JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
Immigration and illegal immigrants.
- Thread starter rockseller
- Start date
- Watchers 5
Alex Jones and Michael Moore are two people interested in making their views big business in the US. I've noticed a lot of "may have been" "reported as having" inserts in Jones' news reports. He is using the same old tricks that journalists use the world over,to justify what he is saying and, probably, he is protected by law from revealing his sources. I've, also, noticed that his web site has a shopping area with videos, etc priced at around $20.
He, Moore and all the rest of the independent media group are interested in making money or, if they have enough of that, of entering the power game. They and their ambitious political counterparts have all started out that way.
A new one on the horizon? How about Hilary Clinton? Al Gore, who lost an elecion by a very small majority to Bush, is trying to make a comeback on the echological issue.
They are not all media and lawyers. Some of them are out and out terrorists. Names in the UK? McGuinness and Adams. They are, already, on the political ladder and have jobs for life.
To get back to the beginning. When I read something, I don't take it as gospel.
Split
He, Moore and all the rest of the independent media group are interested in making money or, if they have enough of that, of entering the power game. They and their ambitious political counterparts have all started out that way.
A new one on the horizon? How about Hilary Clinton? Al Gore, who lost an elecion by a very small majority to Bush, is trying to make a comeback on the echological issue.
They are not all media and lawyers. Some of them are out and out terrorists. Names in the UK? McGuinness and Adams. They are, already, on the political ladder and have jobs for life.
To get back to the beginning. When I read something, I don't take it as gospel.
Split
Yeah right ! They look to me more like sites flogging some ultimately right wing, American, so called "libertarian " politics. In this mishmash we have opposition to gun control, opposition to social welfare, xenophobic attitudes to illegal immigrants, conspiracy theories by the dozen including the really quite strange new world order stuff and of course they hate Bush, the neocons and their wars.
Most of the planet hates Bush, the neocons and their wars, but doesn't subscribe to the rest of this stuff.
Most of all, it is just the same as the mainstream media in that it is really US centric and there is little of value with real insight into the rest of the world.
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
split, i would explain further, but judging by a lot of your previous posts on these types of issues, it seems to me that you just don't a lot of this stuff, or that you haven't looked into the subjects in that much detail:| !
Last edited:
fibonelli
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,338
- Likes
- 288
Liberty is not a party political issue. Liberty transcends politics.
A written bill of rights in the UK or a fully upheld constitution if I was living in the US, is liberty from national socialism aka fascism.
Parallels with Nazi Germany? Watch the video and decide
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2502830637471895940
Well, maybe it's a deep rooted suspicion brought on by media coverage over time. I make no apologies for that.Out of courtesy for your answer to my post, I have just viewed "Iluminazi". It is convincingly presented but I would want to know a great deal more about the speakers and their history before I believed them. Jordan Maxwell was right when he said that Washington was the world's largest nest of corruption, but they mix up what are well known facts with theories of their own. True or false? We come back to to what , or what not to believe. Do you believe that Americans giving up their right to own arms would allow a new world order into the US? Some of their ideas are as wierd as their government's. That does not make them untrue, of course.
I'll look at some more videos over time and thanks for the post.
Split
Liberty is not a party political issue. Liberty transcends politics.
How about gun control ? Is that an infringement on liberty ?
How about social welfare - is that an infringement on liberty because taxes must be levied to pay for it ?
Likewise for a socialized health service.
There is a distinct political agenda here on these web sites and it is disingenuous to just chant "liberty".
And by the way, I am quite aware of the threats to democratic freedoms posed by Bush and his ilk.
As a further footnote, I'm not hostile to all web sites run by US "libertarians".
http://www.antiwar.com
is run by a libertarian - Jason Raimondo - has excellent articles and is possibly the best single source of news on the wars in the Middle East. It is also not polluted with crackpot theories and recognizes that those opposed to these wars can have a common goal of ending them.
http://www.antiwar.com
is run by a libertarian - Jason Raimondo - has excellent articles and is possibly the best single source of news on the wars in the Middle East. It is also not polluted with crackpot theories and recognizes that those opposed to these wars can have a common goal of ending them.
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
dcraig, you have again mouthed off without being properly aware of the FACTS!
Like others, you seem so willing to offer your opinion, but its a shame you do not do thorough background research before you start bagging something or somebody
.Yes Alex Jones is against illegal immigrants being able to work in the USA, taking jobs that could be done by Americans - this is hardly a minority view - i'd guess the majority of people feel this way - hence this thread!
Alex Jones doesn't blame Mexicans for illegally entering the US, he openly says that if he was a Mexican, in their position, he would do the same thing, as there's nothing wrong with seeking escape from a desperate fascist country like Mexico, and a better life for your family. Therefore he is not blaming individual Mexicans/illegals from elsewhere.
AJ is against illegals seemeinlgy being above the law in the USA, which he has provided much evidence of.
As for gun control, AJ seems to think that an armed society is a safer society. If you outlaw guns, you are simply disarming the victoms, as criminals will get guns anyway. This has happened in the UK, with an explosion of gun crime since they were banned a decade ago, and this has also happened in Aus i believe.
Personally, i am not convinced by this argument, as the US, has such a high gun crime problem, i can't see how making guns illegal would do anything other than reduce the number of gun crimes. If i was an American, i would be in favour of a ban on guns.
JT leaves thread, and political debates for good (and i mean it this time!).
dcraig, you have again mouthed off without being properly aware of the FACTS!
Like others, you seem so willing to offer your opinion, but its a shame you do not do thorough background research before you start bagging something or somebody
Yes Alex Jones is against illegal immigrants being able to work in the USA, taking jobs that could be done by Americans - this is hardly a minority view - i'd guess the majority of people feel this way - hence this thread!
Alex Jones doesn't blame Mexicans for illegally entering the US, he openly says that if he was a Mexican, in their position, he would do the same thing, as there's nothing wrong with seeking escape from a desperate fascist country like Mexico, and a better life for your family. Therefore he is not blaming individual Mexicans/illegals from elsewhere.
AJ is against illegals seemeinlgy being above the law in the USA, which he has provided much evidence of.
You read this link and tell me if this is not xenophobic clap trap, designed to appeal to racist sentiment -
http://fight4truth.com/openborders.htm
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
Maybe some of it is xenophobic, & a lot of it isn't, i'm not going to describe any of it as clap trap, as presumably there is supporting evidence to back up the claims.
So, in what way is it clap trap, and why have you posted this link:?:
I will respond to people quoting my posts, even though i have "left" the debate. I can't see what this link has got to do with Alex Jones though
, or why you bothered to quote my post in making this reply ........So whats your point :?: Lets try & keep things in context........otherwise leave me out of it
.......Which part is NOT Xenophobic according to you and which part is not clap trap....?
....Don't keep on sying that you are leaving a debate and then coming back with more comments.....!!
....Either stay in debate OR just leave WITHOUT a word.....
....I say this with respect for you and your posts.....
Last edited:
I agree that all this New World Order talk suggests that what they have to say is claptrap. America has always brought in immigrants from all over Europe with the offerings of a new and better way of life for impoverished people. We have seen the Poles, Italians and many others brought into the country on this pretext. Actually, the reason for it is Capitalism's answer to the unions. This is what is happening today with the Mexicans. A better way of life is the Mexicans' reason. Cheaper labour is the US reason. Keeping them illegal is a convenient way of not accepting them as citizens until they have to, that way troublemakers (i.e. those who want better conditions) can be deported. It is a hypocritical way of doing things, but that is the way it is. The same happens in the UK, France and other European countries. I see nothing of an emerging Naziism in it but it is good that these small groups keep us on our toes, because it is possible, although I do not believe it, myself.
Instead of blaming a New World Order, I think that we should blame those who want cheap domestic labour to look after children and the elderly and do not want to pay for their social security, which is what making them legal entails.
Split
Instead of blaming a New World Order, I think that we should blame those who want cheap domestic labour to look after children and the elderly and do not want to pay for their social security, which is what making them legal entails.
Split
Last edited:
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
OK, you'll know when i have left the debates when i stop positng, i agree it is unneccessary and looks stupid to keep posting having supposedly left!
What is so absurd about "new world order"? Suggestion - find out what a term - eg. NWO actually means to before ridiculing it (talk about ignorance)!
Gordon Brown has already said we need a NWO to tackle climate change.
The NWO is being incrementally implemented before us! eg.
The EU & Euro, the impending North American Union & introduction of the amero, the recent trade agreement between the USA & the EU meaning no tax when buying goods from the US - thus tieing together two eperate exisitng unions. Asian Union, African Union etc. etc.
The NWO is moving towards a one world totalitarian (this means unelected!) government, thus a moving away from Nationalism towards globalism. ALL THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW - IT IS FACT! THIS IS NOT A BIG RIDICULOUS IDEA !
It's introduction is incremental over many years, but i am sure we can all agree that its we are now well into its formation - FACT!
What is so absurd about "new world order"?
Suggestion - find out what a term - eg. NWO actually means to before ridiculing it (talk about ignorance)!Gordon Brown has already said we need a NWO to tackle climate change.
The NWO is being incrementally implemented before us!
eg.The EU & Euro, the impending North American Union & introduction of the amero, the recent trade agreement between the USA & the EU meaning no tax when buying goods from the US - thus tieing together two eperate exisitng unions. Asian Union, African Union etc. etc.
The NWO is moving towards a one world totalitarian (this means unelected!) government, thus a moving away from Nationalism towards globalism. ALL THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW - IT IS FACT! THIS IS NOT A BIG RIDICULOUS IDEA
!It's introduction is incremental over many years, but i am sure we can all agree that its we are now well into its formation - FACT!
JT,
Arguably the EU is now a type of 'global' govt in the sense that it is progressively taking more powers away from the constituent countries and doing so without any direct mandate from the voting electorate.I'm not making any judgement about that,just stating that is what I see happening.
To a lesser degree you have orgs already formed in the Mid East ,Far East and Americas. At the moment they are more involved with trade as indeed the EU was 30 to 40 years ago. However ,it would be a logical next step for them to draw closer together politically as well if they can overcome the historical differences that lie between them, as again we did in Europe.
I don't see anything sinister per se in this trend. I see it if anything as a survival mechanism. When trade barriers etc are removed then individual countries seek strength from greater unity by banding together and it is natural for such proximity to develop further along political lines...that's how people behave even in small groups.
Whether such a trend would develop even further , that is different sub groups banding to making even bigger groups I don't know...that's just too far over the horizon for me to see....arguably there are good reasons why it wouldn't happen as it would undrcut some of the rational for having groups in the first place. However , I think if there was big enough 'threat' in evidence it could happen ,but again I wouldn't know what that would be.
LOL...I'm off topic.
Arguably the EU is now a type of 'global' govt in the sense that it is progressively taking more powers away from the constituent countries and doing so without any direct mandate from the voting electorate.I'm not making any judgement about that,just stating that is what I see happening.
To a lesser degree you have orgs already formed in the Mid East ,Far East and Americas. At the moment they are more involved with trade as indeed the EU was 30 to 40 years ago. However ,it would be a logical next step for them to draw closer together politically as well if they can overcome the historical differences that lie between them, as again we did in Europe.
I don't see anything sinister per se in this trend. I see it if anything as a survival mechanism. When trade barriers etc are removed then individual countries seek strength from greater unity by banding together and it is natural for such proximity to develop further along political lines...that's how people behave even in small groups.
Whether such a trend would develop even further , that is different sub groups banding to making even bigger groups I don't know...that's just too far over the horizon for me to see....arguably there are good reasons why it wouldn't happen as it would undrcut some of the rational for having groups in the first place. However , I think if there was big enough 'threat' in evidence it could happen ,but again I wouldn't know what that would be.
LOL...I'm off topic.
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
Exactly, the continued trend towards regionalisation & glabalisation of a countries interests = loss of Nationalism and loss of a countries sovereignty. Lets see where this has taken us in 50 years if the trend continues.
JTrader
Guest
- Messages
- 5,741
- Likes
- 507
Yes, but what you are describing is happening as a natural evolution of human behaviour.
What Iluminazi is describing is an evil power group bent on world domination.
These are two quite different uses of the same phrase.
Don't go, man, hang around. We're quite nice, really. I belong to the first group
Split
What Iluminazi is describing is an evil power group bent on world domination.
These are two quite different uses of the same phrase.
Don't go, man, hang around. We're quite nice, really. I belong to the first group
Split
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,773
- Likes
- 3,973
OK, you'll know when i have left the debates when i stop positng, i agree it is unneccessary and looks stupid to keep posting having supposedly left!
What is so absurd about "new world order"?
Gordon Brown has already said we need a NWO to tackle climate change.
The NWO is being incrementally implemented before us!
The EU & Euro, the impending North American Union & introduction of the amero, the recent trade agreement between the USA & the EU meaning no tax when buying goods from the US - thus tieing together two eperate exisitng unions. Asian Union, African Union etc. etc.
The NWO is moving towards a one world totalitarian (this means unelected!) government, thus a moving away from Nationalism towards globalism. ALL THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW - IT IS FACT! THIS IS NOT A BIG RIDICULOUS IDEA
It's introduction is incremental over many years, but i am sure we can all agree that its we are now well into its formation - FACT!
I agree with the developments of what you are saying JTrader, but I have a slightly different perspective on this NWO.
My view is there is a fundamental paradigm shift in terms of the size of the cake and it's distribution. The only way Europe and US can counteract the wind of change coming from the East (BRITEC countries) is by unifying. Even then US and EU only make up about 1/3 the size of India and China alone. It's the size of the market that will determine productivity and economic gains imo.
We also have with the improved communications, travel and globalisation the removal of the Technology gap. Way of some countries keeping ahead of developing countries. In fact some people say developing countries will not even bother with the intermediary steps to get to where we are. ie. Phone - telecommunication networks with mobiles or wireless comms, or mass car and road production when you can have efficient rail networks. Good or bad not being judged here just the process of change. This NWO is as Chump pointed out is man trying to have the edge over his fellow man to have a bigger slice of the cake.
As it stands I see the NWO and the Illumini failing really. Even the banking system looks precarious over night. Dollar has lost the plot.
On a micro macro scale, it's difficult as it is getting agreement within members of a family let alone countries, continents and the World.
Whilst I agree with your comments and large part of power plays and government deceptions I really can't see a single NWO as much as they try. Some people simply can't be bought.
Also, I would like to see a single global system with no borders and international rules adhered to by all... and I'm not one of them.
Also, I would like to see a single global system with no borders and international rules adhered to by all... and I'm not one of them.
This the whole point, really. None of us are one of them
Split
