Are you for open borders?

[LibertyEagle]

Being disingenious again. For one, no one is forced to get an abortion so thats a pretty bad plan if you want to either decline the population (In a real negative percentage), or if you want to create a permenant voting class (You do know blacks account for the vast majority of abortions, right? And you do know blacks on the whole vote 90%+ Democrat, right?). Listen to yourself for a second. You are whipped up into such an anti-immigration fervor that you try and come up with the most outlandish scenarios you can possibly think up.

You STILL have not answered the questions.

As for the original point at hand, I answered it sufficiently. Why are you supporting HR1207?

Because I want the FED audited. You?

I also noticed you answered none of my questions, and I suspect even if you did you wouldn't be able to square your answers with logic. That being you would probably say yes to all, but then not understand how you undermine them at the same time.

You're dodging. Answer the questions.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

You STILL have not answered the questions.


Because I want the FED audited. You?


You're dodging. Answer the questions.

I did answer the questions, just because they weren't to your liking doesn't mean I didn't answer them, or answer them sufficiently at that. Further, I will not repeat what I've all ready said.

Again, you clearly cannot see the similarity between supporting HR1207 (Putting Reid, Pelosi, Obama, Neo-Cons, et. al) in charge of all monetary policy (National Bank; remember theres only a handful of possible free-banking, commodity-currency (competing, etc.), advocates compared to the hundreds of central planning Statists), and supporting open borders. Just because you support HR1207 doesn't mean you want Congress and a National Bank to be in charge of monetary policy, just like I don't want Global Statism, Global Fascism, or any type of Global monopoly. Your failure to reconcile these similar positions and plaster one and not the other (To wit you support) is not only disingenious its down right hypocritical of you.

Let me say again, just because we may support one aim of the other side, doesn't mean we are both headed in that direction, nor do we want to. If what you say is ultimately the truth, it means we must never under any circumstances support any measures of those we oppose (Kucinich, Nader, Grayson, etc.).

I all ready know what you are going to say though. You can shove whatever utilitarian notion straight up you know where. I'm getting tired of you saying just because I don't believe in imaginery borders means I'm one and the same of the NWO. The NWO believes in borders all right, one Global monopoly State border called the Earth. I don't believe in one at all. Now, if you are going to say that what I advocate is a net negative, then why are you supporting HR1207?

Deontology (a priori, moral absolutism, etc.) > Teleology (utilitarianism).

 

[LibertyEagle]

I did answer the questions, just because they weren't to your liking doesn't mean I didn't answer them, or answer them sufficiently at that. Further, I will not repeat what I've all ready said.

Nah, you didn't answer them. But, if you don't want to, fine.

Again, you clearly cannot see the similarity between supporting HR1207 (Putting Reid, Pelosi, Obama, Neo-Cons, et. al) in charge of all monetary policy (National Bank; remember theres only a handful of possible free-banking, commodity-currency (competing, etc.), advocates compared to the hundreds of central planning Statists), and supporting open borders. Just because you support HR1207 doesn't mean you want Congress and a National Bank to be in charge of monetary policy, just like I don't want Global Statism, Global Fascism, or any type of Global monopoly. Your failure to reconcile these similar positions and plaster one and not the other (To wit you support) is not only disingenious its down right hypocritical of you.

I have been concerned for a very long time, and stated it here on these forums, what might happen as the FED is brought down here. I have great concern, that this discussion is only getting so much media attention as a precursor to convincing the people that we should go from the FED to some kind of world bank. And yes, I am quite concerned that we are helping them carry this out.

Let me say again, just because we may support one aim of the other side, doesn't mean we are both headed in that direction, nor do we want to. If what you say is ultimately the truth, it means we must never under any circumstances support any measures of those we oppose (Kucinich, Nader, Grayson, etc.).

I know you think that, but I think you are quite wrong. But, you and I also have a big disagreement in this area. As I recall, you do not believe in national sovereignty, or having a nation at all. I asked you this up above to make sure this was your position, but thus far, you have refused to answer.

I all ready know what you are going to say though. You can shove whatever utilitarian notion straight up you know where.

I'm pretty sure this is against guidelines, but I realize you are frustrated that you cannot get me to join your anarchy bandwagon. It's ok that we have different viewpoints, you know.

I'm getting tired of you saying just because I don't believe in imaginery borders means I'm one and the same of the NWO. The NWO believes in borders all right, one Global monopoly State border called the Earth. I don't believe in one at all. Now, if you are going to say that what I advocate is a net negative, then why are you supporting HR1207?

Oh, I don't think you are part of the NWO, if that's what you're saying. But, I do think you are inadvertently helping them.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Nah, you didn't answer them. But, if you don't want to, fine.


I have been concerned for a very long time, and stated it here on these forums, what might happen as the FED is brought down here. I have great concern, that this discussion is only getting so much media attention as a precursor to convincing the people that we should go from the FED to some kind of world bank. And yes, I am quite concerned that we are helping them carry this out.



I know you think that, but I think you are quite wrong. But, you and I also have a big disagreement in this area. As I recall, you do not believe in national sovereignty, or having a nation at all. I asked you this up above to make sure this was your position, but thus far, you have refused to answer.



I'm pretty sure this is against guidelines, but I realize you are frustrated that you cannot get me to join your anarchy bandwagon. It's ok that we have different viewpoints, you know.


Oh, I don't think you are part of the NWO, if that's what you're saying. But, I do think you are inadvertently helping them.

Just as you are helping to further cement totalitarianism by supporting HR1207. You do still support HR1207 last I checked.

I told you what I am for. Read it again for your answer.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Just as you are helping to further cement totalitarianism by supporting HR1207. You do still support HR1207 last I checked.

Yes, I do and yes, we could be.

Does this mean that you do NOT support HR1207?

I told you what I am for. Read it again for your answer.

Sorry, still don't see where you explicitly stated whether you believe in national sovereignty, or nations, at all. I'm pretty sure you don't, but I wanted to make sure. It would've been really easy to just answer the questions, but you seem to prefer playing this little game. Okey, dokey. Whatever knocks your socks off.

 

[Dunedain]

I do not understand why you are unable to see that a country cannot assimilate half of another country overnight. Many people who come here have no idea of the principles upon which this country was founded.

I have noticed that people that dislike traditional social norms/morals/ways of life(which made the civilization possible in the first place) generally favor massive 3rd world unassimilable levels of immigration (both legal and non). For if you dislike your own society then what is to lose from having it replaced by another?

People that support levels of immigration that will destroy the U.S. as we know it simply hate the traditional identity of America. They support run-away immigration-invasion for the same reason as the globalists do. They are America haters. If you cherish your country you naturally will dislike huge numbers of people moving in that don't share your view and don't assimilate.

 

[constituent]

I have noticed that people that dislike traditional social norms/morals/ways of life(which made the civilization possible in the first place) generally favor massive 3rd world unassimilable levels of immigration (both legal and non). For if you dislike your own society then what is to lose from having it replaced by another?

Lol, yea, it's the "degenerates."

Where have we heard that one before?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

You immigration hounds need to come up with something other than Ad Hom's. You're starting to sound like Neo-Cons and the Socialists/Fascists over in the Demo. Party. If I don't support imaginery borders which destroy private property and individual sovereignty, I guess I'm an American hater.

 

[JustinTime]

Its a tough one for me, but after giving it a lot of thought for several years (since Bush tried to pass his immigration reform package in '07) I came down on the restrictionist side.

I see it this way, freedom's byproduct is always differences, if we are free to choose we all choose different things. People will naturally group together with those of similar opinions and worldviews, to live according to thier own rules. That necessitates some sort of border, where one groups laws (or lack thereof) ends and anothers begins.

Another thing is strategy, I really dont think there is much hope for the US ever becoming a libertarian country, our best hope is for those who value liberty to group together in one state, or region, and hopefully break away while the USA spirals down the toilet.

Thats a long shot, but if we manage it, we'd better mind out borders and carefully select our immigrants. An open border would only let the Empire will send as many leeches and fools our way, until they skew they new nations politics in the wrong direction.

 

[Lord Xar]

Lol, yea, it's the "degenerates."

Where have we heard that one before?

Oh look everyone, its Constituent - the open border apologist. Lets give him a big hand.
DId you ever marry that illegal immigrant gf?

 

[LibertyEagle]

You immigration hounds need to come up with something other than Ad Hom's. You're starting to sound like Neo-Cons and the Socialists/Fascists over in the Demo. Party. If I don't support imaginery borders which destroy private property and individual sovereignty, I guess I'm an American hater.

Huh? Aren't you one who advocates tossing out the Constitution and dissolving the United States, entirely? If so, I don't see how that would make you an America lover?

 

[Lord Xar]

You immigration hounds need to come up with something other than Ad Hom's. You're starting to sound like Neo-Cons and the Socialists/Fascists over in the Demo. Party. If I don't support imaginery borders which destroy private property and individual sovereignty, I guess I'm an American hater.

lol. Actually, it is you who sounds like a neo-con. I always get a kick out of these open border fanatics who in the name of "freedom" advocate the largest and most destructive force against the constitution. More illegal immigration = bigger government = more subsidies = more balkanization.
I mean based on your assumptions, wouldn't this MASSIVE wave of illegal immigration actually bring about more freedom? It hasn't. It has constricted it. It has done the opposite of what you preach, yet you are still trumpeting it. Why? I believe Dunedain hit on a good point.

What is most troubling is that you have no inclination to see what your wacko beliefs are bringing - everything you supposedly are against.

20million illegal immigrants. Hmmm. grant them amnesty. Majority of them are uneducated in low paying jobs - displacing americans = more strain on the 'gubbment' to subsidize the massive dependency. In addition, I would say a majority will also vote "left" - thus creating a bigger incentive for big government.

In my eyes, you are the same enemy as the neo-cons/neo-libs. Your wants will most assuredly bring about a demise of the constitution/liberty/freedom faster than any "secure our borders" mentality ever could. You are a globalist and you don't even know it. Or perhaps you do.

 

[Dunedain]

I see it this way, freedom's byproduct is always differences, if we are free to choose we all choose different things. People will naturally group together with those of similar opinions and worldviews, to live according to thier own rules. That necessitates some sort of border, where one groups laws (or lack thereof) ends and anothers begins.

QFT.

Also, this is why biological life is so varied. When like mates with like you get differences between groups eventually. If different mated with different we'll all be one homogenous simple life form as the differences are destroyed and similarities emphasized.

It is very ironic that the DIVERSITY that the NWO pushes (and a minority of posters on this board) ultimately would have diversity totally destroyed according to their globalist belief system.

 

[JustinTime]

It is very ironic that the DIVERSITY that the NWO pushes (and a minority of posters on this board) ultimately would have diversity totally destroyed according to their globalist belief system.

Quite right.

We visited London and Toronto in 2005 and 2006 respectively, and my wife noticed how similar they were. No real character of their own (not anymore I guess), both cities were just patchworks of little bits of cultures from all over the world.

The craze to have every place become "diverse" is just insane. The world is diverse and should be, but every corner world the world slathered with "diversity" actually makes everywhere homogenous.

 

[revolutionisnow]

Found this interesting comment on a YT video

"I think the bottom line is the issue of identity & culture, which is how all people come together to protect their own families from intruders... All peoples of the world view themselves as the true people. If you study history, you see we all to the same kinds of things. Every nations & tribes tend to name themselves "the People", "the True People", "The Real People", etc... we all need to know that we are special & our lives are meaningful. Unity & love makes people overcome odds...Without common identity, people can't unite. Without that, we are pushed around and annihiliated. That's why when the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) came to bring the Arabs back to One God, they became powerful - it dispelled the tribal warfare that had divided the continent and united them as one people. There's so much to this, but my point is not to discriminate... I have seen soulless vultures in every group of people I have encountered in life."

 

[Natalie]

I'm for open borders, if we get rid of free healthcare, free education, etc. If you come here you have to work.

 

[catdd]

We have enough problems with the population we already have in this country. Anyone been on the freeway around 5:00pm lately?
There is a limit to what this land can tolerate and I think we've already hit it.

 

[Agorism]

E-verify is ridiculous though.

I think it might be ok for federal jobs though including the military.

 

[Dunedain]

I'm for open borders, if we get rid of free healthcare, free education, etc. If you come here you have to work.

We need border enforcement until we get rid of the welfare state.

 

[American Nationalist]

We need border enforcement until we get rid of the welfare state.

We need border enforcement period, regardless of the welfare state. The border should be secured for security reasons and economic reasons. America is most vulnerable at it's borders, and though it hasn't happened yet, if we leave our borders open, it is only a matter of time until a terrorist attack occurs on American soil. It is an inevitability. Secondly, if we allow hordes of third worlders by the million pour over our borders even without a welfare state they will still undermine the labor pool. The more you increase the labor pool for the same amount of jobs the lower the wages will go. That is basic economics. We need to keep wages high and keep Americans employed. I believe in an American Nation. Open borders and free trade is a large step towards world government and the elimination of cultural and national identity.