issue die.

Meanwhile, if the children of illegal Mexicans want to attend schools that are supported by the tax dollars of U.S. citizens, they should behave or leave. The district should meet violent or disruptive behavior by removing the source of the problem. It’s that simple.

Hugo Chavez is at it again. Venezuela’s absurd toad of a dictator, who foolishly spends his people’s money making changes to the country’s flag whilst they starve, is most likely behind the attack on the U.S. Ambassador today.

Ambassador William Brownfield’s car was chased for miles through the streets of Caracas by a motorcycle gang who’s members kicked and pounded on the car and pelted it with various objects. Local police sat back and watched the spectacle but didn’t once attempt to intervene.

An ambassador from any country being harassed and threatened in this way would ordinarily be viewed as a very serious crime, but apparently not in the banana republic that Venezuela has become under the assinine direction of Senor Chavez.

Embassy spokesman Brian Penn believes the attack was orchestrated by the Mayor’s office which would strongly indicate that Chavez is pulling the strings. The message is clearly that the Ambassador should leave the country and I think we should take them up on it.

It’s time the United States stopped wasting precious resources attempting to maintain diplomatic relations with countries that are openly hostile to us.

The Senate seems poised to pass an immigration reform bill today and like much of what Congress does, it will be almost useless.

For the last week, America watched as hundreds of thousands of protesters, many if not most of whom are here illegally, took to the streets waving Mexican flags. It’s true that some of those involved carried American flags, but many of those folks were attacked by other Mexicans for the apparent crime of possessing the American flag.

Some pro-Latino organizations like the League of United Latin American Citizens are claiming that the majority of illegals really do want to become American citizens and they display the Mexican flag only as a demonstration of cultural pride. That may be true although there’s plenty of evidence suggesting that illegal Mexicans would like to “take Back” the Southwestern U.S.

I said that the immigration bill would be almost useless, but the way it appears to be structured, it should be good for at least one thing. It will determine if Mexican illegals really are serious about becoming U.S. citizens.

The bill calls for Mexicans who have been here between 2 and 5 years to return home for a short period of time, then return as a guest worker on their way to full citizenship. Those who have been here longer than 5 years need not return home, but those here less than 2 years must return to Mexico and get in line to seek citizenship the old-fashioned way.

So since there will most likely be no serious sanctions against employers who hire illegals, the whole thing becomes voluntary. Mexicans who are here now illegally for less than 5 years and have no real desire to become U.S. citizens will have no incentive to follow the new rules. If millions of them step forward to comply, then the Latino organizations mentioned earlier will be proved right.

My guess is that the Congressional leadership knows this bill won’t work but also knows that it takes the issue off the table until well after the elections.

The ACLU is for once on the right side of an issue, but for the wrong reason. Oceanside Unified School District in San Diego has banned all vestiges of American patriotism as well as Mexican patriotism from their racially mixed campus including American flags and Mexican flags.

The ACLU is opposed to the ban on the basis that it is in violation of free speech rights guaranteed by the Constitution. But based on the ACLU’s long-standing efforts to get American flags banned from schools, it logically follows that they are specifically defending the “rights” of Mexican students to wave the Mexican flag.

As for the school district, they see the ban as a way to gain more control over the situation and limit the risk of violence, but in so doing, they have lost sight that their’s is an American school, not a Mexican school.

Mexican students illegally in the U.S. who nevertheless are enjoying an American education at the expense of American taxpayers should be expected to recognize the country they are in and dispense with the Mexican flag BS.

And as for the ACLU, in their never ending quest to destabilize and eventually topple the U.S. Government, involvement in this case is nothing more than an attempt to confer the rights of U.S. citizens on the illegals. The day that non-citizens can expect the same rights as citizens is fast approaching and when it’s here, being an American will no longer mean much of anything.

Hugo Chavez, that absurd left wing nutcase who recklessly spent money his starving people could have used to make changes to the Venezuelan flag, has again shown the world what is wrong with communist dictatorships.

In his quest to discredit the United States and generally anger the rest of the civilized world, Chavez has seized control of France’s oil interests in that country. As a key element of his “Bolivarian Revolution,” and in true leftist fashion, Chavez put the screws to the various oil companies who have made it possible for him to have the cash which he then pisses away.

Chavez changed the terms of the deals he had with the various oil interests after, naturally, the wells were drilled and operating. To their credit, France and Italy refused to be a party to Chavez’s grand schemes.

According to insiders, he intends to use the money to purchase arms (uh-oh), step-up his anti-U.S. campaign (maybe now he can afford to pay Alec Baldwin to fly down there for a good old fashioned Hate America Festival), and sell oil below market value to other South American countries in order to destablize world markets. Meanwhile, the people of Venezuela are starving to death waiting for the largess Chavez promised them.

These hijinks go way beyond blowing a few million bucks to reconfigure the national flag. As is the case with all two-bit dictators, the seriously over-inflated self-importance that informs Chavez’s actions will eventually turn the entire world against him. Except for, of course, Harry Belafonte, Cindy Sheehan, Alec Baldwin, the ACLU, Code Pink, MoveOn.org, - am I leaving anybody out? - the People for the American Way, A.N.S.W.E.R., etc., etc., etc.

Initial preparation for the 9/11 Memorial at the World Trade Center site in downtown Manhattan has begun, but typically, it’s not starting out smoothly. As American flags left by visitors pile up in front of the temporary memorial, wrangling between the involved parties threatens to temporarily derail the start of construction.

But no one doubts that the project will eventually get built, and when it does, millions of people from all over the world will see it and remember the lives that were snuffed out that day and what was done to America in the name of evil.

A couple of hundred miles away, in a field in Pennsylvania where 40 or so passengers of United flight 93 also died that day, another 9/11 memorial is planned. Just as in New York, hundreds of visitors have left American flags as a remembrance but unlike New York, it’s doubtful that millions of visitors will find their way to this remote place.

However, another kind of memorial in the form of a new film titled “United 93″ will be released this month and millions are destined to see it. What is amazing is that weeks before the release, the film is already garnering complaints. Moviegoers who were shown the trailer in Los Angeles reportedly were shouting “Too soon!”

Too soon for what? Too soon to disrupt your comfortable denial of the new world we live in? Unfortunately, the families of the victims of the vicious animals that hijacked those flights never got the opportunity to voice opposition to the attacks. They never had the chance to tell the hijackers, “No, no, it’s too soon!”

Too many Americans have been way too comfortable for way too long. People that say “too soon” are just refusing to accept the inevitable - that we have an enemy that we must deal with before they deal with us.