Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
Almost like he is an accomplice.There is no sense in it... Swinging back at the wrong perp.
Almost like he is an accomplice.There is no sense in it... Swinging back at the wrong perp.
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.
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.
The timing is uncertain but it is inevitable.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.
The timing is uncertain but it is inevitable.
You have no right to defend your rights.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.
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.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.
So even a voluntary association for the common defense is not permitted, in your view?
You can't explain why you support the globalists and communists, it would ruin your cover.
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.
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.
View attachment 6525
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.
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?
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.