The Captain's Journal » So What’s The Real Concern With Immigration Anyway?

So What’s The Real Concern With Immigration Anyway?

BY Herschel Smith

6 years, 3 months ago

Frank Clarke poses an interesting thought experiment on immigration.

As much as I admire David Codrea, I retain the opinion that he is flat wrong when he worries about immigration. A hundred years ago and more our forebears came here seeking to build a new life unaided and unhindered, and they were the ones who made America great. They did not expect that the American system would protect them if they failed, but they did expect that the American system would not get in their way, either. Today we have a welfare system that steps in when people suffer from their own bad decisions, and a regulatory system that purports to prevent such bad decisions from being made. Naturally, both systems are abject failures where they aren’t merely counter-productive.

We don’t have an “immigration problem”; we have a “welfare state problem”, and the immigration problem is merely its symptom. You may choose to cure the symptom, but I’m 100% certain it will return next year in a slightly different guise.

Yes, it’s a far bigger job to undo the welfare state, but if we don’t do that, we will spend all our energies battling ghosts.

This requires a separate analysis and I had decided to grant some space to it. This should be seen as an amicable discussion between friends, not an internet throw-down battle to the death, and so I’d like the comments to reflect that.

It’s a disagreement between allies, but an important one nonetheless. To be sure, I have more than a little direct experience with the entitlement state and its appurtenant give-aways. To begin with, I strongly feel that, along with the author of the Holy Scriptures, “The good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children.” This is no small matter, and I see forcible taxation as confiscatory and therefore wicked. Only wicked rulers do that.

I may be unable to provide for my children’s children as I’d like because of such government intrusion in my life’s work. Furthermore, my own daughter works as a health care provided in a hospital. Where do you think immigrants go for doctor visits as well as any pseudo-medical emergency? That’s right, the emergency room is the primary care physician for all of those immigrants, as well as dead weight we already have on the rolls in America.

How would you like to say no to providing more narcotics to feed a habit, only to have lice-infested, diseased, drug-addled ne’er-do-wells spit on you? But in the end, Frank is right, the welfare state creates this mess and the remedy for what we see in the hospitals is the same as with confiscatory taxes – repair the political system.

But that doesn’t even begin to touch the core issue with immigration. As I’ve pointed out before, the Hispanics and Latinos arriving on the Southern border have been taught and raised in a totally different world view and cultural paradigm.

Any force trying to work for a democratic, anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist transition has to win a base among the rural poor. But for historical reasons to do with the nationalisation of the land under Lázaro Cárdenas and the predominant form of peasant land tenure, which was “village cooperative” rather than based on individual plots, the demand for “land to the tiller” in Mexico does not imply an individual plot for every peasant or rural worker or family. In Mexico, collectivism among the peasantry is a strong tradition: we are not dealing with the atavistic Russian peasants, but a country in which there has already been a bourgeois-democratic revolution led by the peasantry.

One consequence of these factors is that the radical political forces among the rural population are on the whole explicitly anti-capitalist and socialist in their ideology (leaving aside the EZLN, which is a slightly different case). Sometimes this outlook is expressed in support for guerilla organisations; but struggle movements of the rural population are widespread, and they spontaneously ally with the most militant city-based leftist organisations. A good example of this is the OCSS (Peasant Organisation of the Southern Sierra), which would have no difficulty in getting the dictatorship of the proletariat written into its program.

The general conclusion about strategy which needs to be emphasised is that, far from Mexico having ceased to be an oppressed country, today it is more oppressed than 20 or 30 years ago.

It’s not a difficult decision for them to support gun control. They are steeped in statist views. Time and space don’t permit a detailed and thoroughgoing explanation of liberation theology, so readers can do their own search and study of this abomination and bastardization of the gospel. But suffice it to say that liberation theology easily gained a following among the Catholic priests in Latin America. One former Soviet spy claims that the Soviet Union created liberation theology.

I learned the fine points of the KGB involvement with Liberation Theology from Soviet General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, communist Romania’s chief razvedka (foreign intelligence) adviser – and my de facto boss, until 1956, when he became head of the Soviet espionage service, the PGU, a position he held for an unprecedented record of 15 years.

On October 26, 1959, Sakharovsky and his new boss, Nikita Khrushchev, came to Romania for what would become known as “Khrushchev’s six-day vacation.” He had never taken such a long vacation abroad, nor was his stay in Romania really a vacation. Khrushchev wanted to go down in history as the Soviet leader who had exported communism to Central and South America. Romania was the only Latin country in the Soviet bloc, and Khrushchev wanted to enroll her “Latin leaders” in his new “liberation” war.

The movement was born in the KGB, and it had a KGB-invented name: Liberation Theology. During those years, the KGB had a penchant for “liberation” movements. The National Liberation Army of Columbia (FARC), created by the KGB with help from Fidel Castro; the “National Liberation Army of Bolivia, created by the KGB with help from “Che” Guevara; and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), created by the KGB with help from Yasser Arafat are just a few additional “liberation” movements born at the Lubyanka — the headquarters of the KGB.

The birth of Liberation Theology was the intent of a 1960 super-secret “Party-State Dezinformatsiya Program” approved by Aleksandr Shelepin, the chairman of the KGB, and by Politburo member Aleksey Kirichenko, who coordinated the Communist Party’s international policies. This program demanded that the KGB take secret control of the World Council of Churches (WCC), based in Geneva, Switzerland, and use it as cover for converting Liberation Theology into a South American revolutionary tool. The WCC was the largest international ecumenical organization after the Vatican, representing some 550 million Christians of various denominations throughout 120 countries.

In any case, it’s imperative that we understand the cultural proclivities and world and life views of those we allow to become citizens and vote. The constitution won’t protect us because it outlines a bill of rights or a form of government. It is a covenant between men, and that covenant no more protects malfeasance than the marriage covenant protects a woman whose husband is bent on adultery. The parties to the covenant matter.

We don’t just want to turn over a heritage of financial security to our children’s children, but as I have stated to my own children, I want to turn over a heritage of Christianity to them. Statism is opposed in all of its ways to Christianity, and Christianity denies the state the rights only belonging to God. The foundations of the American experiment are Christian.

We care about immigration for more reasons than having stuff. To reduce this debate to having stuff is an ungracious charge, and the reasons for control over our borders and approval of the men whom we would call our fellow countrymen run deep and wide.

Immigration

Comments

On August 13, 2018 at 11:26 pm, JoeFour said:

With regard to the future of this country and immigration, race is of fundamental and ultimate importance and immigration is all about race. The presence of the welfare state is a minor footnote to the issue of race.

All United States immigration law since the founding has been racially based. Until 1965 preference was given to the white European peoples … after 1965 such preference was eliminated and replaced by preference to Asians, Africans, Central and South Americans … or to say it another way … immigration preference went from white (pre-1965) to non-white and it remains that way to this day.

The concept of merit-based immigration (advocated by those “conservatives” who follow the lead of Fox New’s Tucker Carlson) is a canard pure and simple. It refuses to acknowledge the facts and harsh reality of racial differences and their impact on the country … it especially fails to consider that this country was founded by white people who wanted their (white) posterity to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And what is the likely result of a merit-based immigration policy that makes no racial restrictions? The Chinese alone could give us a hundred million highly educated and well-behaved immigrants … including all the engineers we could ever want … but then we’d become a smaller version of China not the country founded by our Fathers …

Our last president is reported to have said that the United States is not a Christian country. There is no doubt that the strength and force of American Christianity has been in decline since … well …. 1965. Is it merely by odd chance that this decline has occurred during the same period in which the country shifted from being a 90% white county to one pushing 60%? Or is it more likely that religion follows race and race follows religion?

If these United States continue to experience the immigration trends that have been in place since 1965, the country will become a white minority nation in my lifetime … with no end in sight to an increasingly shrinking white minority thereafter. Is South Africa our model?

Truth be told, the United States today is no longer “a nation” but rather a group of disparate nations all living within the borders of what used to be one united country. And, consider that every white country in the world is experiencing this same transformation. We should all ask ourselves, what hidden power was it that created, lead, and advanced these simultaneous attacks … all of which continue with no end in sight?

Let’s compare the solid Republican California of the Beach Boys and Ronald Reagan to the California of today that gave Hillary Clinton some 2 or 3 million more votes than Donald Trump … that’s the future of the whole country and its coming soon. Google the demographics of all our major cities and you’ll find they were all 90% white in the 1950s vs minority white today … and that transformation happened as a direct result of the 1965 Immigration Act.

So, what’s the bottom line in the immigration debate? Repeal of the 1965 Immigration Act or else … or is there really no hope regardless of whether it stays or goes? Is it already … too late? I have no answers … but fear the worst is yet to come.

On August 14, 2018 at 7:07 am, Mark Matis said:

The problem is third world culture. And fourth world culture.

Third world is Central and South America. Fourth world is Africa and any Muslim nation.

When they are a small part of the population, they can act like decent human beings. As their numbers increase, however, their “culture” shows through. As you can see across Europe with the Muslim invasion.

And please do note that one CHOOSES one’s culture. It’s just that they consistently choose the sewer.

On August 14, 2018 at 9:12 am, Thomas Madere said:

I am 74 years old, my only hope is to be dead before the demise of the country or alive when the shooting starts.

On August 14, 2018 at 9:31 am, JJ said:

Whoever you let into the country who isn’t part of the original group has the incentive to slant or subvert the preexisting civilization toward his own group.

For instance the same guy who says no White person should ever be born in Africa (in response to the White genocide going on in SA, a civilization Dutch colonists created…) is the same guy who says America is for ‘everybody’. This same guy, who happens to be Black and Christian also brings up slavery every single time something positive is mentioned about America before 1970. The weakening of Whites, to where they have given up their own country is necessary to making this person feel comfortable.

Some immigrants want to be like the hosts. Inevitably all immigrants must be pressured and indoctrinated into becoming like the host population. Why the hell are they here if they don’t already want to be Americans??? Accomodating them is a one-way street to losing your country.

Everybody shows up after the Founding to take part in, or if the posterity is weak- steal all of the inheritance.

The posterity, in the inevitable cycle throughout history grows soft and ignorant. One thing leads to another, and Israel and Judah are getting slaughtered and carted off to serve the Assyrian Empire and Babylon as foreigners are moved in to replace them!

On August 14, 2018 at 9:48 am, dad29 said:

Re: “Liberation Theology”…….it is noteworthy that the Jesuits were the most fierce advocates of that particular heresy. John Paul II attempted to quell the Jesuit rebellion, but he did not do what was necessary, which would have been to de-frock the ‘infected’ Jesuits.

Now why is this detail of interest? Because the current Pope is a Jesuit and displays a lot of the Liberation Theology signs. As a Catholic, this is painful to admit.

On August 14, 2018 at 11:23 am, Hiram said:

Shouldn’t immigration be considered a privilege, not a right? If so, I personally feel our nation is overcrowded as it is – and I live in a very rural area. That’s all I’ve got to say about that.

Herschel, I doubt we will ever see eye to eye on the whole “constitution is a covenant” concept. I will ask this: if I am to buy into the covenant idea – whom do I sue for breech of contract and/or specific performance?

On August 14, 2018 at 12:17 pm, Frank Clarke said:

“Race” as a concept for judging the political value of individuals is utter nonsense. The proof of this is easy-peasy: the American Revolution was fought between two groups from the same race and the opposing sides were as different as night and day. Politically, there was an ocean between them. I could have picked any civil war anywhere.

Those who worry about diluting America’s “whiteness” by importing “other races” haven’t thought this through all the way. The real worry — masked by concerns over “race” — is for our political system, yet everyone of this august company is ready to assert that our current political system is catastrophically broken. Who would want to save the mess we’re in today? What we need to do is get to the point where brown skin, or lack of fluent English, or a tendency toward collectivism is no longer seen as “a problem that requires exclusion”.

The first rule of holes, we’re told, is ‘when you’re in one, stop digging’. We’re in a hole and if we expect to get out, we need to know how we got here and why. The ‘how and why’ we got here is human cupidity. Everybody likes free stuff, and when our politicians offered us free stuff, we bit that apple, just like Eve did. We allowed ourselves to be tempted because FREE STUFF. TANSTAAFL, as Robert Heinlein might say, or maybe TANSTAFS. Of course, nothing is really free. It has to be paid for by taxes. We went to war with the most powerful army on Earth over a 3% tax, yet today government at all levels, federal, state, county, municipal, and school and fire districts gobble 47% of GNP, much of it hidden from view because it’s corporate taxes or import duties (tariffs). That’s the real price of ‘free’, and because you can’t see it, you don’t complain. Well, you don’t complain when white folk are getting free stuff. Those messicans are another matter, though.

Yes, indeed, the hole we’re in has lots of causes. In fact, our present hole is so complex that it’s hard to know where to start to get us out of it. For the longest while, I thought the Libertarian Party might be a worthwhile endeavor but then they ran Bob Barr for President — Bob Barr, a renegade Republican who never saw a drug prohibition law he didn’t like — and I realized even they, “The Party of Principle”, only talked a good game.

Okay, dismantling the welfare state is too big a task. What can we do that’s bite-sized? There are such things.

You may have seen elsewhere on the web something about a hoped-for 28th amendment:
The 28th Amendment, “Restoring Sanity to The Law”

1. Congress may not exempt itself or its agents from compliance, in whole or in part, with any Federal law or regulation, nor allow regulations which do so, nor shall it encourage state or local jurisdictions to exempt it from compliance with their laws.

2. Any existing Federal law or regulation which exempts Congress from compliance with its provisions, in whole or in part, is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

I may have started this; at least, I have a TXT file with this exact text dated 11/11/2000, so that’s pretty far back. This might be a good place to start filling in the hole.

Another is the Interstate Commerce clause (in Article I, section 8). I.8 lists 16 things Congress has the power to do… and the power to regulate interstate commerce. As interpreted during the FDR years, “regulation of I/C” is so broad a power that much of I.8 is redundant; the things it authorizes are almost entirely subsumed within regulation of I/C. That’s the first clue that our current interpretation of the clause is wrong. I.8 could have been written as “Congress shall have the power to do whatever it pleases”. The War On Drugs exists because of the I/C clause, as does the FDA, the FCC, gun-free school zones, and a host of other things we could easily do without.

Without the things the I/C clause supposdly authorizes, our government would be a far more pliable entity. Without Congress’ ability to insulate themselves from the laws they pass, this country would be a much nicer place to live.

It would also, not exactly coincidentally, be a country that would attract the kind of immigrants who once converted the United States from farmland to an industrial behemoth. The newcomers could do it again. Ugh! Yukk! Who wants THAT!!

Me.

On August 14, 2018 at 1:26 pm, Herschel Smith said:

@Frank,

You are continuing with your ungracious reduction of this to having stuff. I’ve said very clearly and plainly that this wasn’t and isn’t my primary concern. Your singleminded focus on this issue has caused an inability to see forward.

My focus wasn’t on race. My focus was on culture and world and life views.

As for newcomers who would “convert” Amerika into some sort of industrial behemoth (as opposed to something it’s supposed to be now, I don’t know what), this sounds like gooey, emotional, religio-psycho babble wrapped up in jingoism.

I care about no such thing, nor should I (even if you could frame such babble into something more coherent). I believe in man being made in God’s image. That means three things: 1. Knowledge, 2. Righteousness, and 3. Holiness (this means in more pedestrian terms, following God in terms of being a prophet, priest and king). We are quite able to turn the wheels of America without additional help depending upon our dedication to the precepts outlined in the Holy Scriptures.

And thus I am back to where I started. You view and mine are fundamentally different, a difference for which I do no apologize, and of which I am glad and proud. I take a Calvinian world and life view, one based squarely on continental Calvinism regarding man’s calling, his weaknesses, his need for salvation, and the proper remedy. The culture and world and life view I wish to propagate in America rest on these shoulders.

I need no gooey, emotional jingoism.

@Hiram,

If it isn’t a covenant, then what is it? Do you see your rights as coming from the state rather than God? Do you see the state as outside of the precepts of the Scriptures and accountable to no one?

A covenant is nothing more than an agreement. You cannot and will not sue when this agreement goes bad. The remedy requires guns.

On August 14, 2018 at 1:52 pm, Henry said:

I have great sympathy for the viewpoint of the original poster, as far as it goes. But several additional issues need to be covered.

First of all, the welfare state isn’t the root issue, but only the biggest symptom of the root issue, which is the now widely-accepted pretense that a popular vote EMPOWERS one class to divest some other unpopular class (like middle-class wage-earners, small businesspeople, and gun owners) of their wealth, property, and/or rights.

The Supreme Court has ruled, “The very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the Courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights, may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” Ironically, they uttered this sentiment in 1942, seventy years after deciding that economic rights had practically no constitutional protection, and seven years after the New Deal had already begun the inexorable process of officially eroding both economic and personal rights.

Many of our uninvited immigrants hail from countries where “voting to take Joe’s stuff” is accepted both de facto and de jure — they immigrate here and (unlike the Poles, Italians, Irish, etc. of earlier centuries) no longer encounter any authority figures of the “dominant US culture” willing to set them straight about how “we” do things here… because our corrupt government now likes their way better than the constitutional way.

The second point is that the solution is not an either/or issue. If your house floods out twice a year, it’s easy for someone to say, “The proper solution isn’t for people to sandbag their houses, it’s to repair the levee.” But if the “proper solution” is going to take five years, nobody’s going to tell me I can’t use sandbags for five years. The same is true of immigration and the welfare state.

I believe that in a country where people’s rights and property are sacrosanct and immune from confiscatory elections, and in which those principles are immutable, immigration — even unlawful immigration, short of a deliberate military invasion — presents practically negligible risk. But we don’t have such a country, and even if we did, we’ve already proved that those principles are not immutable anyway. Totally ignoring a short-term amelioration (limiting illegal immigration) in favor of a root correction that will take decades to achieve — if it is achievable at all — is folly.

On August 14, 2018 at 2:27 pm, Frank Clarke said:

@Henry: 100% agreement, sadly.

@HFS: The issue may not be “stuff” for you (or for me), but it is for too many others, and they out-vote us far too often. Have we crossed that Rubicon yet beyond which is only civil war? I’m beginning to think so.

On August 14, 2018 at 2:42 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:

Respected military/geopolitical analysts such as William Lind and John Robb have warned for years that America’s inability and/or unwillingness to control its border with Mexico is, in effect, to court fourth-generation conflict.

Lind, one of the creators of the “generations of warfare” model, along with several other members of the inner circle of the late Colonel John Boyd – who was perhaps this nation’s greatest military theorist – flatly states that to import illegal immigrants from Mexico is to import 4GW (fourth-generation warfare) and that such a massive flow of people over our southern border must be construed as an invasion, whether the “invaders” bear arms or not.

It germane to note that in 4GW, non-traditional weapons are often those which work the best – and Lind includes mass movements of people, whether legal or illegal – in that category.

The people flooding into Europe may be called “refugees” by the powers-that-be, just as the people flooding into the southern United States are euphemistically called “migrant workers” – but such language does not alter the fact that these people are in actuality invaders. And that their presence is anything but accidental and by chance.

As former Navy SEAL-turned-author/analyst Matt Bracken has observed, the invasion of Europe now underway has been planned with as much care as the invasion of Normandy in June, 1944. The “refugees” – many of whom are young Muslim males of military service age and whom we are told are destitute and poor – continue to arrive at the southern coast of Europe in obviously new powered ocean-going launches capable of carrying as many as fifty people. If the ‘refugees” are poor, who is buying these vessels and the petrol and provisions for them?

Incidentally, when these craft set forth from the coast of North Africa towards southern Europe, and reach open water out of the sight of land, the Muslims throw overboard any non-Muslims who happen to be present. Can’t have the hated infidels and kafirs along on the great hegira, now can they?

Unless the United States and Europe militarize their borders, and are prepared to use lethal force (as a last resort of course) to defend the sanctity of their borders, they will drown in the sea of humanity surging toward them. Any nation – any civilization – which is unprepared or unwilling to defend its own borders, language and culture, will in time – like ancient Rome – cease to exist. That is the hard truth of history.

On August 14, 2018 at 3:26 pm, Gryphon said:

Face the Facts. It IS a Race War. And a certain ‘race’ (the same one that invented communism) is Promoting, and often Paying For (like the Boats) this Invasion of non-assimilable, low-I.Q., overbreeding welfare Parasites.
This IS a 4-G War, being waged upon the White, Christian Europeans, and the Sooner that Whitey figures this out, the less Damage will be done in the End.
Here is an Example of the Real Enemy –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85BKDj_1vVU

http://www.mediafire.com/file/vcpu7j7hakukmde/Coudenhove-Kalergi-Practical-Idealism-English.pdf

On August 14, 2018 at 3:59 pm, scott s. said:

Seems to me the migration of human populations has been pretty much a constant through all human history. It’s only been since the later nineteenth century that the concept of “borders” as a means of preventing migration has existed. So trying to prevent something so rooted in human ethos seems a difficult task that requires a great deal of acceptance if it is going to be successful.

On August 14, 2018 at 9:54 pm, Herschel Smith said:

See, this is why the Southern border will never be secured. While the Marxists think as a monolith concerning this issue and unanimously want more Marxist voters (which is what they get with open borders), the (ahem) “conservatives” can’t come to terms with this existential threat. It continues to be like herding cats to make them understand. Thus, civil war is inevitable. It WILL HAPPEN.

As to the issue of fixing the welfare state, it is the height of naivety to think that we can fix problem A, only to invite millions of voters in who then proceed to un-fix the fix to problem A. It doesn’t matter what that problem is – gun controllers, welfare, or whatever.

It matters who lives here and how they think. But as of this writing it’s now too late.

On August 14, 2018 at 9:58 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:

@ Scott S.

Re: “Seems to me the migration of human populations has been pretty much a constant through all human history. It’s only been since the later nineteenth century that the concept of “borders” as a means of preventing migration has existed.”

You are substantially correct, but to be clear, the idea of defensible borders drawn on a map dates to a much earlier time, in Europe certainly to the Middle Ages and the first nation-states after the Treaty of Westphalia, perhaps earlier.

Human beings have woven into their DNA the trait of territoriality. Since prehistoric times, humans have sought to defend the physical spaces in which they live, work, hunt, farm, conduct commerce and otherwise call home.

The idea of drawing lines on a map or building a wall around what territory you consider yours isn’t new – witness the Great Wall of China. What is new, relatively speaking, is the weaponization of large movements of people by one nation against another, or one faction, tribe or group of the population against another.

I am not speaking of massive armies of soldiers, which been around for millennia, but the weaponization of immigration policy, the use of refugees for geopolitical purposes, and similar tactics which use civilians as de facto invaders.

The only exception to this pattern, which is fairly new – are the Muslims, who have used the mass migration of the believers – via what is termed the hegira – since the time of Mohammed 1,400 years ago, to conquer new territories in the name of Allah.

What has been termed the “most important graph in the world” graphs human population over time in the developed (first) world, versus that in the developing (second/third) worlds. Whereas the population of the developed world (mostly northern hemisphere) nations is stable and shows only a very modest increase, the line charting second-third world population growth is exponential – and extremely steep.

Because the passage from North Africa to Southern Europe is relatively short in comparison to transiting the Atlantic, Indian or Pacific Oceans, Europe is feeling the brunt of this massive population wave. Native Europeans will soon, in the near-term future, face an existential choice – defend themselves and their borders – or face oblivion beneath the onrushing tide of third-world humanity.

To borrow the analogy from Dr. Michael Savage, a lifeboat can hold only so many people before it capsizes. European civilization can take in only so many people before it ceases to exist.

On August 15, 2018 at 8:49 am, Fred said:

I’m not a big fan of Turkey. Stay with me here. I think our need for them as a strategic ally in NATO to cover the southern flank of Europe has obviously past given the current self inflicted invasion. We, as people’s have nothing in common. In fact, as a white Christian they want me dead. No, not a fan at all. Wouldn’t it be nice if we stopped messing with the Russians and stopped making them a fictional enemy so our governments can play geopolitic strategy games? The Russian people are a fine people. I think that we would be good natural allies against the global south. The whole East vs. West global paradigm needs to end immediately and northern peoples need to realize that the actual threat is southern peoples invading. The Pentagon and presidents have been warned of this repeatedly and yet have invited the invasion. Your problem, ladies and gentlemen, is your governments. And no, Trump isn’t fixing it. The invasion continues apace. I can only conclude that the NWO is looking forward to profiting from the supply of both sides in these coming conflicts. I’m just wondering who their pre-selected winner is. These people need killing.

On August 15, 2018 at 11:32 am, Hiram said:

@Herschel “A covenant is nothing more than an agreement.” Exactly. It takes at minimum TWO to come to agreement. Unless we are talking about a unilateral contract and such is not the case here.

My rights come, as do yours, from a Sovereign God. It might be more productive to ask you, who are the parties to which this covenant pertains? I have agreed to nothing. Yes, I understand there is this idea of “implied consent” bandied about but am I then allowed to withdraw said “consent”. We can get into an ocean of muck sorting out this whole thing. Suffice it to say, I, personally have not seen any evidence of a covenant. If you are suggesting this “agreement” is embodied in our constitution, then I must point out that this “agreement” i.e. contract is indeed in breach.

On August 15, 2018 at 12:50 pm, Gryphon said:

Hiram – “Natural Rights” or Human Rights, if you will, do Indeed come from God. However, the ‘corporate’ State neither Recognizes God nor your Rights. (((they))) consider You as Chattel, Property, ‘Collateralized’ by the so-called ‘Birth Certificate’. (((they))) consider that You have CONSENTED to their Laws and Taxes and Regulations by having used (((their))) ‘Social Security Number’
(Hollerith System of Stock Control) and Applying for Permission to Travel, i.e. a ‘Driver’s License’.

Until enough People Understand the Criminal Fraud Corporate Entities that have Usurped the Lawful Constitutional Government, and Refuse to Comply in Numbers that (((they))) cannot Suppress, the Degradation of Society and the Looting of the Productive will Continue. Until it Doesn’t.

On August 15, 2018 at 12:55 pm, Herschel Smith said:

@Hiram,

You make some clever and insightful points, but take a Lockean view of things. There were times in history (most of history, in fact) when covenants were made between parties for those parties when those parties didn’t have any choice, e.g., arranged marriages which were commonplace until the nineteenth century, and the proto-covenant between God and His saved people, the followers of Christ, in Genesis Chapter 15.

On August 15, 2018 at 12:56 pm, Herschel Smith said:

And, the FedGov is indeed in violation of said covenant, which raises the question of how long the Amerikan people will suffer those infringements.

On August 15, 2018 at 3:21 pm, Gryphon said:

Captain – IMO, the ..”Amerikan people will suffer those infringements.” as long as the Feral government Functions juuuust well enough that the Lights Stay On and the EBT Cards Work. As long as (not too many) People are not sitting Hungry in the Dark, the Majority’s Interest is to ‘go along with it’ even if they Know things are FUBAR, until the point where it becomes Impossible (for whatever Reason) to ‘Play Nice’ with the parasites.

On August 15, 2018 at 5:01 pm, Pat Hines said:

Hershel said, “concerning this issue and unanimously want more Marxist voters (which is what they get with open borders), the (ahem) “conservatives” can’t come to terms with this existential threat. It continues to be like herding cats to make them understand. Thus, civil war is inevitable. It WILL HAPPEN.

It matters who lives here and how they think. But as of this writing it’s now too late.”

This is pretty much where we are today. We cannot vote our way out of the situation, communists are the establishment.

An example of the issue is the reluctance of some to not name the (((tribe)) that is working and funding the demise of the white race. I like both David Codrea and Matt Bracken, both of whom refuse to acknowledge the glaring obviousness of the core issue.

Those (((people))) do not consider themselves white and are major advocates of white genocide.

On August 15, 2018 at 7:14 pm, JoeFour said:

Pat Hines said, “Those (((people))) do not consider themselves white and are major advocates of white genocide.”

Yes.

Forgive me for once again recommending Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s book, “The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in 20th Century Intellectual and Political Movements.”

On August 19, 2018 at 1:25 am, Bob said:

>A hundred years ago and more our forebears came here seeking to build a new life unaided and unhindered, and they were the ones who made America great.

My forebears came here almost 400 years ago. They made America so great that your forebears wanted to come here. Your ancestors never assimilated, try as they might have. They made our country more like where they came from. Now we have a country that is sick and dying. Many things contributed to it, but an incredible influx of new people who never learned our values can’t be ignored.

If you think you’ve adopted American values, ask yourself if most Americans hold similar values. You might respond, like me, that there are no values that most Americans have. We’re very split. That is the real concern with immigration.

On August 19, 2018 at 3:24 pm, Northgunner said:

Stefan Molyneux and Vox Day had a very interesting
discussion that I believe bears on the discussion here.

Will There Be War? – Stefan Molyneux and Vox Day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW5USVpTnJA&t=1447s

Except for Pat Hines, no one else, including Codrea
mentioned the 2 ton gorilla in the room; that being
the domination and influence of the zionist/talmudist
enemy (especially the rothschilds corporate/military
colony known as israel and it’s foreign occupation
tentacles known as adl, aipac, bnai-brith, spcl and
others especially both the chabad lubavich and domestic
useful idiots such as christian zionists like ‘baby huey’
Haggee and his flock and related ministers not to mention
the members of congress that happen to be ‘dual-citizens’
of israel).

America has been under quiet foreign occupation by
israel since JFK’s murder (LBJ quickly ascended and showed
himself to be their puppet, especially covering for them
when the USS Liberty and her crew were attacked in 1967).

Isn’t it interesting how much aid and support that israel
and it’s ‘lobbys’ give out to ‘mass immigration/diversity’
but israel declares itself a ‘jewish state dedicated to protecting
it’s culture and identiy’ and refuses to take a single ‘syrian’
or african?….

Don’t believe me?…then watch this (hear it from the jews
own lips!):

The Plan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKyp1e_jYc

Don’t forget that the EU was the idea of zionist Kalergi;
what’s happening today in Europe and America is what
he and other zionists/talmudists desired and dreamed of!

Northgunner

On August 19, 2018 at 11:34 pm, JJ said:

Actually there’s many elites working together through mystery cults, secret societies and open groups like Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission. Trying to pin all the blame on one faction is ignorant. It’s the equivalent of ignorant Black people blaming White people for everything wrong with the world.

On August 13, 2018 at 11:26 pm, JoeFour said:

With regard to the future of this country and immigration, race is of fundamental and ultimate importance and immigration is all about race. The presence of the welfare state is a minor footnote to the issue of race.

All United States immigration law since the founding has been racially based. Until 1965 preference was given to the white European peoples … after 1965 such preference was eliminated and replaced by preference to Asians, Africans, Central and South Americans … or to say it another way … immigration preference went from white (pre-1965) to non-white and it remains that way to this day.

The concept of merit-based immigration (advocated by those “conservatives” who follow the lead of Fox New’s Tucker Carlson) is a canard pure and simple. It refuses to acknowledge the facts and harsh reality of racial differences and their impact on the country … it especially fails to consider that this country was founded by white people who wanted their (white) posterity to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And what is the likely result of a merit-based immigration policy that makes no racial restrictions? The Chinese alone could give us a hundred million highly educated and well-behaved immigrants … including all the engineers we could ever want … but then we’d become a smaller version of China not the country founded by our Fathers …

Our last president is reported to have said that the United States is not a Christian country. There is no doubt that the strength and force of American Christianity has been in decline since … well …. 1965. Is it merely by odd chance that this decline has occurred during the same period in which the country shifted from being a 90% white county to one pushing 60%? Or is it more likely that religion follows race and race follows religion?

If these United States continue to experience the immigration trends that have been in place since 1965, the country will become a white minority nation in my lifetime … with no end in sight to an increasingly shrinking white minority thereafter. Is South Africa our model?

Truth be told, the United States today is no longer “a nation” but rather a group of disparate nations all living within the borders of what used to be one united country. And, consider that every white country in the world is experiencing this same transformation. We should all ask ourselves, what hidden power was it that created, lead, and advanced these simultaneous attacks … all of which continue with no end in sight?

Let’s compare the solid Republican California of the Beach Boys and Ronald Reagan to the California of today that gave Hillary Clinton some 2 or 3 million more votes than Donald Trump … that’s the future of the whole country and its coming soon. Google the demographics of all our major cities and you’ll find they were all 90% white in the 1950s vs minority white today … and that transformation happened as a direct result of the 1965 Immigration Act.

So, what’s the bottom line in the immigration debate? Repeal of the 1965 Immigration Act or else … or is there really no hope regardless of whether it stays or goes? Is it already … too late? I have no answers … but fear the worst is yet to come.
On August 14, 2018 at 7:07 am, Mark Matis said:

The problem is third world culture. And fourth world culture.

Third world is Central and South America. Fourth world is Africa and any Muslim nation.

When they are a small part of the population, they can act like decent human beings. As their numbers increase, however, their “culture” shows through. As you can see across Europe with the Muslim invasion.

And please do note that one CHOOSES one’s culture. It’s just that they consistently choose the sewer.
On August 14, 2018 at 9:12 am, Thomas Madere said:

I am 74 years old, my only hope is to be dead before the demise of the country or alive when the shooting starts.
On August 14, 2018 at 9:31 am, JJ said:

Whoever you let into the country who isn’t part of the original group has the incentive to slant or subvert the preexisting civilization toward his own group.

For instance the same guy who says no White person should ever be born in Africa (in response to the White genocide going on in SA, a civilization Dutch colonists created…) is the same guy who says America is for ‘everybody’. This same guy, who happens to be Black and Christian also brings up slavery every single time something positive is mentioned about America before 1970. The weakening of Whites, to where they have given up their own country is necessary to making this person feel comfortable.

Some immigrants want to be like the hosts. Inevitably all immigrants must be pressured and indoctrinated into becoming like the host population. Why the hell are they here if they don’t already want to be Americans??? Accomodating them is a one-way street to losing your country.

Everybody shows up after the Founding to take part in, or if the posterity is weak- steal all of the inheritance.

The posterity, in the inevitable cycle throughout history grows soft and ignorant. One thing leads to another, and Israel and Judah are getting slaughtered and carted off to serve the Assyrian Empire and Babylon as foreigners are moved in to replace them!
On August 14, 2018 at 9:48 am, dad29 said:

Re: “Liberation Theology”…….it is noteworthy that the Jesuits were the most fierce advocates of that particular heresy. John Paul II attempted to quell the Jesuit rebellion, but he did not do what was necessary, which would have been to de-frock the ‘infected’ Jesuits.

Now why is this detail of interest? Because the current Pope is a Jesuit and displays a lot of the Liberation Theology signs. As a Catholic, this is painful to admit.
On August 14, 2018 at 11:23 am, Hiram said:

Shouldn’t immigration be considered a privilege, not a right? If so, I personally feel our nation is overcrowded as it is – and I live in a very rural area. That’s all I’ve got to say about that.

Herschel, I doubt we will ever see eye to eye on the whole “constitution is a covenant” concept. I will ask this: if I am to buy into the covenant idea – whom do I sue for breech of contract and/or specific performance?
On August 14, 2018 at 12:17 pm, Frank Clarke said:

“Race” as a concept for judging the political value of individuals is utter nonsense. The proof of this is easy-peasy: the American Revolution was fought between two groups from the same race and the opposing sides were as different as night and day. Politically, there was an ocean between them. I could have picked any civil war anywhere.

Those who worry about diluting America’s “whiteness” by importing “other races” haven’t thought this through all the way. The real worry — masked by concerns over “race” — is for our political system, yet everyone of this august company is ready to assert that our current political system is catastrophically broken. Who would want to save the mess we’re in today? What we need to do is get to the point where brown skin, or lack of fluent English, or a tendency toward collectivism is no longer seen as “a problem that requires exclusion”.

The first rule of holes, we’re told, is ‘when you’re in one, stop digging’. We’re in a hole and if we expect to get out, we need to know how we got here and why. The ‘how and why’ we got here is human cupidity. Everybody likes free stuff, and when our politicians offered us free stuff, we bit that apple, just like Eve did. We allowed ourselves to be tempted because FREE STUFF. TANSTAAFL, as Robert Heinlein might say, or maybe TANSTAFS. Of course, nothing is really free. It has to be paid for by taxes. We went to war with the most powerful army on Earth over a 3% tax, yet today government at all levels, federal, state, county, municipal, and school and fire districts gobble 47% of GNP, much of it hidden from view because it’s corporate taxes or import duties (tariffs). That’s the real price of ‘free’, and because you can’t see it, you don’t complain. Well, you don’t complain when white folk are getting free stuff. Those messicans are another matter, though.

Yes, indeed, the hole we’re in has lots of causes. In fact, our present hole is so complex that it’s hard to know where to start to get us out of it. For the longest while, I thought the Libertarian Party might be a worthwhile endeavor but then they ran Bob Barr for President — Bob Barr, a renegade Republican who never saw a drug prohibition law he didn’t like — and I realized even they, “The Party of Principle”, only talked a good game.

Okay, dismantling the welfare state is too big a task. What can we do that’s bite-sized? There are such things.

You may have seen elsewhere on the web something about a hoped-for 28th amendment:
The 28th Amendment, “Restoring Sanity to The Law”

1. Congress may not exempt itself or its agents from compliance, in whole or in part, with any Federal law or regulation, nor allow regulations which do so, nor shall it encourage state or local jurisdictions to exempt it from compliance with their laws.

2. Any existing Federal law or regulation which exempts Congress from compliance with its provisions, in whole or in part, is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

I may have started this; at least, I have a TXT file with this exact text dated 11/11/2000, so that’s pretty far back. This might be a good place to start filling in the hole.

Another is the Interstate Commerce clause (in Article I, section 8). I.8 lists 16 things Congress has the power to do… and the power to regulate interstate commerce. As interpreted during the FDR years, “regulation of I/C” is so broad a power that much of I.8 is redundant; the things it authorizes are almost entirely subsumed within regulation of I/C. That’s the first clue that our current interpretation of the clause is wrong. I.8 could have been written as “Congress shall have the power to do whatever it pleases”. The War On Drugs exists because of the I/C clause, as does the FDA, the FCC, gun-free school zones, and a host of other things we could easily do without.

Without the things the I/C clause supposdly authorizes, our government would be a far more pliable entity. Without Congress’ ability to insulate themselves from the laws they pass, this country would be a much nicer place to live.

It would also, not exactly coincidentally, be a country that would attract the kind of immigrants who once converted the United States from farmland to an industrial behemoth. The newcomers could do it again. Ugh! Yukk! Who wants THAT!!

Me.
On August 14, 2018 at 1:26 pm, Herschel Smith said:

@Frank,

You are continuing with your ungracious reduction of this to having stuff. I’ve said very clearly and plainly that this wasn’t and isn’t my primary concern. Your singleminded focus on this issue has caused an inability to see forward.

My focus wasn’t on race. My focus was on culture and world and life views.

As for newcomers who would “convert” Amerika into some sort of industrial behemoth (as opposed to something it’s supposed to be now, I don’t know what), this sounds like gooey, emotional, religio-psycho babble wrapped up in jingoism.

I care about no such thing, nor should I (even if you could frame such babble into something more coherent). I believe in man being made in God’s image. That means three things: 1. Knowledge, 2. Righteousness, and 3. Holiness (this means in more pedestrian terms, following God in terms of being a prophet, priest and king). We are quite able to turn the wheels of America without additional help depending upon our dedication to the precepts outlined in the Holy Scriptures.

And thus I am back to where I started. You view and mine are fundamentally different, a difference for which I do no apologize, and of which I am glad and proud. I take a Calvinian world and life view, one based squarely on continental Calvinism regarding man’s calling, his weaknesses, his need for salvation, and the proper remedy. The culture and world and life view I wish to propagate in America rest on these shoulders.

I need no gooey, emotional jingoism.

@Hiram,

If it isn’t a covenant, then what is it? Do you see your rights as coming from the state rather than God? Do you see the state as outside of the precepts of the Scriptures and accountable to no one?

A covenant is nothing more than an agreement. You cannot and will not sue when this agreement goes bad. The remedy requires guns.
On August 14, 2018 at 1:52 pm, Henry said:

I have great sympathy for the viewpoint of the original poster, as far as it goes. But several additional issues need to be covered.

First of all, the welfare state isn’t the root issue, but only the biggest symptom of the root issue, which is the now widely-accepted pretense that a popular vote EMPOWERS one class to divest some other unpopular class (like middle-class wage-earners, small businesspeople, and gun owners) of their wealth, property, and/or rights.

The Supreme Court has ruled, “The very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the Courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights, may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” Ironically, they uttered this sentiment in 1942, seventy years after deciding that economic rights had practically no constitutional protection, and seven years after the New Deal had already begun the inexorable process of officially eroding both economic and personal rights.

Many of our uninvited immigrants hail from countries where “voting to take Joe’s stuff” is accepted both de facto and de jure — they immigrate here and (unlike the Poles, Italians, Irish, etc. of earlier centuries) no longer encounter any authority figures of the “dominant US culture” willing to set them straight about how “we” do things here… because our corrupt government now likes their way better than the constitutional way.

The second point is that the solution is not an either/or issue. If your house floods out twice a year, it’s easy for someone to say, “The proper solution isn’t for people to sandbag their houses, it’s to repair the levee.” But if the “proper solution” is going to take five years, nobody’s going to tell me I can’t use sandbags for five years. The same is true of immigration and the welfare state.

I believe that in a country where people’s rights and property are sacrosanct and immune from confiscatory elections, and in which those principles are immutable, immigration — even unlawful immigration, short of a deliberate military invasion — presents practically negligible risk. But we don’t have such a country, and even if we did, we’ve already proved that those principles are not immutable anyway. Totally ignoring a short-term amelioration (limiting illegal immigration) in favor of a root correction that will take decades to achieve — if it is achievable at all — is folly.
On August 14, 2018 at 2:27 pm, Frank Clarke said:

@Henry: 100% agreement, sadly.

@HFS: The issue may not be “stuff” for you (or for me), but it is for too many others, and they out-vote us far too often. Have we crossed that Rubicon yet beyond which is only civil war? I’m beginning to think so.
On August 14, 2018 at 2:42 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:

Respected military/geopolitical analysts such as William Lind and John Robb have warned for years that America’s inability and/or unwillingness to control its border with Mexico is, in effect, to court fourth-generation conflict.

Lind, one of the creators of the “generations of warfare” model, along with several other members of the inner circle of the late Colonel John Boyd – who was perhaps this nation’s greatest military theorist – flatly states that to import illegal immigrants from Mexico is to import 4GW (fourth-generation warfare) and that such a massive flow of people over our southern border must be construed as an invasion, whether the “invaders” bear arms or not.

It germane to note that in 4GW, non-traditional weapons are often those which work the best – and Lind includes mass movements of people, whether legal or illegal – in that category.

The people flooding into Europe may be called “refugees” by the powers-that-be, just as the people flooding into the southern United States are euphemistically called “migrant workers” – but such language does not alter the fact that these people are in actuality invaders. And that their presence is anything but accidental and by chance.

As former Navy SEAL-turned-author/analyst Matt Bracken has observed, the invasion of Europe now underway has been planned with as much care as the invasion of Normandy in June, 1944. The “refugees” – many of whom are young Muslim males of military service age and whom we are told are destitute and poor – continue to arrive at the southern coast of Europe in obviously new powered ocean-going launches capable of carrying as many as fifty people. If the ‘refugees” are poor, who is buying these vessels and the petrol and provisions for them?

Incidentally, when these craft set forth from the coast of North Africa towards southern Europe, and reach open water out of the sight of land, the Muslims throw overboard any non-Muslims who happen to be present. Can’t have the hated infidels and kafirs along on the great hegira, now can they?

Unless the United States and Europe militarize their borders, and are prepared to use lethal force (as a last resort of course) to defend the sanctity of their borders, they will drown in the sea of humanity surging toward them. Any nation – any civilization – which is unprepared or unwilling to defend its own borders, language and culture, will in time – like ancient Rome – cease to exist. That is the hard truth of history.
On August 14, 2018 at 3:26 pm, Gryphon said:

Face the Facts. It IS a Race War. And a certain ‘race’ (the same one that invented communism) is Promoting, and often Paying For (like the Boats) this Invasion of non-assimilable, low-I.Q., overbreeding welfare Parasites.
This IS a 4-G War, being waged upon the White, Christian Europeans, and the Sooner that Whitey figures this out, the less Damage will be done in the End.
Here is an Example of the Real Enemy –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85BKDj_1vVU

http://www.mediafire.com/file/vcpu7j7hakukmde/Coudenhove-Kalergi-Practical-Idealism-English.pdf
On August 14, 2018 at 3:59 pm, scott s. said:

Seems to me the migration of human populations has been pretty much a constant through all human history. It’s only been since the later nineteenth century that the concept of “borders” as a means of preventing migration has existed. So trying to prevent something so rooted in human ethos seems a difficult task that requires a great deal of acceptance if it is going to be successful.
On August 14, 2018 at 9:54 pm, Herschel Smith said:

See, this is why the Southern border will never be secured. While the Marxists think as a monolith concerning this issue and unanimously want more Marxist voters (which is what they get with open borders), the (ahem) “conservatives” can’t come to terms with this existential threat. It continues to be like herding cats to make them understand. Thus, civil war is inevitable. It WILL HAPPEN.

As to the issue of fixing the welfare state, it is the height of naivety to think that we can fix problem A, only to invite millions of voters in who then proceed to un-fix the fix to problem A. It doesn’t matter what that problem is – gun controllers, welfare, or whatever.

It matters who lives here and how they think. But as of this writing it’s now too late.
On August 14, 2018 at 9:58 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:

@ Scott S.

Re: “Seems to me the migration of human populations has been pretty much a constant through all human history. It’s only been since the later nineteenth century that the concept of “borders” as a means of preventing migration has existed.”

You are substantially correct, but to be clear, the idea of defensible borders drawn on a map dates to a much earlier time, in Europe certainly to the Middle Ages and the first nation-states after the Treaty of Westphalia, perhaps earlier.

Human beings have woven into their DNA the trait of territoriality. Since prehistoric times, humans have sought to defend the physical spaces in which they live, work, hunt, farm, conduct commerce and otherwise call home.

The idea of drawing lines on a map or building a wall around what territory you consider yours isn’t new – witness the Great Wall of China. What is new, relatively speaking, is the weaponization of large movements of people by one nation against another, or one faction, tribe or group of the population against another.

I am not speaking of massive armies of soldiers, which been around for millennia, but the weaponization of immigration policy, the use of refugees for geopolitical purposes, and similar tactics which use civilians as de facto invaders.

The only exception to this pattern, which is fairly new – are the Muslims, who have used the mass migration of the believers – via what is termed the hegira – since the time of Mohammed 1,400 years ago, to conquer new territories in the name of Allah.

What has been termed the “most important graph in the world” graphs human population over time in the developed (first) world, versus that in the developing (second/third) worlds. Whereas the population of the developed world (mostly northern hemisphere) nations is stable and shows only a very modest increase, the line charting second-third world population growth is exponential – and extremely steep.

Because the passage from North Africa to Southern Europe is relatively short in comparison to transiting the Atlantic, Indian or Pacific Oceans, Europe is feeling the brunt of this massive population wave. Native Europeans will soon, in the near-term future, face an existential choice – defend themselves and their borders – or face oblivion beneath the onrushing tide of third-world humanity.

To borrow the analogy from Dr. Michael Savage, a lifeboat can hold only so many people before it capsizes. European civilization can take in only so many people before it ceases to exist.
On August 15, 2018 at 8:49 am, Fred said:

I’m not a big fan of Turkey. Stay with me here. I think our need for them as a strategic ally in NATO to cover the southern flank of Europe has obviously past given the current self inflicted invasion. We, as people’s have nothing in common. In fact, as a white Christian they want me dead. No, not a fan at all. Wouldn’t it be nice if we stopped messing with the Russians and stopped making them a fictional enemy so our governments can play geopolitic strategy games? The Russian people are a fine people. I think that we would be good natural allies against the global south. The whole East vs. West global paradigm needs to end immediately and northern peoples need to realize that the actual threat is southern peoples invading. The Pentagon and presidents have been warned of this repeatedly and yet have invited the invasion. Your problem, ladies and gentlemen, is your governments. And no, Trump isn’t fixing it. The invasion continues apace. I can only conclude that the NWO is looking forward to profiting from the supply of both sides in these coming conflicts. I’m just wondering who their pre-selected winner is. These people need killing.
On August 15, 2018 at 11:32 am, Hiram said:

@Herschel “A covenant is nothing more than an agreement.” Exactly. It takes at minimum TWO to come to agreement. Unless we are talking about a unilateral contract and such is not the case here.

My rights come, as do yours, from a Sovereign God. It might be more productive to ask you, who are the parties to which this covenant pertains? I have agreed to nothing. Yes, I understand there is this idea of “implied consent” bandied about but am I then allowed to withdraw said “consent”. We can get into an ocean of muck sorting out this whole thing. Suffice it to say, I, personally have not seen any evidence of a covenant. If you are suggesting this “agreement” is embodied in our constitution, then I must point out that this “agreement” i.e. contract is indeed in breach.
On August 15, 2018 at 12:50 pm, Gryphon said:

Hiram – “Natural Rights” or Human Rights, if you will, do Indeed come from God. However, the ‘corporate’ State neither Recognizes God nor your Rights. (((they))) consider You as Chattel, Property, ‘Collateralized’ by the so-called ‘Birth Certificate’. (((they))) consider that You have CONSENTED to their Laws and Taxes and Regulations by having used (((their))) ‘Social Security Number’
(Hollerith System of Stock Control) and Applying for Permission to Travel, i.e. a ‘Driver’s License’.

Until enough People Understand the Criminal Fraud Corporate Entities that have Usurped the Lawful Constitutional Government, and Refuse to Comply in Numbers that (((they))) cannot Suppress, the Degradation of Society and the Looting of the Productive will Continue. Until it Doesn’t.
On August 15, 2018 at 12:55 pm, Herschel Smith said:

@Hiram,

You make some clever and insightful points, but take a Lockean view of things. There were times in history (most of history, in fact) when covenants were made between parties for those parties when those parties didn’t have any choice, e.g., arranged marriages which were commonplace until the nineteenth century, and the proto-covenant between God and His saved people, the followers of Christ, in Genesis Chapter 15.
On August 15, 2018 at 12:56 pm, Herschel Smith said:

And, the FedGov is indeed in violation of said covenant, which raises the question of how long the Amerikan people will suffer those infringements.
On August 15, 2018 at 3:21 pm, Gryphon said:

Captain – IMO, the ..”Amerikan people will suffer those infringements.” as long as the Feral government Functions juuuust well enough that the Lights Stay On and the EBT Cards Work. As long as (not too many) People are not sitting Hungry in the Dark, the Majority’s Interest is to ‘go along with it’ even if they Know things are FUBAR, until the point where it becomes Impossible (for whatever Reason) to ‘Play Nice’ with the parasites.
On August 15, 2018 at 5:01 pm, Pat Hines said:

Hershel said, “concerning this issue and unanimously want more Marxist voters (which is what they get with open borders), the (ahem) “conservatives” can’t come to terms with this existential threat. It continues to be like herding cats to make them understand. Thus, civil war is inevitable. It WILL HAPPEN.

As to the issue of fixing the welfare state, it is the height of naivety to think that we can fix problem A, only to invite millions of voters in who then proceed to un-fix the fix to problem A. It doesn’t matter what that problem is – gun controllers, welfare, or whatever.

It matters who lives here and how they think. But as of this writing it’s now too late.”

This is pretty much where we are today. We cannot vote our way out of the situation, communists are the establishment.

An example of the issue is the reluctance of some to not name the (((tribe)) that is working and funding the demise of the white race. I like both David Codrea and Matt Bracken, both of whom refuse to acknowledge the glaring obviousness of the core issue.

Those (((people))) do not consider themselves white and are major advocates of white genocide.
On August 15, 2018 at 7:14 pm, JoeFour said:

Pat Hines said, “Those (((people))) do not consider themselves white and are major advocates of white genocide.”

Yes.

Forgive me for once again recommending Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s book, “The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in 20th Century Intellectual and Political Movements.”
On August 19, 2018 at 1:25 am, Bob said:

>A hundred years ago and more our forebears came here seeking to build a new life unaided and unhindered, and they were the ones who made America great.

My forebears came here almost 400 years ago. They made America so great that your forebears wanted to come here. Your ancestors never assimilated, try as they might have. They made our country more like where they came from. Now we have a country that is sick and dying. Many things contributed to it, but an incredible influx of new people who never learned our values can’t be ignored.

If you think you’ve adopted American values, ask yourself if most Americans hold similar values. You might respond, like me, that there are no values that most Americans have. We’re very split. That is the real concern with immigration.
On August 19, 2018 at 3:24 pm, Northgunner said:

Stefan Molyneux and Vox Day had a very interesting
discussion that I believe bears on the discussion here.

Will There Be War? – Stefan Molyneux and Vox Day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW5USVpTnJA&t=1447s

Except for Pat Hines, no one else, including Codrea
mentioned the 2 ton gorilla in the room; that being
the domination and influence of the zionist/talmudist
enemy (especially the rothschilds corporate/military
colony known as israel and it’s foreign occupation
tentacles known as adl, aipac, bnai-brith, spcl and
others especially both the chabad lubavich and domestic
useful idiots such as christian zionists like ‘baby huey’
Haggee and his flock and related ministers not to mention
the members of congress that happen to be ‘dual-citizens’
of israel).

America has been under quiet foreign occupation by
israel since JFK’s murder (LBJ quickly ascended and showed
himself to be their puppet, especially covering for them
when the USS Liberty and her crew were attacked in 1967).

Isn’t it interesting how much aid and support that israel
and it’s ‘lobbys’ give out to ‘mass immigration/diversity’
but israel declares itself a ‘jewish state dedicated to protecting
it’s culture and identiy’ and refuses to take a single ‘syrian’
or african?….

Don’t believe me?…then watch this (hear it from the jews
own lips!):

The Plan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKyp1e_jYc

Don’t forget that the EU was the idea of zionist Kalergi;
what’s happening today in Europe and America is what
he and other zionists/talmudists desired and dreamed of!

Northgunner
On August 19, 2018 at 11:34 pm, JJ said:

Actually there’s many elites working together through mystery cults, secret societies and open groups like Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission. Trying to pin all the blame on one faction is ignorant. It’s the equivalent of ignorant Black people blaming White people for everything wrong with the world.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

So What’s The Real Concern With Immigration Anyway?

Comments

Leave a comment