The late, great Will Grigg on the border invasion

In Italy. The Vatican demands Italy to accpet more Migrants.
While the UNHCR is apparently an appeal to force Italy to accpet more alleged migrants to come into Italy and land on Lampedusa. Its rather not surpising when these NGOS are doing this. They are doing this on the of World Refugee Day.

This is what the idiotic pope said.

Today the Pope also spoke. On the occasion of World Refugee Day, Pope Francis is more active than ever, even on social media: "With refugees - says Bergoglio - Providence offers us an opportunity to build a more supportive, more fraternal society, and a more Christian community open, according to the Gospel. #WithRefugees ". The message comes at a time of high tension between Italy and the Sea Watch 3.


Meanwhile in Italy there are almost 6 Million Poor Italians living on the streets along with families.
 
Shit's gonna get real in the next 10-15yrs. Don't know where or when, or what specifically will spark it. But, mark this.

Oh ya totally, 10-15 years from now, it's on. Or maybe 20-25 whatever, we'll see.

It'll probably happen maybe. Eventually.
 
They can do whatever the hell they want to do on their own private property. But the second my freedoms are in any way, shape or form violated, all bets are off.

So even a voluntary association for the common defense is not permitted, in your view?
 
You have no right to defend your rights.
Allowing tyranny is the only true freedom.

This always pisses [MENTION=6186]Danke[/MENTION] off when I bring it up, but...

My great-great Uncle Smedley said there are only two legitimate reasons to go to war: to defend your home or to defend the bill of rights. War for any other reason is a racket.

What is happening right now is open, Fifth Gen demographic warfare, being waged against both, my home and my liberty.

Those who fail to see that do so not only at their own peril but at the peril of all those around them.
 
This always pisses @Danke off when I bring it up, but...

My great-great Uncle Smedley said there are only two legitimate reasons to go to war: to defend your home or to defend the bill of rights. War for any other reason is a racket.

What is happening right now is open, Fifth Gen demographic warfare, being waged against both, my home and my liberty.

Those who fail to see that do so not only at their own peril but at the peril of all those around them.
The absolute anti-group poison is seductive and deadly, it plays on the legitimate opposition to collectivism and leaves the victim unable to defend himself against his well organized enemies.

You can't have liberty without responsibility and one of the primary responsibilities is to maintain liberty for yourself and those who help you secure it, you can't do that without group action.

The whole idea that allowing millions of foreigners to move into your area without affecting your rights is possible would be a laugh riot if the shills and useful idiots who push it weren't deadly serious.
 
So even a voluntary association for the common defense is not permitted, in your view?

Voluntary association as long as it does not puke on the natural rights of others, otherwise I would be no better than those who I oppose.


You can't explain why you support the globalists and communists, it would ruin your cover.

I can not explain it because it is simply not true. You are the one who violates the RPF site mission. We can through that exercise one by one but I believe that was already done in a prior thread.

Shill, my positions and why are widely known, do not try to twist my words completely out of context to suit your own pro-government-growth agenda.
 
Voluntary association as long as it does not puke on the natural rights of others, otherwise I would be no better than those who I oppose.

A community fire brigade of volunteers drags hoses and fire equipment across your property without your permission, to extinguish a conflagration that assuredly would have burned your home down as well all your neighbor's homes.

Would this be an example of vomiting on your natural rights?
 
This always pisses @Danke off when I bring it up, but...

My great-great Uncle Smedley said there are only two legitimate reasons to go to war: to defend your home or to defend the bill of rights. War for any other reason is a racket.

What is happening right now is open, Fifth Gen demographic warfare, being waged against both, my home and my liberty.

Those who fail to see that do so not only at their own peril but at the peril of all those around them.

I had totally forgotten it was you here who was related to him...

Not sure why you think that it "pisses" me off.


Champion Ken French 005.jpg
 
A community fire brigade of volunteers drags hoses and fire equipment across your property without your permission, to extinguish a conflagration that assuredly would have burned your home down as well all your neighbor's homes.

Would this be an example of vomiting on your natural rights?

Do not ever set foot on my private property without my permission. You have no idea if I could recoup the loss from my private insurance that I pay into, due to my house needing more repairs than I planned to address.

You sound like the California bureaucrats trying to justify “doing something” about those wild fires. Wild fires are necessary in nature to make way for new growth, and those with private property should be protected by private insurance.

Hillary it takes a village does not belong on this RPF.

Edited to add, I am within my right to contract out having that fire put out On My Own Property.
 
Last edited:
Do not ever set foot on my private property without my permission. You have no idea if I could recoup the loss from my private insurance that I pay into, due to my house needing more repairs than I planned to address.

You sound like the California bureaucrats trying to justify “doing something” about those wild fires. Wild fires are necessary in nature to make way for new growth, and those with private property should be protected by private insurance.

I made it clear that we are talking about a private, volunteer fire brigade...doing nothing more than accessing the fire around you by going across your property with hoses and equipment, not hut hutting into your home to chop it to bits and drown it.

You would be opposed to that community effort?

But yet you have no opposition to communal efforts brought about by specialization in labor and commerce?
 
Hillary it takes a village does not belong on this RPF.

There are many human endeavors that take a village to complete successfully.

The ability to co-operate toward a common goal is what separates us from the animals.

The poison that Hillary was talking about was injecting it into areas it should not be, and substituting "village" with "government", which brings with it forced compliance.

Assuming you have had children, wouldn't you much rather live in a community, that, if somebody sees your child in trouble of some sort, steps in to help, or to contact you, instead of anonymously calling cops on them?
 
I made it clear that we are talking about a private, volunteer fire brigade...doing nothing more than accessing the fire around you by going across your property with hoses and equipment, not hut hutting into your home to chop it to bits and drown it.

You would be opposed to that community effort?

But yet you have no opposition to communal efforts brought about by specialization in labor and commerce?

You replied just as I edited that I am within my right to contract that out if I choose to do so, and in that case yes they may access my property for that reason only. If I choose not to contract that out but others around me do, then the private fire brigade must find another route outside of my property.
 
Notice that the article in the OP was printed in New American in 2002, when Grigg was still with JBS. He parted ways with them a few years later over precisely the issue of his no longer being willing to toe the anti-immigration line that they required him to toe. The post-2006 Will Grigg, the one we loved so much here at these forums (AF included, back before he took his Bolshevik/anti-immigration turn), was much more pro-immigration and repudiated the anti-immigration views he had expressed on that issue when a part of JBS.
 
Notice that the article in the OP was printed in New American in 2002, when Grigg was still with JBS. He parted ways with them a few years later over precisely the issue of his no longer being willing to toe the anti-immigration line that they required him to toe. The post-2006 Will Grigg, the one we loved so much here at these forums (AF included, back before he took his Bolshevik/anti-immigration turn), was much more pro-immigration and repudiated the anti-immigration views he had expressed on that issue when a part of JBS.

People can change their minds.

They can address new realities within a framework of bedrock principles and come to differing conclusions.

To wed oneself to a particular policy or action, ignoring the reality around you, is pedantic cant masquerading as informed opinion.

Will Grigg is not with us (sadly) to comment on the current crisis, so what he would think of the situation, today, is nothing but speculation.
 
Back
Top