Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Manassas Billboard Headed To Court

By Greg L | 28 May 2008 | Manassas City | 43 Comments

The MJM is reporting today that Manassas City officials are again recommending that Gaudencio Fernandez be taken to court for his continuing violations of city zoning ordinances, and given Fernandez’s continued intransigence, we may well see that finally happen.  While the city has bent itself over backwards trying to encourage Fernandez to comply with the law, it has obviously encouraged nothing but his continued defiance.  In the end, the city has played out a lot of rope that Fernandez has diligently wrapped around himself in a legal sense, and his self-destructive behavior will prove to be his absolute undoing.

This could end up being the best outcome possible.  Not only will this act of civic vandalism soon be removed, but because Fernandez actively encourages litigation against him, Manassas City may be able to make a perfect example out of him and establish a perfectly solid legal basis to prevent future acts of civic vandalism.  There are few things better than a defendant in this kind of case that demonstrates consistent and utter stupidity, and undermines his cause with every action he takes.  Now that he has alienated himself from virtually all of the other members of the illegal alien lobby, he still doesn’t understand what a disservice he is doing to his cause, and the trouble he is making for himself by continuing to defy local zoning authorities.

The wall is coming down.  It’s just a matter of when, and that can’t be soon enough for the residents of Manassas City.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

43 Comments

  1. BattleCat said on 28 May 2008 at 6:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    I still think they ought to put it on travel brochures.

  2. Red Dawn said on 28 May 2008 at 6:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    BattleCat,

    Now, that was funny! Cheers :)

  3. ateacher said on 28 May 2008 at 7:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    I have always thought it rude (to say the least) that Mr. Fernandez ignored not only the historical significance (to african americans and historians) of the home that once stood at that corner, but that he used the remaining wall to suggest that the current immigrant plight is akin to slavery. (And lately there has been the installation of two port-a-potties.) I feel that Mr. Fernandez has succeeded in destroying a home of historical significance, and then he further rubs salt in the wounds by suggesting that current immigrants suffer the same fate of slaves. At no point in the year 2008 have hispanic people been brought to the USA in bondage, against their will. To even suggest that current times remotely resemble what slaves in this country went through is a kick in their decendants faces.

  4. josh said on 28 May 2008 at 7:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    is this guy an idiot? he’s going to lose, the city is actually playing it quite nicely and has strung him along until he has not an option left. I dont care what legal counsel he has, he’s not going to win this one. his appeal period is over, the fact that he’s recalcitrant and has been so in print multiple times wont go over well with the city for sure. His support base is eroding and the very people he claims to advocate for are backing away.

    what a tool!

  5. josh said on 28 May 2008 at 7:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    ateacher,

    the only time hispanics are brought here in slave and bondage are by there own people (coyotes) so if they need to blame anyone they should turn the finger on themselves.

  6. Marceline Harris said on 28 May 2008 at 7:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    It is an outrage that the city has “bent over backwards” in this matter,
    and for what? Some one please explain this to me, for it is beyond my
    comprehension. Political correctness is destroying this country IMO.
    Josh, what do you suppose would happen if you were to erect such an
    idiotic sign on your property?
    ateacher, you are absolutely correct. They have themselves to blame,
    just as WE have ourselves to blame for putting up with this crap for longer
    than we should have.

  7. manassascityresident said on 28 May 2008 at 9:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    Marceline Harris said on 28 May 2008 at 7:57 pm:

    AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!

  8. SickoftheSign said on 28 May 2008 at 9:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Ditto” to Marceline Harris and her post of 28 May-7:57 pm! I am a resident of the City of Manassas and I am delighted that something is finally being done about that ugly eyesore in our fine city!! Time for the sign to come down!!

  9. anon said on 28 May 2008 at 10:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    In my opinion, the house had no historical significance–difference between old and historical

  10. Dan Cooper said on 28 May 2008 at 10:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Do you suppose Manassas City will call upon any of the scores of citizens who have spoken against the sign and property owner at citizens’ time to explain to the court what impact all this has had on them and their property values?

  11. Dan Cooper said on 28 May 2008 at 10:26 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, I really like the advertising link at the top of the bvbl tonight!

    http://www.uscitizenship.info/?ad=adwords&keyword=ins468

  12. anonymous21 said on 28 May 2008 at 10:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anon, I agree. The house was in ill repair for decades. No waxing poetic here. It used to be an eye sore and now its remains, the final wall, is an eye sore.

  13. 999 said on 28 May 2008 at 11:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    Woa! Not so fast. The only thing positive lately about the sign was the call for it’s removal by the MJM in today’s paper. What positive steps has the COM done lately other than cowtow to Fernandez. He should have been taken to court a year ago (win or lose.) It will be many more months before the sign is removed (if the city in fact takes him to court.)

  14. Maureen Wood said on 29 May 2008 at 6:33 am:
    Flag comment

    Fernandez thinks he is above the law. And scince the city has NEVER enforced any of the violations he has been cited with for the past TWO years its no wonder. Koodos to the MJM for letting the public know exactly how some of the illegal alien lobby operates. The laws don’t apply to them.

  15. SLB said on 29 May 2008 at 6:58 am:
    Flag comment

    FINALLY, FINALLY, FINALLY.

  16. Anonyboy said on 29 May 2008 at 9:19 am:
    Flag comment

    Don’t you guys believe in freedom of speech?

  17. manassascityresident said on 29 May 2008 at 9:56 am:
    Flag comment

    Anonyboy said on 29 May 2008 at 9:19 am:
    Don’t you guys believe in freedom of speech?

    Nice try, Anonyboy. Perhaps you should go back and read the entire article again.

  18. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 29 May 2008 at 10:00 am:
    Flag comment

    I said this way back when:

    http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/03/25/mexicans-without-borders-defaces-manassas-again/#comment-58766

    and it still holds true today. When a sufficient amount of rope has been extended out to properly hang the person, then it will be time to strike. Let him think he is winning when in fact the city is flanking him as we speak.

    BTW, I think I posted the 60k post as well :)

  19. josh said on 29 May 2008 at 10:08 am:
    Flag comment

    Medic,

    I totally agree, it’s easy to string him along and ensure that plenty of people get upset along the way (which is what is happening) once the hammer drops he’ll have little to no recourse. Either he’ll tear the sign down himself, or the city will do it for him. Would be nice if he lost the property all together.

  20. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 29 May 2008 at 10:09 am:
    Flag comment

    anonboy, this isn’t about freedom of speech, this is about violating laws and ordinances. Since this action is not abridging or prohibiting the wall, it is not covered under the 1st amendment. The action is for the lack of compliance to ordinances. The city didn’t tell him he couldn’t have the sign, they told him he had to abide by the ordinances for having the sign.

  21. /\/\3|)iç 64 (Winner of the BVBL 40k and 50k post award) said on 29 May 2008 at 10:10 am:
    Flag comment

    josh, I wouldn’t want him to loose the property just as I wouldn’t want you to loose your home or property. He can keep his property, it just has to be in compliance with the ordinances that have been enacted within the city.

  22. josh said on 29 May 2008 at 10:59 am:
    Flag comment

    i would hope that it does not reach that far, probably wont. I would hope that he would want to follow applicable laws but it appears he wont do a simple task such as file a permit so he apparently has little use for the law (or the property) other than to make a mockery of it all. It would be really nice if he just used the property for it’s purpose, building a house.

  23. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 11:39 am:
    Flag comment

    Every now and then I have to apologize for carrying a concept forward from a previous post so give it a decent chance for people to read an important issue and comment on it before they move on. This means I have to try to make the issue relevant to the current topic.
    A while back, Greg posted a great article warning about the destructive nature and militancy of ethnic and racial groups advocating for their own racist cause. He correctly denounces that as immoral, unlawful, and unjust. I post something like the following about the injustice and danger of racial hatred, destructive “diversity” concepts, and racial militancy:

    Michael said on 23 May 2008 at 7:36 pm:
    More blatant arrogant, hatred, self-segregation, separatism and “diversity” promotion along racial, gender, religious and ethnic groups lines, instead of the “integration” we are all supposed to believe these “diversity”, factioned polictical groups want us to belief they falsely represent.

    Rather than “integration” this “group diversity” demand for privilege and power simply promotes national identity destruction, racism, elitism and cultural warfare.

    It makes me sick…real integration is a thing of the past now.

    and I get back an answer that defies all logic and evidence of intelligent thought.

    The Truth said on 23 May 2008 at 7:44 pm:
    Michael,

    I think you’re a fascist. Freedom = Diversity.

    I had to take some time to think about how anyone could possibly equate “diversity” with freedom, and then call someone a ” fascist”, when they are against racial militancy and racial hatred, racial extremism, racial seperatism, and ethnic self-segregation.

    I realized that people like the man that created the sign like the one above is totally ignorant of any concept other than his own racial and ethnic group welfare, and his own concept of what “freedom” means. Freedom to people like this means, I’m the only racial and ethic group that matters on this planet and everyone else can be de-nigrated, oppressed, hated, and made into a racial enemy.

    All I need to do is advocate that “diversity” and “inclusion” is a noble cause to bring as many different ethnically and culturally segregated people as possible that demand different religions, different political ideologies aligned along gender, racial, religious and ethnic group privileges, demand cultural politics be made into laws that benifit only ethnic groups, and demand as many languages as possible (especially my own) be recognized as a arrogant means to remain seperate and divided from the common society, and I don’t care if my support for “diversity” gives me a numerical advantage to benefit more than any other individual that belongs to a majority group. I don’t care if my ethnic group militance and arrogance puts people into close conflict with each other becuase my goal is to militantly force everyone to adopt my ethnic belief system, because I want to destroy their belief system, take it over and destroy the current “national identity” so my ethnic group and cultural, religious ideology will dominate all others. I will use their own words of “Freedom” and “Group Rights” against them to prevail as the dominant ethnic group and political ideology. Those that sympathize with me, as “socialists” will assist my ultimate cause to defeat democracy and integration, and take over the regional political government with my cultural and political idealogy.

    I was very upset to realize people believe that “diversity”= “freedom” and “anarchy” = “peace”. I was even more upset to be called a “facist” when my comments are clearly about the need for “integration” and the denouncement of cultural and ethnic group separatism, hatred, segregation and militancy.

    I just realized that people are clearly “ignorant” in what they understand about the world. So I am going to do my very best to educate people who don’t understand, what freedom really means, diversity really means, integration really means and facism really means, so they don’t go around spouting the very concepts that will ultimately destroy our nation and our peaceful world.

    This is a long post so I will do my best to do it in short “bullets”.

  24. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 11:43 am:
    Flag comment

    This sign is clearly a militant symbol for ethnic group hatred and intended to incite hatred, anger and disintegration of national identity along ethnic group advocacy lines in favor of ethnic group self-segregation and privilege.
    That is why it is so wrong.

  25. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 12:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    First let’s understand what “facism” is:

    Fascism is a government, faction, movement, or political philosophy that raises nationalism, and frequently race, above the individual and is characterized by a centralized autocratic state governed by a dictatorial head, stringent organization of the economy and society, and aggressive repression of opposition.[1] In addition to placing the interests of the individual as subordinate to that of the nation or race, fascism seeks to achieve a national rebirth by promoting cults of unity, energy and purity.[2][3][4][5]

    Fascists promote a type of national unity that is usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, national, racial, and/or religious attributes. Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: patriotism, nationalism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, economic planning (including corporatism and autarky), populism, collectivism, autocracy and anti-liberalism (i.e., opposition to political and economic liberalism).[6][7][8][9][10][11][12]

    The key element in understanding this concept is promotion of a national unity that is based on ethnic, cultural, national, racial or religious attributes. In other words “separate” yourselfs into self-identifying ethnic and religious groups, demand separation into ethnic groups by law and legal advocacy, demand privilege, organize into ethnic aligned social and political groups and then refer to your group as “us” and “them”. i.e. We “demand” that you allow us to claim we are the “real” native Americans. “You” are the oppressors because you will not allow us to segregate into our own ethnic and political groups to defeat you. You will not a allow “us” to break “your” laws. And if you try to stop our cultural revolution, self segregation, refusal to integrate, and not give us our demands for ethnic privilege, we will call you “facists”, “racists” and members of the KKK.

    Funny how every militant group advocating “black power”, or “brown power”, “red power”, “yellow power” or “religious power” sees only the “other” group” as the KKK. Oops..what we are really saying is you are “bad” if you are a majority, and you are only bad if you are “white”.

    Ignorance, complete ignorance of what “facism and “racism” really means. “racism” is ANY political entity aligned along racial and ethnic group lines advocating for their own special privileges and “laws” while trying to oppress and destroy all other “individuals” not part of their ethnic or racial group using concepts that promote your ethnic group supremacy using a concept of “diversity” that really means “privilege” and “advantage” and “racial” balancing so you get 50% or more political leverage and power even if your ethnic group only represents 10% of the individuals in a nation.

    When you see it, you need to denounce it, because it will lead to war and conflict. You have only to look at the rest of the world’s religious and ethnic wars to know this.

    The cancer is group segregation, cultural and ethnic group political identification and “diversity” advocacy rather than “integration” advocacy.

  26. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 12:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    If you do not focus only on “individual rights”, only on following the “law” applied equally to all regardless of ethnic, gender, racial and religious group” and DEMAND “integration” of individuals into a common society, “privilege” based only on talent, skills, ability and intelligence blind to racial, gender, religious and ethnic group identity and political advocacy, then you will yourself, be the very racist, facist, and privilege seeking racial, gender, religious and ethnic group you so clearly denounce, seek conflict with, self-segregate from, and hate when you are not the majority.

    Truth: I am way distant from being a “facist”. I’m trying to save my Nation from self destruction and disintegration from within as a result of its recent belief in destructive socialist ideologies.

    I belong to NO ethnic, racial, gender or religious group.

  27. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 12:35 pm:
    Flag comment

    Freedom according to the concept of Greek democracy, is a gift only to individuals. It opposes all political oppression along ethnic, racial, gender, religious group lines. It is individual “freedom” to not be oppressed by any self-identifying group, advocating the use and exercise of “diverse” laws, and to not be oppressed and forced into conflict by social division into “political groups” that advocate for complete political control and dominance over all other racial, ethnic, gender, and religious groups that don’t belong to their own. Freedom is the basic right for each individual to be a “member” of an “integrated” and culturally “united” and politically “united” nation, in those days known as “Greece” and “Greecians”, where a multitude of “captured” cultures were politcally and socially “integrated” under a “common” law obeyed by all. “diversity”, “disintegration”, “factionism”, and “political” and “cultural” separatism, was not part of the Greek equation of Freedom and Democracy.

    Freedom did not equal “diversity” and “ethnic group” political power. In the Greek Senate, Freedom and Democracy equaled “individual” rights (only), common law and integration”. Out of many, one. Not out of many, many.

  28. AWCheney said on 29 May 2008 at 12:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    Yankee Boy said on 29 May 2008 at 11:39 am:

    You might want to check your own local ordinances, Boy, and see what is allowed and NOT ALLOWED in historic districts…assuming, of course, that you don’t live in a totally primitive area with absolutely no historic districts so the issue is not addressed. If I’m reading correctly, you are advocating breaking the law…is that a distinguishing feature of Yankees? Is lack of appropriate vocabulary also a distinguishing feature?

  29. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 1:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    Freedom and Democracy does not promote that is is OK to seek politcal advantage and advocacy using ethnic, racial, gender and religious group self-segration and alignment to gain economic and social advantage or to make laws that benefit only one gender, racial, religious or ethnic group over all other individuals (so called “protected classes”).

    Such concepts will destroy Democracy, hurt all individuals and remove individual freedoms and protection for ALL under fair and equitable laws, resulting in a conflicted and warring society align along racial, gender, religious and ethnic group lines.

    What do you think is happening in this national presidential election? Destruction of “integration”, Freedom and Democracy and replacement by political “factions” aligned along racial, gender, religious and ethnic group lines of advocacy. THAT leads to “facism” and militant signs like the one above.

    Most of you “social engineers” just don’t get this concept of impending national destruction, because you don’t notice it happening in the rest of the world’s religious, racial, and ethnic group wars. It has come home to America.

  30. save america said on 29 May 2008 at 8:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think “Michael” writes too much and says nothing on the topic

  31. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 10:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    SA you may just have deaf ears. If you think I’m saying nothing then tell me what you think needs to be discussed instead about this national identity and multiculturalism issue.

    Do you have a better explaination for why the rest of the world is fighting ethnic and religious wars? Do you firmly believe these issues of ethnic hatred and ethnic superiority do not exist here in the US?

    Do you believe that racial, religious, gender and ethnic groups should proliferate and advocate only for their own politcal agendas (as they are) without taking care of everyone equally?

    Would it make sense to you if one of these ethnic, gender, racial, and religious group’s that advocate and demand special privilege and laws that apply only to them was a “white power” political advocacy group?

    I’m telling you ALL of them are wrong and hateful. Do you disagree that these groups should not be allowed to operate?

  32. Michael said on 29 May 2008 at 10:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    Perhaps you should read Thomas Jefferson’s concerns about “individual” rights, instead of group rights, or Ben Franklin, or John Adams.

    Nothing will destroy a nation faster than group political advocacy along racial, gender, religious or ethnic group lines of group supremacy and self-interests.

  33. Red, White and Blue said on 30 May 2008 at 12:40 am:
    Flag comment

    Nothing destroys a nation faster than millions of illegal aliens who refuse to join the very nation that is feeding them, giving them a free education, free health care (both of the latter by the Supreme Court), protections they never had in their own countries and then wave their flags in our faces and claim we are illegals, killers, slave owners and murderers all in the name of wanting to be “good citizens” by trying to make me feel like I am bad and owe them something they did not earn, did not respect and are not entitled to.

    Read what Teddy Roosevelt said about immigration, language and the borders. Read the Constitution and the protections it affords its CITIZENS.

    That is my free speech and it is the truth. I don’t have to listen to some stupid, ignorant rant about how bad we (I) am. That sign can go to hell.

  34. Maureen Wood said on 30 May 2008 at 3:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    I want proof that the city is going to take legal action on this. It was suggested by staff MONTHS ago that legal action be taken and yet NOTHING was done. Won’t believe it ’til I see it.

  35. silverfox said on 30 May 2008 at 9:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    Let’s be careful to not get too hopeful that anything will really change. I’m with Maureen. If it has taken these city officials 2 years to push this rock down the path, how long will it actually take to the push the rock up the mountain? Shall we begin the countdown?

  36. ateacher said on 30 May 2008 at 10:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    Michael I read what you said on 5/29 at 12:35 and I find it interesting. How did the Greeks encompass these ideals into their education processes? Were their slaves afforded any education or freedoms? What about their children? How were they educated? If we apply the principles you described..would democracy be pro-choice or anti-choice? Would religion ever interfere with a woman’s right to choose?

  37. AWCheney said on 30 May 2008 at 10:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    Ateacher, if I remember my Classical Greek History properly, the pure democracy of the Golden Age of Greece was actually only made possible by the institution of slavery, which is what makes pure democracy an impractical form of government…and a contradiction in terms.

  38. Michael said on 12 Jun 2008 at 8:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    aTeacher, I know this is a very late post, so no one will likely read it, but if I remember Greek slaves at one time in the democratic development process were given the right to vote (I think partially however 1 citizen vote = 2 non-citizen votes was the law passed by the Greek Senate senate.) They were generally educated in the home of their owners and children were often educated with the owner’s children. If there was cruelty, I read it was not wide-spread and members of any given greek household were generally treated with respectl, they were just not paid for their labor as slaves. I could be wrong about these historical generalities as I am no expert on Greek slavery. I believe they would have been pro-individual and pro-choice if you had the right to vote. Women in Greek society however if I remember were not declared citizens and therefore had no voting rights. I agree it would have been difficult to live as a woman at that time, but I believe they also owned property and had rights to family wealth, & huge dowerys. Religion has always interfered with a woman’s right to choose. That has not changed even today based on most religious doctrines as I understand them, except rights under common law and “Individual Rights” of the US Constitution (thank God)…

  39. John Burton said on 16 Jun 2008 at 10:08 am:
    Flag comment

    Why the hell is this wall still standing!?!?
    It is hate speech dirrected at White Amaricans.
    It is NOT pro immigration, it is just insulting rhetoric to MY ancestors.

    Does no one have the courage to simply destroy it?
    Why?

    We need to join together. Pick a day and DO IT.
    It needs to be brought down.

    Anyone willing to do so?….

    ….

  40. Greg L said on 16 Jun 2008 at 10:27 am:
    Flag comment

    It is not a matter of a lack of courage to destroy this, it is a respect for the law that would prohibit such activities. The way to resolve an issue of unlawful behavior is not to engage in further unlawful behavior.

  41. John Burton said on 16 Jun 2008 at 10:55 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg, I respect what you are doing, and recognize that it takes courage.

    I just beleive this sign is spouting hatred towards a segment of the community. It is disrespectfull of our heritage and culture.

    It is NOT pro-immigrant it is ANTI-european.

    It needs to be brought down by citizens as a demonstration that we will NOT be treated this way.

    I realize that you can not condone illegal actions on your site, and have never done so. (Though I think destroying the wall is civil disobience and protest).
    I will respect that by not posting any farther on your site.
    Thank you.

  42. WayOffCourse said on 11 Jul 2008 at 2:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    The USA has a long and rich history of war, genocide (against native peoples), slavery, racism and exploitation of immigrants. Haven’t any of you ever read a history book?

    Why is it so hard for modern-day Americans to acknowledge the sins of their past?

    I’m not saying this country isn’t deserving of redemption. It is. There have always been and will continue to be courageous Americans who will go against the tide and work to make this country better for future generations.

    So this man puts up a sign (on his private property) airing his grievances with perceived injustices committed by the county and city he lives in. Contrary to the outrageous claims by some previous posters, the sign does not explicitly display any specific hate speech or incite a call to violence. So what gives? Does the first amendment of the US Constitution have no significance anymore? This is a clearly a case of the local authorities attempting to suppress a citizen’s constitutional right to free speech through the dubious use of a technicality regarding building permits or some other trivial matter … all because they don’t want to be publicly embarrassed by the exposure of their policies and actions. Well, you reap what you sow.

    I somewhat agree that PWC’s immigrations policies, as draconian and heavy-handed as they are, aren’t really the equivalent of the gross atrocities committed by the KKK, but the mans’ tendency toward exaggeration can be addressed in a more constructive and civilized manner than advocating trespass and destruction of his property.

    To John Burton:

    Advocating vandalism and destruction is not an act of civil disobedience. Anyone who claims so does not understand the nature of civil disobedience. Mr. Fernandez is a private citizen, not a civil authority … meaning he’s not “the man.” Stop being so irresponsible in your statements.

  43. Jade said on 16 Jul 2008 at 3:28 am:
    Flag comment

    It really bothers me when I see these comments about the USA being “stolen” and/or the land of Aztlan being “stolen.” They always try to make it sound like it’s all about “their” land. None of this has anything to do with land. Mexico has no shortage of land. There are MANY countries that are much more densely populated, and the population density of Mexico isn’t much higher than that of the USA.

    I don’t consider the USA to be stolen land, but suppose we were to agree to be neighborly and gave them back the entire US southwest, EXACTLY AS IT EXISTED WHEN IT WAS “STOLEN.” Suppose we could magically wipe it all back to barren land…no homes, businesses, industry, roads, public services…just he virgin land they so desperately want back. Then suppose that, at the same time the land was turned over, we could also magically wall that off from what was left of the USA.

    Would they be satisfied to have “their” land back and take responsibility for it to make it into the paradise they assume it could have been, or would they be climbing the wall?

Comments are closed.


Views: 2475