Illegal immigration

PirateNews,

The shotgunning of information you present makes it difficult to argue a single point. If we focus on one or two of your theories, it would be easier to stay on topic.

Your counter-argument... why notify the Russians if it's not nuclear?

Simple enough. We have an agreement with them that we won't set off nukes anymore. The explosion is large enough to be mistaken for a nuke, and will be visible from space by monitoring satellites.

To prevent any misunderstandings, you want to tell them what it is.

Now, did you want to shift the topic to abortion, the definition of genocide, or the definition of judaism?

--Anthony


"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Hey Piratejenny,

Yeah, diebold and the like are a big issue.

I basically agree with you. A revolution is what they need. I'm not sure I put the blame on the people at this point, for not rising up. I take the basic premise that people are people, meaning that, if these people have reacted differently in this situation than others have in a different situation, the overall circumstances must be different, even if that circumstance is mindset alone.

And I can't really see it being too heartening, to actually have a revolution(they did revolt against their oppressive government) only to have their chosen leader undermined not only by the people's enemies, but by the United States(if I were to distinguish the two). That's the sort of result that feeds apathy, and teaches helplessness, and quite frankly its the far more common result of a revolution...replace one bad regime with another. I wasn't saying the U.S. was unique for revolting...I was saying it was rare for succeeding in making something better.

The only other thing is I really don't remember a day of our revolution. I can't really claim that "WE" overthrew the British and "WE" earned our freedoms. I didn't earn them any more than the bussers at the restaurant I work at did. Would I fight for such a thing if I were put in the situation? I'd like to think I would, but I don't know.

Aside of those quibbles, I agree with you. In fact, after reading a post of yours before the one you posted to me, I was wondering why I was engaging in this long debate, because in the context of that post, my post didn't seem as well founded. But I never read that one, and just saw a post that, while not wrong in any way, seemed to frame this particular issue by chastising the people who don't have the power(or at least haven't realized the power), rather than the ones who have it and are abusing it. My appologies, if I misinterpreted.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I know that it's irritating for people to wander away from a thread and then try to revive dead parts of the discussion. All I can say is that real life intervened. I've said more than once that I'm of two minds (maybe three or four) about illegal immigration. So perhaps you can help me out.

Should we even consider paperless immigration a crime? Someone early in the dicussion said people should be able to go wherever they want to go. Forgetting "Mexicans" (and other Hispanics) for a moment, let's take the position that anybody- Asian, African, European, whatever- who can fly, walk, or boat to the United States should be able to work and live here. What would result?

Well, likely we would have a mass influx from societies that are poorer than ours. Doubtful we would get many Danes, Swedes, or Germans. In all likelihood we would see the poorest from the closest nations (Mexicans, Guatemalans, Ecuadorans, etc.) and the poor to middle class (what little there is of it) from farther nations (Sudanese, Rwandans, Indonesians, Russians etc.) Very few poor speak English (going by current situation) and many do not read or write in any language.

Where would that leave us? Well, first of all these people would be able to legally look for work. But most would be at a language and education disadvantage, and not knowing their rights and the US political system (being accustomed to meager eomployment and abusive, authoritarian societies) it's likely that many would be willingly exploited at work and isolated into ghettos at home, no matter what the law says. We could raise the minimum wage so as not to be exploitative and enforce work rules (set a few corporate heads on pikes at the city gates as examples) but that would prolly create unemployment and drive the marginal economy underground and back into illegal territory.

And then what do we do for the un- and under-employed? Welfare? State health insurance (like Medical)? Housing vouchers? The more I go down this thought experiment, the more it seems to me that even with the best of intentions unregulated immigration would be a national disaster. Does anyone see a different outcome?




---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

PirateNews,

The shotgunning of information you present makes it difficult to argue a single point. If we focus on one or two of your theories, it would be easier to stay on topic.

Now, did you want to shift the topic to abortion, the definition of genocide, or the definition of judaism?

---

The point is that USA is currently under attack by Civil War, fomented from within and by foreign powers, both govt and corporate. Criminal immigration (invasion) is merely a single front in this war, like the Western Front in Europe was just one front in World War 2. The best way to lose a war is to focus on only one front, while leaving your flank undefended.

In the case of criminal invasion, the best way to lose a war is to provide zero defense of your border, as in the Mexican border without any guards, fences or walls, with 7,000 criminal terrorists invading USA daily, 365 days every year - then they have 10 anchor babies that allegedly have US citizenship (so deport the parents and put them in orphanages - or better yet, sell them at a profit overseas, perhaps to European, Israeli, Arab, Asian, Mexican and South American slave brothels, to save them from US slave brothels).

Genocide of stupid US citizens is proceeding nicely, with 200-million US citizens genocided in Death Camps in the past century - abortions, children and adults.
www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_01.htm

The published official goal of US Govt and the 50 state govts is to genocide 90% of US citizens and the world, via bioweaponized viruses, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Bioweaponized HIV/AIDS is not fast enough - they publicly bragged last week that they need a man-made virus that kills within 48 hours, sprayed from aircraft (named "chemtrails" by US Congress), before the antidote can be destributed.

For those of you who laff at Jewish/Luciferian/Molech death cult at Bohemian Grove presidential compound, the lowly scientists and professors have their own death cult. These are the psychopaths who actually create the bioweapons in govt university laboratories:

Quote:

---

Meeting Doctor Doom

by Dr. Forrest M. Mims III
www.forrestmims.org


Dr. Eric Pianka - his students literally call him "GOD"

There is always something special about science meetings. The 109th meeting of the Texas Academy of Science at Lamar University in Beaumont on 3-5 March 2006 was especially exciting for me, because a student and his professor presented the results of a DNA study I suggested to them last year.

But there was a gravely disturbing side to that otherwise scientifically significant meeting, for I watched in amazement as a few hundred members of the Texas Academy of Science rose to their feet and gave a standing ovation to a speech that enthusiastically advocated the elimination of 90 percent of Earth's population by airborne Ebola. The speech was given by Dr. Eric R. Pianka (Fig. 1), the University of Texas evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert who the Academy named the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.

Something curious occurred a minute before Pianka began speaking. An official of the Academy approached a video camera operator at the front of the auditorium and engaged him in animated conversation. The camera operator did not look pleased as he pointed the lens of the big camera to the ceiling and slowly walked away.

This curious incident came to mind a few minutes later when Professor Pianka began his speech by explaining that the general public is not yet ready to hear what he was about to tell us. Because of many years of experience as a writer and editor, Pianka's strange introduction and the TV camera incident raised a red flag in my mind. Suddenly I forgot that I was a member of the Texas Academy of Science and chairman of its Environmental Science Section. Instead, I grabbed a notepad so I could take on the role of science reporter.

www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/feature1p
www.sas.org/tcs/w

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME