Response to an email Slandering a Good American

Response to an email Slandering a Good American

 

I received an email attachment today from a group of Latinos who had taken it upon themselves to defend immigrants against Congressman E. James Sensenbrenner, who had had the audacity to introduce a law that would defend the sovereignty of the US by building a wall at the southern border and deporting illegals, although the emailer seemed not to notice that illegals were intended rather than immigrants per se.

It turned out to be a PowerPoint presentation in Spanish and a disproportionately large number of the addressees, who had passed it on, were employees of Allstate (that’s the company that fired executive Matt Barber for privately stating his opposition to the homosexual agenda a few years back).

The presentation said Sensenbrenner, the racist congressman from Wisconsin, had introduced the Sensenbrenner bill, which was intended to “try all immigrants [my italics] as criminals and punish anyone who gave any help and assistance in the form of work, or rented a residence or shelter to any immigrant.”

“The police could report you to the INS for a simple traffic violation or detain you simply for being an immigrant.”

It went on to complain about the draconian measures to be taken under this travesty of justice against all immigrants.

I thought: “Poor Governor Schwarzenegger! I wondered if he was warned.”

The letter also said Sensebrenner was the head of Kimberly Clark and demanded that all Latins boycott this company, specifically no longer buying Kotex, Kleenex, Scott, Huggies, Depend and Andrex.

I responded to them in the native tongue of those who had sent it. Here is a rough translation:

 

I received this email claiming that Congressman Sensenbrenner is a racist because he supposedly wants to “send back all immigrants.”

Sensenbrenner, whose ancestors were immigrants, never said such a thing and anyone who believes this is at least naïve but perhaps a liar himself.

What he really said was that the United States is a sovereign country, that is, a country like all other countries in the world, that has boundaries and that everyone must respect these boundaries.

Now, Sir or Madam, you who have received this email to which I am responding, I have a question for all of those who think the US has no right to defend its boundaries from the entry of people without passports or valid entry visas:

Do the authorities of your country of origin allow all people from poorer countries than yours to enter your country without visas?

Let me take Mexico, the country many Latinos naively consider a victim of US racism, as an example to answer my own question.

Did you know that many non-Mexican Latinos who illegally attempt to cross the border into Mexico, the supposed “victim” country, are robbed of their possessions and money and blackmailed by the Mexican authorities themselves?

Did you know that Mexican border guards even rape Latino women, for example, Guatemalans? And that these officials are obliged by Mexican law to detain and send back all illegal immigrants? Did you know that no such case of rape or robbery by American border guards has ever surfaced involving a North American immigration official and if such a case were to come to light, the perpetrating official would be immediately tried, jailed and relieved of his duties permanently?

But let’s get to the point:

If it is true in your view that North Americans who insist on legal entry, including a valid visa, for non-citizens to enter this country (by the way, these North Americans make up over 70% of our population and included many citizens of Latin origin) are all racists, then why do so many millions of Latinos want to enter this country every year, even risking their lives in the attempt to do so, only to live among us “racists”?

You know the answer to that: Because no Latino believes deep down inside that we are racists.

As an American citizen I am sick to death of hearing these lies about my country and the few Americans who have enough courage to tell the truth, namely, that no country in the world owes citizenship to all who care to live in that country.

Further, if there are so many Latinos who can’t stand the conditions, whether political or economic or other, in their country of origin, let them stay there and do what any good American would do, namely, work hard and fight to change the repressive climate in their own country.

Every time a Mexican border guard rapes a Central American woman or robs an illegal immigrant of his goods and money, those Latinos who suffer these indignities need to use every means of communication available to get the word out and let the world know what happened to them.

But in reality, it turns out to be more politically expedient to invent lies about the good North American who dares to tell the truth and speak honorably.

This behavior is called cowardice. This is the kind of cowardice that is expressed in the letter to which I am responding. And yet it is precisely because of such cowardice that so many people can no longer tolerate life in their own countries. Because cowardice on the part of the people perpetuates and encourages corruption on the part of officials.

Latino friend, get up a little courage: Stay in your own country and fight for truth and justice there, and change your country, where no one wants to live any longer (because of the kidnappings, the brutal murders in countries in the hands of narcoterrorists). Because to achieve justice and prosperity, each one of us must demand justice of our authorities and our politicians. Because that is your duty as a good citizen of Latin America and of the world.

Demand that your officials control the criminal element, fighting terror and bringing them to justice without fear. Demand that they encourage good investments through the free market so that everyone has enough work there and no one feels compelled to emigrate anywhere else.

Further, any Latino who is drawn to my country has the moral obligation to study the mentality and the ideology that have made the United States the great country it is today. Ladies and Gentlemen, this ideology stems in large part from faith in Christ and an intimate knowledge of the Bible—despite the lack of morality and the decadence we see everywhere today (especially on the cinematic screen thanks to our great source of immorality, Hollywood), and despite the attempts by the ACLU to extirpate our Judeo-Christian roots. Thus good Americans are fighting hard to restore righteousness and good religion.

It is due to this Judeo-Christian ideology that our officials treat all immigrants humanely, including illegal ones (many of whom speak ill of us and call us racists or worse, commit crimes against mankind), despite all the rhetoric aimed at convincing us to give up our sovereignty to the anarchists of the world.

This letter was written by the husband of a legal immigrant from Latin America, whose own children have Latino blood. I am proud of my family, all of them, and I love them with all my heart, just as I love all Latinos. I bear you no malice. I pray that god will bless you and yours. And I welcome you in my country—with a valid entry visa.

 

This was the extent of my response.

But I urge you today, Dear Reader, to do the following:

Go the web site  http://spanish.laiglesforum.com/2006/10/29/respuesta-a-un-email-calumniando-a-un-buen-americano.aspx  and retrieve the Spanish language copy of my letter and send it far and wide to anyone on your email list who may be Hispanic.

I also urge you to send a copy of this article to the Elect Sensenbrenner Committee and suggest that they put this letter in the hands of as many Hispanics as possible.

Then, I would suggest as many of you as possible get in touch with Allstate, either your local agent or the national headquarters, and ask them why so many employees of theirs are stooping to calling a concerned American a racist, using their company email address!

Tell them that you understand that they have the option to say anything they want under the Constitution, but the same Constitution gives you the right to purchase your insurance from anyone you choose to.

Finally, support Kimberly Clark, to show your solidarity with the Hon. James E. Sensenbrenner.

Thus, if you were touched by this letter, wipe away your tears with a Kleenex.

Thank you and may God richly bless you!

Don Laigle

Breaking News: CHARLES CARL ROBERTS IV is in Hell

Breaking News: Charles Carl Roberts is in Hell

 

Charles Carl Roberts, killer of innocent Amish girls and their teachers, has just found out what his pastor refused to tell him:  There is a real hell.  It is a lake of fire.  At variance with post modern theology, God hasn’t changed.  He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.  That’s why He calls Himself  “I am.”

 

Charles will find many other “Christians” in hell.  Many of them are there for much the same reasons.  The BTK killer was the president of his congregation.  His church teaches political correctness.  Their hymns have been neutered, so as not to offend the feminists, God’s enemies.  It is absurd to think that his church might have taught the old fashioned concept of hell, that is, that those who offend God by intentionally sinning go to a burning hell when they die.

 

Charles Carl Roberts IV may have been greeted by his fellow Lancaster Countian and murderer David Ludwig, the young “Christian” whose website featured the Christian rock song “I’m fireproof,” which provides insight into what Ludwig had been trained to believe by his local church and why he thought he could literally get away with murder.  The popular evangelical doctrine goes something like this:

 

As a Christian, especially a baptized Christian, you are fireproof.  You couldn’t go to hell (even if there were such a place) no matter what you did to offend God.  Once you are saved, you are saved. But we recommend you tithe.

 

No wonder Lancaster County has some of the biggest, most lavish church buildings anywhere in the country.  Like the medieval popes, they are selling indulgences.  Their message: give us your money and we’ll make you fireproof.  Not much has changed since the Middle Ages.

 

Let me try to explain how this indoctrination works.

 

The pastor of a church once lent me a book by colonial pastor Jonathan Edwards recounting the amazing story of the Great Awakening, a religious revival that swept most of Connecticut and dramatically changed people’s lives, making them both fear and love God and leading them to give up sometimes heinous sins.  Edwards reported that even prostitutes came to Jesus and became devout women of faith.  After reading a few chapters, it became clear to me that the driving force behind this religious phenomenon was in fact nothing more nor less than the fear of hell, and by that I mean the fear that people who transgress in direct defiance of God are doomed to spend eternity in a lake of fire far away from God. 

 

I became so enthused about the prospects of an awakened America in my time that I stood up at testimony time and told about the book.  I told of my conclusion that a true religious awakening depends upon a belief not only in heaven but also in hell and on the teaching of that belief in America’s pulpits.  After I had finished my talk, the same pastor who had lent me the book appeared embarrassed and upset.  He immediately quoted a verse from the New Testament to the effect that Christians are not to be afraid of anything.  Clearly the mention of hell is taboo in that church, as it is in many others now that modern psychology has infiltrated religion.

 

Once one of the parishioners, a middle-aged man whose wife was suffering from an incurable and lethal disease, had told this pastor “I’m mad at God.” The next Sunday, this pastor dedicated an entire sermon to the angry young man, who, coincidentally, was a well to do and generous tither.   I at first naively expected the pastor to detail the sufferings of Job and remind us how that remarkable man of faith had continued to show his love and devotion to God through all his trials and tribulations. 

 

Instead he picked out an obscure passage from the Old Testament telling of a godly prophet who had earnestly pleaded with God for relief from suffering.  Nothing in this passage suggested that this prophet was even remotely angry with God.  It merely said that the prophet earnestly pleaded with God and presented his grievances.  Yet the pastor favorably compared this godly prophet with the angry parishioner and encouraged the congregation to follow his example.  He said there’s nothing wrong with letting God know when we are disappointed with our lot in life.  No one could disagree with that.  But to compare the words “I am mad at God” with the earnest statement of a godly prophet’s grievances as recorded in the Bible reflects a theology alien to those sacred pages.

 

I mention this incident because Charles Carl Roberts had said, shortly before committing the dastardly murders, precisely what the young parishioner had said, namely, that he was angry at God.  I wonder if his pastor rushed to endorse that statement of supreme ignorance of the nature of God.

 

How long will it be before we see an end to these brutal murders by “Christians” among us? And what share of the responsibility goes to the pastors of America?

I personally think many of them who downplay hell will find out about hell the hard way.

 

Let us pray that they will have their own Great Awakening before it is too late and they too learn the hard way about the hell they refused, out of political correctness, to tell us about.

 

It is a sin to murder the innocent. But woe unto the pastors who train these murderers by teaching them false doctrines. For their sin is no less grave.