I am a proud Veteran,
---
being proud of killing and destruction is a mental disorder.

  and yes, I have stood on the wall to protect folks like you who are 
worthless drains and dregs on our society. 
---
delusion noted. 

You should salute folks like me and be thankful!
---
I should piss on your graves and pity your children.

On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 11:03:15 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>
> Hey Sissy-Pus!  
>
> I am a proud Veteran, and yes, I have stood on the wall to protect folks 
> like you who are worthless drains and dregs on our society.  
>
> You should salute folks like me and be thankful!
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:54 AM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> As a proud Veteran
>> ---
>> so you're a fucking warmonger.
>> those who choose war are the first to die.
>>
>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 10:50:01 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>
>>> As a proud Veteran, I will compare my acts of Patriotism against yours 
>>> any day of the week, Pussy....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:47 AM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> How do you justify your Anti-Semitism
>>>> ---
>>>> I don't have anything against semites .. but you do.
>>>>
>>>> Sem·ite
>>>> ˈsemīt/
>>>> *noun*
>>>>
>>>>    1. a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic 
>>>>    language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.
>>>>    
>>>>
>>>>  ... and you're pos zionist xian and a traitor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 10:42:31 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides not being all that well informed, (you've made clear where you 
>>>>> obtain your news and who your sources are);  it's dawned on me the last 
>>>>> six 
>>>>> or ten months that you're really not all that bright....
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you justify your Anti-Semitism with your obvious support for 
>>>>> the likes of George Soros, the Democratic Party; and those who subscribe 
>>>>> to 
>>>>> the entire Jewish Socialistic/Communistic theorem?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's got to be perplexing for you, even though it's abundantly clear 
>>>>> that you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer......
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ​
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:35 AM, plainolamerican <
>>>>> plainol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> believe your own lies often?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [image: Image result for US zionist christians]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 10:15:01 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes.....You do.  Your far left Anti-American rhetoric on a daily 
>>>>>>> basis establishes who you support, much less your choice for candidates:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>> From: plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:02 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Your 2016 Presidential Picks
>>>>>>> To: PoliticalForum <politic...@googlegroups.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Candidates you side with...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 89%
>>>>>>> [image: Hillary Clinton]Hillary Clinton  Democratic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> on economic, domestic policy, healthcare, social, education, and 
>>>>>>> environmental issues.
>>>>>>> compare answers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556209>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 82%
>>>>>>> [image: Bernie Sanders]Bernie Sanders  Democratic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> on environmental, domestic policy, healthcare, social, and economic 
>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>> compare answers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556211>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 61%
>>>>>>> [image: John Kasich]John Kasich  Republican
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> on environmental and electoral issues.
>>>>>>> compare answers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:585676237>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 56% 
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
>>>>>>> [image: Jeb Bush] 
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>Jeb
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Bush  Republican 
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> on healthcare, immigration, and criminal issues.
>>>>>>> compare answers 
>>>>>>> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:20 AM, plainolamerican <
>>>>>>> plainol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  the woman who you support for POTUS
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> wrong agian ... I don't vote for democrats or republicans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump courts Republican Jews with offensive stereotypes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WASHINGTON – Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on 
>>>>>>>> Thursday invoked a series of stereotypes about Jews that are often 
>>>>>>>> deemed 
>>>>>>>> offensive and even anti-Semitic — in an address to Jewish Republicans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “I’m a negotiator like you folks were negotiators,” the 
>>>>>>>> controversial candidate declared to his audience at the Republican 
>>>>>>>> Jewish 
>>>>>>>> Coalition, as he explained that he would broker a stronger nuclear 
>>>>>>>> deal 
>>>>>>>> with Iran than the one concluded earlier this year. At another point 
>>>>>>>> in his 
>>>>>>>> speech, he said: “Is there anyone in this room who doesn’t negotiate 
>>>>>>>> deals? 
>>>>>>>> Probably more than any room I’ve ever spoken.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> His speech came at the tail end of a morning of addresses in which 
>>>>>>>> the other Republican candidates boasted of their pro-Israel 
>>>>>>>> credentials and 
>>>>>>>> their close ties to the US Jewish community.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although Trump did reiterate his tight ties with his “friend” Prime 
>>>>>>>> Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the audience wasn’t tolerant of the 
>>>>>>>> mogul’s 
>>>>>>>> attempts to duck a question on Jerusalem. Asked about his position on 
>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>> unification of the Israeli capital, Trump refused to commit – as most 
>>>>>>>> Republican candidates have – to declaring the city to be the eternal 
>>>>>>>> capital of the Jewish state, and was greeted with boos.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, the audience did not offer any negative response when 
>>>>>>>> Trump told them, “You’re not gonna support me even though you know I’m 
>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>> best thing that could ever happen to Israel. And I’ll be that.” He 
>>>>>>>> continued, evoking a stereotype about Jews, money and control, “And I 
>>>>>>>> know 
>>>>>>>> why you’re not going to support me. You’re not going to support me 
>>>>>>>> because 
>>>>>>>> I don’t want your money. Isn’t it crazy?”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> According to AP, he added: “You want to control your own 
>>>>>>>> politician.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump backtracked on comments that he made Wednesday in which he 
>>>>>>>> suggested that Israelis could sacrifice more than they had already for 
>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>> sake of peace.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “It has to be said that Israel has given a lot,” he acknowledged. 
>>>>>>>> “I don’t know whether or not they want to go that final step, you 
>>>>>>>> know, and 
>>>>>>>> that’s going to be up to them. But Israel has not been given the 
>>>>>>>> credit 
>>>>>>>> that they deserve for what they’ve done, I will say that. I will say 
>>>>>>>> that.” 
>>>>>>>> At the same time, he added that he didn’t know “if Israel has the 
>>>>>>>> commitment to make [a deal with the Palestinians]” or “if the other 
>>>>>>>> side 
>>>>>>>> has the commitment to make it.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump, who previously questioned whether President Barack Obama was 
>>>>>>>> born a US citizen, also reiterated insinuations that the president was 
>>>>>>>> hiding something, implying that perhaps he is crypto-Muslim.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “Radical Islamic terrorism — we have a president who refuses to use 
>>>>>>>> the term,” he complained. “There’s something going on with him that we 
>>>>>>>> don’t know about.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Earlier Thursday, the head of the Republican Party in Israel said 
>>>>>>>> that Trump should not not be the president of the United States. 
>>>>>>>> Speaking 
>>>>>>>> on Army Radio, Marc Zell said that American voters would be sure to 
>>>>>>>> recognize that the candidate did not possess the necessary qualities 
>>>>>>>> to 
>>>>>>>> lead his country.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “The voters understand that to lead the United States, you need a 
>>>>>>>> person who knows more than how to sell products, with all due respect 
>>>>>>>> to 
>>>>>>>> Donald Trump, and everything he has achieved in his career,” Zell 
>>>>>>>> said. “In 
>>>>>>>> my opinion, he cannot be president of the United States.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 9:16:34 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Plain Ol?  How is it that you can obfuscate and totally ignore the 
>>>>>>>>> fact that the woman who you support for POTUS is an Open Borders/Open 
>>>>>>>>> Trade" far left liberal extremist, who has championed increasing 
>>>>>>>>> Syrian 
>>>>>>>>> Rebels/Refugees by 550%?  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nevermind.  It's really quite clear when one thinks about it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:52 AM, plainolamerican <
>>>>>>>>> plainol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream*
>>>>>>>>>> *---*
>>>>>>>>>> RELIGIOUS 'CHARITIES' PROFIT FROM OPEN BORDERS
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thousands of Central American children crossing the border 
>>>>>>>>>> illegally could soon turn into asylum seekers armed with immigration 
>>>>>>>>>> lawyers provided by church groups and paid for by federal tax 
>>>>>>>>>> dollars.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> WND reported Friday 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/church-raising-money-for-illegals/> that 
>>>>>>>>>> Catholic Charities USA and other religious groups were working 
>>>>>>>>>> behind the 
>>>>>>>>>> scenes with the federal government to temporarily house and resettle 
>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>> children in dozens of communities across the United States.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Catholic Charities is running a fundraising campaign to help 
>>>>>>>>>> finance the resettlement of the illegal aliens, WND reported. But 
>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>> religious charities get the bulk of their funding not from private 
>>>>>>>>>> donors 
>>>>>>>>>> or church members putting checks into a basket. They get it from the 
>>>>>>>>>> federal government.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Alexandria, Va.-based Catholic Charities USA reported receiving 
>>>>>>>>>> $1.7 million in government grants in 2012, according to its IRS 
>>>>>>>>>> Form 990 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://catholiccharitiesusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/CCUSA-2013-990.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But one of the largest recipients of government funds to resettle 
>>>>>>>>>> immigrant children is the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The 
>>>>>>>>>> USCCB 
>>>>>>>>>> helps resettle not only unaccompanied alien children, or UACs, who 
>>>>>>>>>> enter 
>>>>>>>>>> the country illegally but also refugees fleeing persecution overseas 
>>>>>>>>>> who 
>>>>>>>>>> enter through legal channels.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The USCCB is one of nine agencies that receive hundreds of 
>>>>>>>>>> millions in tax dollars to resettle refugees and asylum seekers in 
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S. 
>>>>>>>>>> under contract with the federal government. Six of the nine 
>>>>>>>>>> contractors are 
>>>>>>>>>> religious groups, WND has learned, including the Lutheran 
>>>>>>>>>> Immigration and 
>>>>>>>>>> Refugee Service, Episcopal Migration Ministries, the Hebrew 
>>>>>>>>>> Immigrant Aid 
>>>>>>>>>> Society, the Church World Service and World Relief Corp., which 
>>>>>>>>>> includes a 
>>>>>>>>>> plethora of evangelical groups.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Catholic Bishops alone received $65.9 million in federal 
>>>>>>>>>> grants to care for unaccompanied alien children and refugees, 
>>>>>>>>>> according to 
>>>>>>>>>> its 2012 annual report 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.usccb.org/about/migration-and-refugee-services/upload/Annual-Report-2012.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> By contrast, the group raised $1.4 million from its own church 
>>>>>>>>>> members while federal loans and private-sector grants made up the 
>>>>>>>>>> remainder 
>>>>>>>>>> of the $71 million spent on the resettlements that year. That means 
>>>>>>>>>> 93 
>>>>>>>>>> percent of the USCCB’s spending on charity work with UACs and 
>>>>>>>>>> refugees was 
>>>>>>>>>> covered by the American taxpayer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Appleby, director of USCC’s Migration and Refugee Services 
>>>>>>>>>> Office, did not respond to calls and emails from WND seeking comment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Similar funding ratios have been found to be the norm with the 
>>>>>>>>>> Lutheran effort.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service reported total 
>>>>>>>>>> income of $41.7 million in 2012, and government grants accounted for 
>>>>>>>>>> $40.4 
>>>>>>>>>> million, or 96.8 percent of that amount, according to the 
>>>>>>>>>> nonprofit’s most 
>>>>>>>>>> recently reported Form 990 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2012/132/574/2012-132574854-0989f698-9.pdf>,
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> a disclosure that nonprofits must file with the Internal Revenue 
>>>>>>>>>> Service. 
>>>>>>>>>> The group raised only $1.3 million from private donors.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Miji Bell, press spokeswoman for Lutheran Immigration, also did 
>>>>>>>>>> not return calls Tuesday.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The money for refugees and asylum seekers may not even include 
>>>>>>>>>> the federal money funneled to Catholic Charities USA and other 
>>>>>>>>>> religious 
>>>>>>>>>> groups to resettle illegal border crossers coming into Texas, 
>>>>>>>>>> Arizona or 
>>>>>>>>>> New Mexico who arrive by themselves. The charities often subcontract 
>>>>>>>>>> with 
>>>>>>>>>> other charities, making it difficult to track the money.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The numbers of UACs coming through the Southern border have 
>>>>>>>>>> increased dramatically since 2009, and so have the costs, according 
>>>>>>>>>> to the 
>>>>>>>>>> Office of Refugee Resettlement, which operates within the Department 
>>>>>>>>>> of 
>>>>>>>>>> Health and Human Services.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eight years ago, the program averaged 6,775 referrals a year. In 
>>>>>>>>>> fiscal 2013 the number reached 24,668. Now, the agency is expecting 
>>>>>>>>>> 60,000 
>>>>>>>>>> referrals in 2014 at a cost to the U.S. government of more than $750 
>>>>>>>>>> million, up from less than $500 million in 2013 and less than $250 
>>>>>>>>>> million 
>>>>>>>>>> in 2009.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The University of Texas at El Paso’s National Center for Border 
>>>>>>>>>> Security and Immigration conducted a study 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://ncbsi.utep.edu/documents/UAC%20Project%20Site%20Visits/UTEP%20NCBSI%20Final%20Report%20March%2020%202014.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>  published 
>>>>>>>>>> in March in which it laid bare the major cause of the problem – 
>>>>>>>>>> exploitation of weak border enforcement policies by the U.S.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “Both Border Patrol and ICE ERO officers agreed that the lack of 
>>>>>>>>>> deterrence for crossing the U.S.-Mexican border has impacted the 
>>>>>>>>>> rate at 
>>>>>>>>>> which they apprehend UACs. Officers are certain that UACs are aware 
>>>>>>>>>> of the 
>>>>>>>>>> relative lack of consequences they will receive when apprehended at 
>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>> U.S. border,” the authors wrote on page 3 of the UTEP study. “UTEP 
>>>>>>>>>> was 
>>>>>>>>>> informed that smugglers of family members of UACs understand that 
>>>>>>>>>> once a 
>>>>>>>>>> UAC is apprehended for illegal entry into the United States, the 
>>>>>>>>>> individual 
>>>>>>>>>> will be re-united with a U.S. based family member pending the 
>>>>>>>>>> disposition 
>>>>>>>>>> of the immigration hearing. This process appears to be exploited by 
>>>>>>>>>> illegal 
>>>>>>>>>> alien smugglers and family members in the United States who wish to 
>>>>>>>>>> reunite 
>>>>>>>>>> with separated children.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How many of the Central American children will seek asylum is not 
>>>>>>>>>> clear at this point. The United Nations is considering granting some 
>>>>>>>>>> type 
>>>>>>>>>> of legal status to children in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras 
>>>>>>>>>> who can 
>>>>>>>>>> show evidence of being persecuted. An asylum seeker differs from a 
>>>>>>>>>> refugee 
>>>>>>>>>> in that the person comes into the U.S. on his own, often crossing 
>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>> border illegally, and then seeks to gain asylum through legal 
>>>>>>>>>> channels.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Included in President Obama’s $3.7 billion emergency aid package 
>>>>>>>>>> for dealing with the border crisis is $1.1 million for immigration 
>>>>>>>>>> lawyers 
>>>>>>>>>> to represent the illegal alien children. Another $1.8 billion would 
>>>>>>>>>> go 
>>>>>>>>>> toward resettling the children as opposed to deporting them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Don Barnett, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, said 
>>>>>>>>>> he would like to see the feds rein in the grants and loans to 
>>>>>>>>>> charities 
>>>>>>>>>> that resettle refugees and UACs seeking asylum.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The federal government gives out not only grants but loans, and 
>>>>>>>>>> the nonprofit charities are able to pocket 25 percent of whatever 
>>>>>>>>>> they 
>>>>>>>>>> collect on those loans, Barnett explained. He said many of the loans 
>>>>>>>>>> are 
>>>>>>>>>> made to refugees or UACs for travel purposes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “They actually hire collection agents to get the money back from 
>>>>>>>>>> the refugees,” he said. “It’s very profitable for the nonprofits, 
>>>>>>>>>> really 
>>>>>>>>>> quite profitable, and it has introduced perverse incentives into the 
>>>>>>>>>> whole 
>>>>>>>>>> process, into decision making and policy,” he said. “It totally 
>>>>>>>>>> disincentivizes rational thinking.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> These same religious charities can also be found lobbying 
>>>>>>>>>> Congress and the Obama administration for amnesty legislation and 
>>>>>>>>>> other 
>>>>>>>>>> policies that immigration watchdogs see as encouraging more illegal 
>>>>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On July 2 the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a 
>>>>>>>>>> letter  <http://www.usccb.org/news/2014/14-118.cfm>to Obama 
>>>>>>>>>> urging him not to send any of the unaccompanied children who had 
>>>>>>>>>> illegally 
>>>>>>>>>> crossed into the U.S. back to their home countries.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “Current law permits children from non-contiguous countries to 
>>>>>>>>>> remain in the country until their request for asylum or immigration 
>>>>>>>>>> relief 
>>>>>>>>>> is considered by an immigration judge,” said Eusebio Elizondo, 
>>>>>>>>>> auxiliary 
>>>>>>>>>> bishop of Seattle and chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic 
>>>>>>>>>> Bishops’ 
>>>>>>>>>> Committee on Migration. “This is a very vulnerable population which 
>>>>>>>>>> has 
>>>>>>>>>> been targeted by organized crime networks in Central America. To 
>>>>>>>>>> return 
>>>>>>>>>> them to these criminal elements without a proper adjudication of 
>>>>>>>>>> their 
>>>>>>>>>> cases is unconscionable.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And in 2011, the Catholic Bishops advocated for passage 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15398>
>>>>>>>>>>  of 
>>>>>>>>>> the DREAM Act, which would provide permanent legal status, some call 
>>>>>>>>>> it 
>>>>>>>>>> amnesty, to young people under 35 brought into the U.S. illegally by 
>>>>>>>>>> their 
>>>>>>>>>> parents if they had been here in the country since the age of 16 or 
>>>>>>>>>> younger, provided they had completed two years of college or 
>>>>>>>>>> military 
>>>>>>>>>> service.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Conflicts of interest?*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Dan Cadman, with the Center for Immigration Studies, says it’s a 
>>>>>>>>>> conflict of interest for a group that benefits financially from 
>>>>>>>>>> immigration 
>>>>>>>>>> – both legal and illegal – to try to influence immigration policy.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “It bothers me that any private organization is using a 
>>>>>>>>>> government funding stream for that purpose, not only Catholic 
>>>>>>>>>> Charities but 
>>>>>>>>>> Lutheran World Service, the Episcopal Church, they’ve all got their 
>>>>>>>>>> hands 
>>>>>>>>>> in the pie,” Cadman said. “The thing is that everyone understands 
>>>>>>>>>> that, 
>>>>>>>>>> with a wink and a nod, this so-called emergency money (from Obama) 
>>>>>>>>>> is not 
>>>>>>>>>> going to result in any substantial number of individuals being 
>>>>>>>>>> deported. 
>>>>>>>>>> It’s just not. How ironic to see an emergency budget supplemental 
>>>>>>>>>> request 
>>>>>>>>>> and then when you look at the details you see it’s all going to be 
>>>>>>>>>> chewed 
>>>>>>>>>> up for things like brick and mortar buildings for resettlement and 
>>>>>>>>>> not used 
>>>>>>>>>> in any useful way to stop this tidal wave of human beings.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cadman said there is “no doubt in my mind” that the religious 
>>>>>>>>>> NGOs or “non-governmental organizations” are working with the United 
>>>>>>>>>> Nations to get the children qualified as refugees or asylum seekers.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “The religious charities have had a hand in that,” he said. 
>>>>>>>>>> “There’s no doubt in my mind they are looking to afford people 
>>>>>>>>>> status in 
>>>>>>>>>> any way, shape or form because the end game is to not get them sent 
>>>>>>>>>> back to 
>>>>>>>>>> their country of origin.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Children don’t qualify as refugees*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Frank Head Jr., director of Immigration Services for Catholic 
>>>>>>>>>> Charities of Arkansas, said the Central American children would not 
>>>>>>>>>> qualify 
>>>>>>>>>> as refugees under the current United Nations definition, but it’s 
>>>>>>>>>> not out 
>>>>>>>>>> of the question that a special legal status could be created for the 
>>>>>>>>>> children.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “There’s no easy pat answer to that,” he told WND. “They will not 
>>>>>>>>>> get refugee status. That’s never been the case. There is a special 
>>>>>>>>>> set of 
>>>>>>>>>> regulations for children not accompanied by parents, but no 
>>>>>>>>>> immediate 
>>>>>>>>>> status. They get put into a special adjudication system. They never 
>>>>>>>>>> get 
>>>>>>>>>> called ‘refugees’ but there is a category, a process where a 
>>>>>>>>>> juvenile who 
>>>>>>>>>> is basically an orphan with no family to claim them could get a 
>>>>>>>>>> certain 
>>>>>>>>>> status (as an asylum seeker) after a lengthy court battle.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That court battle could be fought with federally funded lawyers, 
>>>>>>>>>> a development even more likely if Obama’s $3.7 billion in emergency 
>>>>>>>>>> aid 
>>>>>>>>>> gets passed by Congress.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “The actual answer, everyone wants to know (about the status), 
>>>>>>>>>> but the Obama administration has proposed a new set of regulations 
>>>>>>>>>> and $3.7 
>>>>>>>>>> billion to fund it,” Head said. “A juvenile, aside from the fact 
>>>>>>>>>> that they 
>>>>>>>>>> get special treatment if caught, and only in recent years have they 
>>>>>>>>>> been 
>>>>>>>>>> afforded that special status – they used to get thrown into adult 
>>>>>>>>>> jails – 
>>>>>>>>>> they now get treated as a juvenile. But there isn’t any immediate 
>>>>>>>>>> status. 
>>>>>>>>>> Definitely there is intensive meetings going on to possibly create 
>>>>>>>>>> some new 
>>>>>>>>>> status because the current refugee law doesn’t apply. They couldn’t 
>>>>>>>>>> qualify.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That’s because a refuge by definition is someone who has been 
>>>>>>>>>> pre-screened by the U.N. and then allowed to legally enter a host 
>>>>>>>>>> country.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “But these kids for the most part don’t qualify as refugees 
>>>>>>>>>> because you have to be part of a designated group facing political 
>>>>>>>>>> or 
>>>>>>>>>> religious persecution, but these are just kids fleeing from 
>>>>>>>>>> violence. 
>>>>>>>>>> They’re not running off all right-wing children or all left-wing 
>>>>>>>>>> children 
>>>>>>>>>> or government-inclined children,” Head said. “It’s not a religious 
>>>>>>>>>> sect, 
>>>>>>>>>> it’s not a political group, so they wouldn’t qualify for asylum 
>>>>>>>>>> status and 
>>>>>>>>>> so you would ultimately just ship them back and that’s what a lot of 
>>>>>>>>>> people 
>>>>>>>>>> want to do. You have a pretty good idea who that is.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Head said he doesn’t expect the Obama package to pass the 
>>>>>>>>>> Republican-dominated House.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pursuing the U.N.’s channels would be a totally separate approach.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “That would have to be for people who hadn’t entered the country 
>>>>>>>>>> yet,” Head said. “The U.N. would have to setup an office in say 
>>>>>>>>>> Guatemala 
>>>>>>>>>> or El Salvador and you could come there, make a case and possibly 
>>>>>>>>>> get 
>>>>>>>>>> refugee status and get a safe place to come. Even if the U.N. 
>>>>>>>>>> approves you 
>>>>>>>>>> it doesn’t mean the U.S. will let you in. But if someone’s already 
>>>>>>>>>> here you 
>>>>>>>>>> have to apply for asylum status.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He said the U.S. lets in 75,000 to 85,000 foreign refugees a 
>>>>>>>>>> year. “And at any given time there’s several million in the world.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is separate from the unaccompanied alien children who 
>>>>>>>>>> illegally cross the border and offer themselves up to be apprehended 
>>>>>>>>>> by 
>>>>>>>>>> Border Patrol agents then get turned over the Health and Human 
>>>>>>>>>> Services and 
>>>>>>>>>> given a piece of paper ordering them to appear at a deportation 
>>>>>>>>>> hearing two 
>>>>>>>>>> to three years down the road.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Read more at 
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/religious-charities-profit-from-open-borders/#S3JjHEIbWJ61tGx8.99
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thursday, 13 October 2016 
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Will Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream End Up Deciding 
>>>>>>>>>>> Election — for Trump? *
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Written by  William F. Jasper 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/itemlist/user/53-williamfjasper>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [image: Description: Will Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream 
>>>>>>>>>>> End Up Deciding Election — for Trump?] 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/media/k2/items/cache/88753bd16644c0558ada2e5c88abfccd_XL.jpg>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategists surely breathed a huge 
>>>>>>>>>>> sigh of relief when the 2nd Presidential Debate 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/24245-media-s-anti-trump-bias-obvious-in-second-presidential-debate>ended
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> without any mention of Clinton’s “open borders” comments, which had 
>>>>>>>>>>> recently been released by WikiLeaks. They know that, as with the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit vote 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/23501-independence-day-historic-brexit-victory-uk-votes-to-leave-eu>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> in the UK in June, the deadly reality of “open borders” could end 
>>>>>>>>>>> up having 
>>>>>>>>>>> a much greater impact on Election Day than the pro-Hillary media 
>>>>>>>>>>> polls are 
>>>>>>>>>>> showing. British voters revolted against the massive “Project 
>>>>>>>>>>> Fear” campaign 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/23488-brexit-crunch-time-cameron-co-ratchet-up-project-fear-before-vote>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> waged by Prime Minister David Cameron, President Obama, and 
>>>>>>>>>>> virtually all 
>>>>>>>>>>> of the British political, banking, academic, and media 
>>>>>>>>>>> establishment. 
>>>>>>>>>>> British voters demanded a return of their independence and 
>>>>>>>>>>> sovereignty. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Especially, they demanded control over their own borders, defying 
>>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>>> European Union’s claim of the right to decide who (and how many) 
>>>>>>>>>>> may 
>>>>>>>>>>> migrate to Britain.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So, Team Hillary’s strategists were undoubtedly relieved when 
>>>>>>>>>>> CNN’s Anderson Cooper and ABC’s Martha Raddatz did them a big favor 
>>>>>>>>>>> in the 
>>>>>>>>>>> second presidential debate last Sunday by saving their candidate 
>>>>>>>>>>> from 
>>>>>>>>>>> having to face her record and policies on open borders, 
>>>>>>>>>>> immigration, 
>>>>>>>>>>> refugees, illegal alien amnesty, and trade treaties. Specifically, 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cooper 
>>>>>>>>>>> and Raddatz made sure nobody brought up the matter of Hillary 
>>>>>>>>>>> Clinton’s 
>>>>>>>>>>> speech to Brazilian bankers in which she told of her “dream” of an 
>>>>>>>>>>> EU-style 
>>>>>>>>>>> hemispheric union of “open trade and open borders.”
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The “open borders” speech was one of many Clinton bombshells to 
>>>>>>>>>>> be dropped by the WikiLeaks organization, in a dump of thousands of 
>>>>>>>>>>> hacked 
>>>>>>>>>>> e-mails, two days before the debate. It goes to the heart of a 
>>>>>>>>>>> timely and 
>>>>>>>>>>> vital issue that millions of American voters consider very 
>>>>>>>>>>> important. 
>>>>>>>>>>> However, Cooper and Raddatz were intent on avoiding the open 
>>>>>>>>>>> borders issue 
>>>>>>>>>>> and insisted on obsessing instead on the conveniently leaked video 
>>>>>>>>>>> of 
>>>>>>>>>>> Donald Trump’s vulgar comments from more than a decade ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Specifically, in a speech to the Brazilian megabank, Banco Itau, 
>>>>>>>>>>> Mrs. Clinton said: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with 
>>>>>>>>>>> open 
>>>>>>>>>>> trade and open borders, sometime in the future with energy that's 
>>>>>>>>>>> as green 
>>>>>>>>>>> and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity 
>>>>>>>>>>> for every 
>>>>>>>>>>> person in the hemisphere."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The social chaos, terrorism, debt, banking crisis, currency 
>>>>>>>>>>> crisis, and other crises under which the European common market is 
>>>>>>>>>>> disintegrating, offer little to commend the European Union as a 
>>>>>>>>>>> hemispheric 
>>>>>>>>>>> model for Americans. The ongoing migration tsunami that is wracking 
>>>>>>>>>>> and 
>>>>>>>>>>> ruining the EU gives us a pretty good picture of what “open 
>>>>>>>>>>> borders” look 
>>>>>>>>>>> like. Europeans are finding out that the ugly reality is far 
>>>>>>>>>>> different from 
>>>>>>>>>>> the rosy pictures painted for decades by their politicians — 
>>>>>>>>>>> politicians of 
>>>>>>>>>>> the same internationalist mold as Hillary Clinton. Borders matter; 
>>>>>>>>>>> if you 
>>>>>>>>>>> don’t have them you can’t enforce them, and you don’t really even 
>>>>>>>>>>> have a 
>>>>>>>>>>> country.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hillary Clinton is extremely vulnerable on this issue, even if 
>>>>>>>>>>> we do not experience another terror attack by Islamic extremists in 
>>>>>>>>>>> this 
>>>>>>>>>>> country before the November election.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Clinton has leapfrogged over her former boss, President Obama, 
>>>>>>>>>>> and called for an even more radical Syrian refugee policy than his 
>>>>>>>>>>> very 
>>>>>>>>>>> unpopular program. In fact, she called for more than six times the 
>>>>>>>>>>> number 
>>>>>>>>>>> of refugees proposed by Obama. In a 2015 interview, she said the 
>>>>>>>>>>> United 
>>>>>>>>>>> States should accept 65,000 refugees from Syria; President Obama’s 
>>>>>>>>>>> Syrian 
>>>>>>>>>>> refugee plan, at the time, was for 10,000.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "We're facing the worst refugee crisis since the end of World 
>>>>>>>>>>> War II and I think the United States has to do more," the former 
>>>>>>>>>>> secretary 
>>>>>>>>>>> of state said on CBS's *Face the Nation*. 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-u-s-should-take-65000-syrian-refugees/>
>>>>>>>>>>>  "I 
>>>>>>>>>>> would like to see us move from what is a good start with 10,000 to 
>>>>>>>>>>> 65,000 
>>>>>>>>>>> and begin immediately to put into place the mechanisms for vetting 
>>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>>> people that we would take in."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, the “mechanisms for vetting people” comment was an 
>>>>>>>>>>> obligatory throwaway line meant to placate voters’ national 
>>>>>>>>>>> security 
>>>>>>>>>>> concerns. But it was totally devoid of content, since our top 
>>>>>>>>>>> security officials have repeatedly pointed out 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/21638-no-vetting-of-syrian-refugees-in-obama-s-resettlement-invasion>
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> there is no way for us to properly vet these “refugees.” However, 
>>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>>> refugee issue is only one part of Hillary’s “open borders” 
>>>>>>>>>>> equation; she 
>>>>>>>>>>> has also spent a political lifetime — as first lady, senator, 
>>>>>>>>>>> secretary of 
>>>>>>>>>>> state, Clinton Foundation chieftess — promoting and supporting 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-and-immigration/>illegal 
>>>>>>>>>>> alien amnesty, increased immigration, entitlements of every kind 
>>>>>>>>>>> for 
>>>>>>>>>>> immigrants (legal and illegal) and fast-track citizenship, and 
>>>>>>>>>>> fast-track 
>>>>>>>>>>> voting.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Beyond the refugee/migrant/immigrant matters that are big-ticket 
>>>>>>>>>>> items for the large pool of voters Donald Trump is aiming at, there 
>>>>>>>>>>> is the 
>>>>>>>>>>> “open trade” and “hemispheric common market” component that crosses 
>>>>>>>>>>> party 
>>>>>>>>>>> and ideological lines, energizing huge numbers of conservative 
>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans, 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ron Paul Libertarians, and Bernie Sanders Democrats and 
>>>>>>>>>>> Independents. To 
>>>>>>>>>>> this broad swath of Americans, the WikiLeaks “open borders” leak 
>>>>>>>>>>> confirms 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hillary’s firm commitment to the deadly trade deals such as the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Trans-Pacific 
>>>>>>>>>>> Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment 
>>>>>>>>>>> Partnership (TTIP) 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/21010-10-reasons-why-you-should-oppose-obamatrade>
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For the past year and a half, Hillary has been trying to 
>>>>>>>>>>> convince voters that despite her role in helping craft the TPP and 
>>>>>>>>>>> TTIP (as 
>>>>>>>>>>> secretary of state), publicly praising it more than 45 times (as 
>>>>>>>>>>> even the pro-Clinton CNN notes 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/15/politics/45-times-secretary-clinton-pushed-the-trade-bill-she-now-opposes/>),
>>>>>>>>>>>  and 
>>>>>>>>>>> having described the TPP as the “gold standard” of trade 
>>>>>>>>>>> agreements. Much 
>>>>>>>>>>> of the opposition to the TPP, the TTIP, and other multilateral 
>>>>>>>>>>> "trade" 
>>>>>>>>>>> agreements of this type has focused on the enormous economic harm 
>>>>>>>>>>> that 
>>>>>>>>>>> NAFTA has done, especially in terms of millions of lost jobs and 
>>>>>>>>>>> the loss 
>>>>>>>>>>> of America's once world-dominant manufacturing and technology base. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Equally 
>>>>>>>>>>> important, though less understood, however, are the numerous 
>>>>>>>>>>> attacks on 
>>>>>>>>>>> national sovereignty woven into the fabrics of NAFTA, TPP, and 
>>>>>>>>>>> TTIP. Like 
>>>>>>>>>>> the various treaties that have incrementally transformed the EU 
>>>>>>>>>>> into the 
>>>>>>>>>>> centralized and increasingly tyrannical behemoth it has become, 
>>>>>>>>>>> these 
>>>>>>>>>>> regional "trade" treaties actually establish bodies with 
>>>>>>>>>>> legislative, 
>>>>>>>>>>> executive, and judicial functions that are designed to gradually 
>>>>>>>>>>> transform 
>>>>>>>>>>> into a regional government that will override our own 
>>>>>>>>>>> constitutionally 
>>>>>>>>>>> limited government. Hillary Clinton is well aware of these dangers 
>>>>>>>>>>> that she 
>>>>>>>>>>> has helped build into the TPP and TTIP. The believability of her 
>>>>>>>>>>> convenient 
>>>>>>>>>>> flip-flop on this crucial issue is about zero; she can be counted 
>>>>>>>>>>> on to 
>>>>>>>>>>> flip again, if she gets to the Oval Office. Her current anti-TPP 
>>>>>>>>>>> stance is 
>>>>>>>>>>> most certainly her “public position,” at the moment, but what does 
>>>>>>>>>>> she 
>>>>>>>>>>> really intend to do on the matter? One of the other inconvenient 
>>>>>>>>>>> (for 
>>>>>>>>>>> Clinton) WikiLeaks revelations concerned her admission of 
>>>>>>>>>>> duplicity, in one 
>>>>>>>>>>> of her high-paid speeches to high-end investors, asserting that 
>>>>>>>>>>> politicians 
>>>>>>>>>>> need to be two-faced, having "both a public and a private position."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Project Fear/Project Smear*
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The political/business/media/academic elites that targeted the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit vote for defeat with “Project Fear” are the same 
>>>>>>>>>>> combined forces that have targeted Donald Trump with Project Smear 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/23440-bilderberg-elites-stop-trump-boost-hillary-stop-brexit-boost-migration>.
>>>>>>>>>>>  Following 
>>>>>>>>>>> the Brexit victory, an obviously chastened Richard Haass, president 
>>>>>>>>>>> of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> world government-promoting, pro-EU, pro-open borders Council on 
>>>>>>>>>>> Foreign Relations 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/1213-council-on-foreign-relations>
>>>>>>>>>>>  (CFR), 
>>>>>>>>>>> commented 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-brexit-warning-trump-2016-6>:
>>>>>>>>>>>  "For 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hillary Clinton's campaign, this is something of a warning not to 
>>>>>>>>>>> underestimate this disaffection, not to underestimate political and 
>>>>>>>>>>> economic nationalism."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hillary Clinton, who, while secretary of state, famously said 
>>>>>>>>>>> (in the presence of her “good friend” Richard Haass) that she 
>>>>>>>>>>> depended upon 
>>>>>>>>>>> the CFR to tell her what to do and what to think (see video of her 
>>>>>>>>>>> confession here 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/15288-cfr-brookings-celebrate-obama-lovefest-for-international-criminal-court>),
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> is obviously listening to the advice of Haass. She has flip-flopped 
>>>>>>>>>>> on TPP 
>>>>>>>>>>> and has sort of flip-flopped on migration-refugees. She is trying 
>>>>>>>>>>> to appeal 
>>>>>>>>>>> to all sides; appealing for the Hispanic/immigrant vote by 
>>>>>>>>>>> supporting 
>>>>>>>>>>> “comprehensive immigration reform” — the longtime code phrase for 
>>>>>>>>>>> amnesty 
>>>>>>>>>>> and open borders — while at the same time attempting to appeal to 
>>>>>>>>>>> Middle 
>>>>>>>>>>> America by insisting she intends to implement stringent vetting of 
>>>>>>>>>>> refugees/immigrants. The open question is how many American voters 
>>>>>>>>>>> will 
>>>>>>>>>>> believe her new “public position” on open borders — and how many 
>>>>>>>>>>> will 
>>>>>>>>>>> believe — or be influenced by/distracted by — Project Smear.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>>>>>> software. 
>>>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> __._,_.___
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> Posted by: "Beowulf" <beo...@westerndefense.net> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Visit Your Group 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMzgwdTJwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NzY0MDIzNzE->
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>>    
>>>>>>>>>>>    
>>>>>>>>>>> [image: Yahoo! Groups] 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlN2sxc2c4BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ3NjQwMjM3Mg-->
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> • Privacy 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • 
>>>>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe • Terms of Use 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> 
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> __,_._,___
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>>>>>> For options & help see 
>>>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>>>> send an email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>>>> For options & help see 
>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>> send an email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>  
>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>
>>>> --- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>  
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to