Myth Blaster – Letter to the Orange Country Register

Joan B., Illinois received this e-mail that states the following:

My wife, Rosemary, wrote a wonderful letter to the editor of the Orange County Register which, of course, was not printed. So I decided to “print” it myself by sending it out on the Internet. Please pass it along if you feel so inclined. Thank you.
Dave LaBonte
Written in response to a series of letters to the editor in the
Orange County Register:
Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one, suggests we should tear down the Statute of
Liberty because the people now in question aren’t being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry. Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today’s American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer.
Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home. They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children
assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity. Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out.
My father fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from
Germany, Italy, France and Japan. None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from.
They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of
Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people. When we liberated France, no one in those villages was looking for the French-American or the German-American or the Irish-American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country’s
flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl. And here we are in 2006 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of ru
les, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country.
I’m sorry, that’s not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900s deserve better than that for the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign
country flags.
And for that suggestion about taking down the Statute of
Liberty, it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn’t start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.
Rosemary LaBonte

Myth Blaster Verdict: Unverified. (Note: Orange Country Register cannot verify letter, but printed letters are online)

According to Snopes:

On 31 March 2006, the Orange County (California) Register published several letters to the editor dealing with the subject of the immigration debate. One of those letters, by a reader named Ernie Lujan, was published under a heading of “Tear down lady liberty” and read as follows:

Illegal immigrants have been around since the early 1900’s, except then they entered through Ellis Island in New York City. They came from countries such as Italy, Ireland, Germany, Poland and France. And now we accept them as true Americans.
Now these people whose ancestors came to this country to make a better life for themselves and their children want to build a great wall along the
U.S. and Mexico border and deny these hard-working people the same rights that their ancestors fought so hard and died for.
If you build this wall then you must also tear down the great Statue of
Liberty that sits in the New York Harbor. Apparently another Register reader penned a rebuttal to some of those immigration debate letters, one which was not published by the newspaper and has instead been ‘printed’ by her husband .”

And as far as the message the e-mail receives – immigration problems existed then, when Ellis Island was operating – it is just that some of the problems were different than today. Building a “wall” or fence is necessary since there isn’t much of any other way to stem the tide of illegal immigration coming across the southern border of the United States. And Snopes adds their input:

However, plenty of immigrants in that same era did not fit that mold, such as those who:

  • Resorted to scams, petty theft, and all sorts of other crimes to get by, or simply resumed the same kinds of criminal activities they’d been perpetrating in their homelands, sometimes on large, organized scales (e.g., the Italian mafia, Chinese triads).
  • Moved to enclaves or communities in which their original cultures and languages were preserved, obviating the need for them to ever assimiliate into the broader American culture or learn English. (If the immigrants of earlier eras “stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl,” then who started all the ethnic enclaves, such as Little Germany and Chinatown, found in New York and many other American cities?) Their children (and future generations) were often left to learn English and assimilate as best they could on their own, driven by necessity rather than allegiance to American national ideals.
  • Retained their original family names, or changed their names only reluctantly — the latter not to “blend in with their new home,” but to try to escape the prejudices, persecution, and violence typically visited upon members of various national, ethnic, and religious groups in the U.S. (e.g., Catholics, Jews, Irish, Italians).
  • Declined to participate in fighting for the U.S. against their home countries in World War I (as did their children in World War II), or even left the U.S. to return home and fight for the other side. (And certainly many first-generation Americans of Japanese descent, who found themselves restricted to internment camps merely due to their ancestry, gave plenty of “thought about what country their parents had come from.”)
  • Disdained free lunches, welfare, and labor laws not because they were virtuous and prized self-sufficiency, but because those government programs did not yet exist, either for native-born American citizens or immigrants.

What this piece illustrates is not so much substantive differences between “old immigrants” and “new immigrants,” but rather the truthfulness of the proverb “Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.”


13 comments on “Myth Blaster – Letter to the Orange Country Register

  1. Jacklyn says:

    I thought something being true or false was whether or not something was actually done or said (or not) – not whether the article is historically correct.

    While I agree that the facts should be documented, I find nothing in the article truly clarifying whether or not this article was actually written by Rosemary LeBonte and forwarded by her husband – or someone just ranting and saying (like the Mrs. Fields Cookies thing, George Carlin or whomever) that the OC Register wouldn’t print it, so please forward to everyone.

    It could be that a real person named Rosemary LeBonte wrote it exactly as stated and it wasn’t published, as stated. Whether the facts in the letter are true or not is not relavent as to whether or not it was a real letter from Mrs. LeBonte. To me, that is what determines whether it’s a TRUE or FALSE status, not the facts in the letter.

    Another example is the “smell of rain” email – ( You clarified that was actually written and documented as stated in the email.

    Another perspective: My maiden name is from Norway. In 1871, they changed the spelling coz it wasn’t easy to say and to “Americanize” it. I am also Native American on my mom’s side. In 1869, the government made up a “white” first and last name during the Dawes Commission era to further remove their Native identity and culture. My aunts and uncle were taken from the family and sent to live in boarding houses hundreds of miles from home to learn to be white. My family – both sides – did not and would not take hand-outs. Not because the government may not have had a free ride program going on, there were soup kitchens. Because they didn’t think it was right to get anything free. Stubborn pride prevented them from accepting any help at all.

    My father in law, an escapee from East Germany, lived under bridges until he could afford to get into a boarding house. My Norse family and my father in law maintained their culture and language in the home with other adults, but in the outside world and to the kids, they PURPOSED to have their children speak flutely in American and BE an American.

    And on top it all, the snopes piece ends in a foreign language. I have no idea what that “proverb” is.

  2. Keith says:

    As far as what the French words mean in the quoted Snopes piece, ask Snopes. What little French I know it translates to changing choice.
    “Another example is the “smell of rain” email – ( You clarified that was actually written and documented as stated in the email.”
    I never “claimed” anything because nothing has been posted concerning “smell of rain” via Myth Blaster and this publication is not responsible for what Snopes publishes. It is a main source of information, but I do not take for granted what is printed, so I do additional research when posting something for Myth Blaster subject material.
    The point was that Snopes (and myself) made is that times change (thus the French words at end) and sometimes it does not. When immigration policy began to change, Ellis Island closed down. America created a system that only allowed so many immigration applicants to be approved per year, creating a controlled immigration system for obvious reasons.
    I don’t understand what your maiden name and the ensuing personal tale has to do with the article, although it was interesting reading.
    So what is your point? Are you stating that someone is implying that all immigrants want hand outs? If so, it isn’t or hasn’t been written here. Discussion concerning illegal immigration applies to those who break immigration and other laws, like falsifying identification records or stealing Social Security identities.
    Nothing here at LPJ implies that immigrants shouldn’t remember their culture and home country language – if any discussion concerning language it is about the trend of creating a bilingual America, required by the U.S. government. Most of us, or rather our ancestors, have come from somewhere else. The true American is the Native American Indian – thus the name “native”.
    Now back to the argument about the “OC Register letter”. It wasn’t printed by them nor received under the Rosemary LaBonte name. If you don’t believe it, write to them and ask them. Snopes did. And I researched archived records and found nothing concerning this letter. But: letters were submitted and the closest one to the e-mail passed around was printed and compared. Therefore the Myth Blaster verdict was FALSE.
    Too often the e-mail chain letter system changes the original, attributes it falsely to someone else and so on. The point made here is that the “good old days” adage presented here wasn’t as cut and dry as the letter makes it seem. There were immigration problems then, as well as now.
    I guess you missed the point and misunderstood the Myth Blaster posting, as well as the Snopes posting.
    Your family story is a story of many families during the Depression and many European/Scandinavians “Americanized” their names somewhat – it wasn’t required, they chose to do so.
    Thanks for your comments. Does anyone else have anything to add pertaining to this subject?

  3. Joseph Blough says:

    Sorry Keith, you screwed up on this one; it appears you trusted and got burned. Snopes can be a valuable tool in proving or disproving urban legends and the sort, most of the time, but sometimes, like here, it seems they discount a story merely because they disagree with its ideology. Jacklyn rightly points this out, yet you stick up for the Snopes party line, so in the words of Inigo Montoya, “prepare to die”.

    First – I believe you misunderstood the original letter. It said the OC Register did NOT publish the letter, so the husband emailed it out to give it publicity. Of course the OC Register has no record of it, it wasn’t published. Newspapers don’t keep records of all the letters they DON’T publish, let’s not be silly now.

    Second – Snopes (and you by trusting them) were wrong in the method used to classify the letter as false. The letter is an opinion piece whose point is that immigrants used to be more patriotic. Because it is opinion, it cannot be disproved as false based on its opinion, but rather upon whether or not the opinion originated from the author and other such details. Did John Lennon say in 1966 “We are more popular than Jesus”? That is the question, not, “was he right”. It was merely Lennon’s opinion, whether you agree or not is a different matter. Snopes ruling would have to be, “yes, Lennon said that in 1966” Not “False, the Beatles were no where NEAR as popular as Jesus”.

    Third and lastly – Your’s and snopes logic is convoluted on many accounts. Overall – and to save time – I must say your point is only valid if things never change. It is possible that things were better in certain areas back at the turn of the 20th century. No effort is made on your part to prove or disprove this. All you say is that people complained about things back then too. This proves nothing. Is it not possible things were better during the renaissance than they were during the dark ages? Answer; of course.

    I happen to agree with the email in question and believe it is provable by public documents. Suffice to say, immigrants were much more patriotic, indeed the our society was much more patriotic prior to the mid 1960’s. This is a valid point that is dismissed as false with nothing more than an editorial opinion, and a weak one at that.

  4. Keith says:

    Joseph Blough:
    Thank you for your input, and your opinion of “you screwed up on this one.” But, to be fair, the verdict at Myth Blaster has been changed to “unverified source” – which means that the alleged letter in a series of letters (which the posting states) was received by OCR, but not published. I did not “trust” Snopes to the extent of using them as the only source. I reprinted their take on the subject material. Where I failed, apparently, was to be more specific, and according to you and Jacklyn, took it personal what Snopes wrote.
    So, since there is to be analyzing here on the subject material, let’s review. First of all, just in my lifetime, there were better times, for example: in the 1970s I made less, but my money went farther. I could go into detail as to why, but then I choose not to at this time.
    And, since you believe I am being “silly” – well, let’s go there … Did you make an inquiry to the Orange County Register concerning the matter?
    The point was, and apparently not made clear (of course, mention was made of an e-mail I did not address in Jacklyn’s response). On that I plead guilty.
    The subject material is poignant because it is referring to the present day immigration situation. I thought I made clear that negativity here is only expressed against illegal immigration.
    So, as it stands, it is unknown if the person mentioned in the posting wrote the letter or not, in a series of letters concerning the same subject submitted to Orange Country Register. So, in the respect that it has been changed to “unverified.” Note also that I wrote “according to” – and published the opinion of Snopes. I should have been more specific as to what was “false” and I have made the correction.

    And, lastly, no where in MY statements (not transcriptions from Snopes) does it say that American immigrants were more patriotic in any historical period. One thing is for sure, they didn’t have to Press “1” for English!
    Bottom line: There were letters concerning this issue, but the names mentioned in the e-mail are unverified. Instead of “False” I should have printed “Unverified Source” – so, in that I apologize for the confusion. Here are some links, which I provide for further reading/research:
    Letters concerning the subject at Orange Country Register
    Break the Chain
    And, Joseph: Opinion is no excuse for excluding the facts. What worth is an “opinion” if it is established upon misinformation? I provide links to sources. If it is provable by documents, “show me”. I hope this clears up the misunderstanding.

  5. Keith says:

    To Readers Joseph is referring to what John Lennon said, the full quote is:
    Christianity will end, it will disappear. I do not have to argue about that. I am certain. Jesus was OK, but his subjects were too simple. Today we are more famous than Him” (1966)

  6. Joseph Blough says:


    Thanks for the oportunity to debate this.

    My beef with snopes, and your op is that it refutes the points of the email in question – points I feel are obvious and easily verifiable – merely by pointing out that people have always complained about immigrants. Not only does not prove anything, but it also doesn’t address the original argument. The point the email makes IS valid. Too many immigrants are spiteful of the very country they seek to take refuge in. This is not unnoticed by the general public and it should be addressed before it erupts into something more spiteful. It is quite obvious to anyone old enough to know, or anyone not too lazy to do 5 minutes of research, that this bad attitude among many immigrants is not the historical norm. Most people, especially immigrants, WERE much more patriotic in the past. That is not so today. These opinions are not “false” or “unproven” to any rational person in America today. Just because people complained about immigrants in the past also does not make this point invalid.

    Look, your site is called “Myth Blaster”, what is it about this letter that is myth, except for the fact that you can’t find out whether it was actually ever sent to the OC Register? Just an idea, but has anyone tried actually contacting the author? Not that it would really even matter, the opinion of the email is the important issue. Who cares if it was sent to the OC resister by a Rosemary Labonte or not? The important thing is does it convey a valid point, and I think it clearly does.

    Regarding being silly; lets just say that newspapers do keep a filed of all the letters to the editor they do not print. Do you suppose that if you asked them to look up and tell you the name of a private letter they received that they would actually do it? Now add to that equation that the letter is a popular one that makes them look bad. My guess is they would have a hard time finding that letter. “Oh, sorry, the cat’s just ate it.”

  7. Keith says:

    There is no “beef” here on my part – maybe you should take it up with Snopes, because I printed THERE opinion concerning the subject material, and I did not write anything concerning that – Myth Blaster is just that what is, no part of the Op/Ed, commentary or editorial that is seen elsewhere in this e-journal.
    I value your willingness to take the time to discuss the subject of the alleged letter posted by the given author, which has been changed to “unverifiable” author.
    I suggest that you search the archive here looking for postings that fall under “immigration” or just use the handy search tool – and then comment on those postings I did write with opinions and facts.
    And, by the way, patriotism has become passé in America or twisted visions of what patriotism is – on that point I agree. And you miss the point Snopes made entirely …. “Just because people complained about immigrants in the past also does not make this point valid.”
    For example, once upon a time, Irish immigrants were looked upon like trash, and, indeed, some of them were. So? Part of history – and, I might add, good or bad, this country was built upon immigration. The only folks that originated from this nation are the Native Americans, who are truly Americans before there was an America.
    Maybe I should have added to the post: “The comments and/or opinion of Snopes does not reflect the thinking or policy here at Lighthouse Patriot Journal – then maybe folks would understand that it was not posted as my opinion, but only trying to sift out the fact that: did the person described write about it. The presentation was a fair account of part of our immigration history, no argument.
    Anyway, I do not ever want folks to be shy about exercising their freedom of speech here, but it would be much more friendly of an atmosphere if one would not tell someone they are “silly” or whatever. And I cannot understand why you think there is an “argument” here. Just an e-mail from some person who supposedly sent it to the Orange County Register (allegedly) and I provided the links for any further “research” – which to as “anyone not too lazy to do 5 minutes of research” descriptive objective adjective.
    PS – my “site” is not called “Myth Blaster”, it is Lighthouse Patriot Journal, with an affiliated Op/Ed blog at TownHall entitled “From My Desk” … And, since I am too lazy to do research, why haven’t you found out via the Register concerning Rosemary or Dave LaBonte, or whoever else has been dubbed authorship of the alleged letter sent to the OC Register, and so on and so on and so on…
    And, finally, since I am a human being, and sometimes ashamed to admit it, I do make mistakes – being chief cook and bottle washer around here, I am allowed. My only staff would be “ghost writers” or “reader staff writers” who would or will submit their essays for posting – and only in that capacity; maybe some day this will change. In the meantime, and I hope I always apply this, I will continue to post corrections under the “Corrections” archive – because I am not afraid of admitting (although embarrassment would be more likely the emotion) of mistakes, errors, et cetera. I guess I am just “silly” that way, and maybe not too “lazy” as one may think …. opinions about the subject of the Myth Blaster e-mail is welcome, rebuttals are not necessary because no opinion of the subject material was offered from this location – is that clearly written to relay what the object was?
    Enuff said ….

  8. Rosemary LaBonte says:

    I am the author of the above mentioned letter that I submitted to the OC Register back in April 2006 following “no gringo day” here in southern California.

    In all fairness to the Register, they were drowning in letters to the editor that day that were familar in tone to mine but written by hispanic readers. I have since had many letters printed in that newspaper.

    My husband did put this letter out on the Internet to ten of his friends and it has traveled across this country six or seven times and been printed in numerous papers.

    The point of the letter was to show legal and illegal immigrates that no one will listen to them while they are waving another country’s flag in their hands. Some readers did not get that point and instead focased on historical facts in the letter.

    I live in Orange County and work in a law firm in Santa Ana where the majority of my clients are hispanic, so I feel I have an interesting view from the window of immigration.

  9. Keith says:

    Thank you Rosemary for speaking out. I do hope indeed you are Rosemary the original drafter of that letter.
    The key issue behind all of this is that illegal not legal immigration is being addressed. After all, this nation began with immigrants.
    If you and your law firm is helping legal immigrants, than I commend you. But as articles posted here and elsewhere shows, illegal immigration has become more than just a problem — it is an imminent danger. Your state has been on the verge of bankruptcy more than once — mostly due to too much tax money being used for social programs, and within those social programs, illegal immigrants are getting signed on when they are not even supposed to be here.
    Personally, I thought your letter to the OC Register was interesting, a part of American history. It is a statement that tells us that legal immigration is good, but when population and job availabilty becomes changed there must be a limitation set annually. This is only fair. And what is unfair is those that come here illegally are getting the benefits of citizenship that others (legal immigrants) worked so hard to achieve in arriving here with the proper papers and applying for citizenship after meeting the requirements.
    I repeat, discussion here is the problem with illegal immigration, not legal immigration. The people we voted for and are running our government are responsible for the mess, and their solution (some of them) is to make an even bigger mess, not thinking how an amnesty in 1986 did nothing but create more illegal immigrants. Why worry about breaking laws when one knows that after a time they will receive amnesty and get a free ride to the benefits of living in America? Why bother learning our language when American society is forced to be bilingual and cater to a specific ethnic group? There are people of other nations who speak many languages – but when they come here they already know some English or take the effort to learn. Why are Mexican immigrants so special that they are not required to learn. For goodness sake, when a citizen goes to the voting place to vote, they have ballots in both English and Spanish. If they are not willing to learn our national language, what gives them the right to vote?
    Thanks again for taking the time to post a comment and thanks for your letter that your husband posted and sent out across the Internet. Discussion is good when coming from different angles, especially when looking to resolve a problem.

  10. Jesse Ohlsson says:

    Plenty of discussion on who really wrote the letter, if they wrote it, blah blah blah.

    Didn’t anyone note the logical fallacies in the original letter?

    The immigrants of 1900 couldn’t have the “handouts” “Rosemary” spoke of. They didn’t exist at that time. Organized welfare didn’t come into existence until the Great Depression. The first real labor laws were in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. So, not only did the 1900 era immigrants not enjoy these things, neither did the “natives” at that time.

    By the way, immigration RATES were at their absolute highest around that time. I think the highest decades were the 1900s, 1840s and 1850s. Today’s RATE of immigration, as a percentage of existing population is considerably lower. This DIRECTLY translates into less risk of a “native” being edged out of one of those highly desirable fruit picking jobs by an immigrant today than in 1900.

  11. Keith says:

    Jesse Ohlsson:
    Thanks for visiting and providing comment.
    Yes, well discussion is good. As far as the Myth Blaster is concerned, the main issue was authorship in this case; however, the issue/subject-at-hand is a real concern.
    You are correct on the previous immigration issue in our history, for example during the Potato Famine in Ireland many came to America to find a better life and people from Europe to get away from tyranny and oppression under the rulers at the time. However, as they say, “times change” and we must change according to the circumstances.
    Back in the periods you emphasize – America had more room, so to speak. There were land rush projects sponsored by the government to encourage immigration and settlement of the western United States. Those days are gone.
    As far as the “fruit picker” in 1900 – he wasn’t set out to undermine our traditions, insist that he had the right to be here because America stole real estate from Mexico, and other fifth column issues. They didn’t raise the Mexican flag and trample the US flag. And, as you pointed out, they didn’t get any more benefits than American citizens do because there weren’t any government welfare programs.
    And immigrants are not just picking fruit/vegetables – they are taking jobs in factories and in the building industry – and employers welcome illegal immigrants who will take less to work, et cetera. There are more problems I am not going to redress here (check out illegal immigration category for more articles with more detail) – but plainly, I am not against all of this because I am against Mexicans in general or any other immigrant. Recently a naturalized citizen from Turkey (Sibel Edmonds) showed more patriotism than people born here by blowing the whistle on corruption and traitorous actions committed by mostly people who were born here and are American citizens. During my lifetime, I have found that people who truly want to be an American are great citizens and fellow neighbors. And, after all, many of us, or rather our ancestors, came from somewhere else – unless you belong to the several tribes of Native Americans. But that is what America is all about. A nation of people who created the United States of America and mostly by people from somewhere else; establishing a form of government that has lasted (and can continue to last if we adhere to why and how it was formed) and a nation where we think as one unified nation – no matter where our origins took place.
    Thanks for your contribution.
    Best Regards …

  12. Van Siege says:

    A lot of talk trying to justify your political point of view. Two facts that cannot be challanged as false about immigrants in the latter part of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century:

    Immigrants to the United States were for the most part legal…not illegal.

    Immigrants to the “great melting plot” had to learn English to become a citizen and to vote. They did not have the choice of using their native language in dealing with the government and with all types of services.

    My father and my grandparents walked this road. We have always been a haven for the oppressed and those seeking a better life. Until recently they have entered this country and swore their allegiance to it. They did not forsake their heritage but they put their new country first.

  13. Keith says:

    Van Siege:
    Thanks for sharing.
    Actually facts do need justification. You have just added to the facts.
    And this is not a political view – this is a real problem concerning a real issue – uninvited people living in our nation, and in effect it has been a silent invasion for at least twenty years. Americans are now saying – enough.
    Demonstrators flying Mexican flags and at the same time desecrating ours, insisting that we learn their language because they have no intention to either assimilate or learn our language because they actually believe that part of America belongs to their government (it was “stolen”) – all the while not realizing that Mexico was once a territory/colony of Spain until their independence. It would be like the Dutch coming to New York and saying it was their land because it was stolen or Massachusetts by the English – or even Wisconsin by the French. Ridiculous.
    And that is what all the “talk” is about – talk that no one would bother talking about in the time period you described and in pertaining to immigrants.
    Yes, there is a clear cut difference between legal and illegal – the latter being lawbreakers from the time they set foot on American soil with intentions to bypass immigration laws to when they obtain false documentation, and any other laws they decide to break.
    The immigrants of the past and the legal ones in the present make their new country theirs. It is sad for them that their efforts and pride is deterred by those who have no regard for the law. And guess what? If they decide to go back on their own – their true country doesn’t want them – as recently the news showed – because they will upset Mexico’s economy. What about ours?
    We need to stand strong on this – liberals/sociocrats/progressives have no line drawn when it comes to liberalism in the true sense of the meaning.
    Americans must awake – those born here and naturalized and stand strong against the invaders and those who stand by them instead of their fellow citizens.
    Enuff said, for now.

Comments are closed.