Enemies Foreign and Domestic

25509 Views 486 Replies 24 Participants Last post by Bkite, 7 mo ago

Bkite

Discussion Starter · Feb 13, 2021

Please make no mistake about it. Immigration and refugee policies of the current bogus administration are being used as weapons to destroy America. Nothing more and nothing less. Joe Biden, his ilk and his puppet masters are attempting to put the very last nail in the coffin of what was the greatest Nation this world has ever known heretofore. He and they are truly, unarguably, Enemies Foreign and Domestic.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ty-measures-25000-migrants-being-brought-u-s/

1 - 20 of 487 Posts

45_Fan

· #20 · Mar 11, 2021

The country ended with Clinton. End of story. Nothing but rubble left.
No, no, no, my mistake, it really ended after that Bush guy.
Er, no, wait, that was Obama. Smoldering ruin, nothing but radioactive afterglow.
Well....no, that was Trump....Biden...somebody always complaining about it no matter who it is.

It’s almost like there’s a detectable pattern here.

Reactions: 2

45_Fan

· #25 · Mar 12, 2021

Bkite said:
Your comments have nothing to do by the way with the very real current assault on American Sovereignty however.

Actually they do. They weren’t posted for you though. If you’d rather me write to you as an audience, I’d ask you directly where you are in your own headspace. You, not-a-Georgia resident, came to a Georgia 2A forum and started a topic of certain unmistakable verbiage in the wake of events on January 6th. Events that have brought both traditionally conservative groups and their communication methods under increased scrutiny. To further that, in the opening salvo, you then label the President so very specifically:

Bkite said:
He and they are truly, unarguably, Enemies Foreign and Domestic.

Following that opening, you have, over and over again, posted messages of divisive (even within conservative communities) nationalistic rhetoric without meaningful contribution to, or even commentary on, our current political efforts to preserve and expand 2A rights in Georgia. It leaves me questioning your goals here. Are you looking to run off new potential 2A allies? Are you looking to sow discord amongst 2A advocates and fracture solidarity? Are you looking to bring down enough additional scrutiny to neuter the usefulness of this virtual town square as we debate enhancements of current legislation? Or worse yet, are you just truly unaware that these are all the fruits of your labor in this place? Seriously, what is your purpose here?

See less See more

Reactions: 1

45_Fan

· #30 · Mar 14, 2021

Bkite said:
Your comments = gobbledygook plain and simple.
We can start over on less adversarial terms if you are mature enough.
I'll pose direct clear questions. You can do the same and I will endeavor to answer.

Do you believe that America can continue on as a Sovereign nation if the current trajectory stays in place?

There. A clear question, posed to inspire dialogue. thanks in advance.

In answer to some of your questions and to be as clear as I can be, I'll answer a few of your questions.

My goal is to further support the 2nd Amendment.

In my opinion, the 2nd Amendment was pinned with the express purpose of illuminating the individual citizen's right to protect itself from an abusive, over reaching government. It was not pinned to illuminating the citizen's right to hunt or even protect against one on one aggression from intruders or would be assailants. What are your thoughts on the purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

I was born and raised in Georgia. Just recently, if you can call 2017 recently, moved out of Georgia to TN. I am a life member of Georgia Carry and again, I support the 2nd Amendment.

I did suggest that Joe Biden and those of his ilk are enemies domestic. I stand by that. I have nothing to support an alternative view. I would welcome any evidence to the contrary. You are welcome to present your argument to the contrary. To help you collect your thoughts here are a couple of questions you can answer directy.

What about his or his administrations policies will strengthen America's Sovereignty?

Specifically, how does his actions on illegal immigration benefit the American taxpayer and strengthen American Sovereignty?

Hopefully you will see this as the olive leaf as it was intended.

You typically do not accept my counterpoints to your anti-immigration views.

Immigrants have significantly lower crime rates than native citizens.
Pretty much every economic boom in the history the US has been fueled by immigrants.
Artificially low immigration caps continue to result in off-shoring of jobs and loss of economic leadership and innovation by the US.
Undocumented immigrants pay substantial taxes without the benefits.
There is no instant ”I crossed the border now I get welfare lottery”; It takes 10 years for even documented immigrants to be eligible for welfare.

To claim a loss of sovereignty, you will have to provide your current definition of sovereignty for me to understand your complaints, I don’t see the President of Mexico moving into the Whitehouse nor China annexing 5 states nor Russia installing Senators.

I’m patriotic. I may grumble about the amount of taxes I pay or if my favorites lose in the election but I was raised to view voting, accepting the outcome of elections, and paying taxes as deeply patriotic duties. I still believe that the US, for all her flaws, is still the best country in the world and I believe we have a duty to share that success with any others who wish to participate similarly. I believe we’re still flawed and we’ve still made some mistakes (the 17th amendment, capping the size of the House, and prohibition come to mind) but I also believe we’re better today than we ever have been. Definitely better than 200 years ago. Definitely better than 100 years ago. Definitely better than 50 years ago.

That all being said, here is the crux of where I don’t follow: I don’t see a pending dissolution of the US. I see an alienated hard-right micro-minority unwilling to trade in facts blustering about with phrases and notions of violence and bloodshed and gallows for reasons wildly beyond my comprehension. It’s not that I’m not open to explanation either. Explanations have been seriously lacking. Facts willfully discarded. Agitprop valued over real dialog. What really fries my brain though is the hard-left side of the spectrum still talks facts once the barrier of emotional arguments is breached. The fact that such an asymmetry even exists compounds just my “I just don’t get it” statement here.

If you want my view of the next 50-100 years? Global governance is coming. We have a choice in being the single defining voice above all others or shirking that responsibility and accepting (through force, economic hardship, or irrelevance) whatever is defined in our absence. Closing the doors all but ensures we eventually accept instead of define.

See less See more

45_Fan

· #34 · Mar 14, 2021

Bkite said:
You start your response by being intellectually dishonest. There is a difference between illegal and legal immigration. I am not anti-immigration.
As far as the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT paying taxes, there is this for your edification. Fiscal-Burden-of-Illegal-Immigration-2017.pdf (fairus.org)
As far as legal immigrants/visa holders there is this. White-Collar Visa Workers Take 2/3 of New Tech Jobs Each Year – [your]NEWS
The welfare not being immediately forthcoming is just a matter of semantics. Free health care services, food, education etc etc whether it is called welfare or not. You can easily refer back to the Fiscal burden article.

You may not be anti-immigration? Every time we’ve had dialog about legal immigration you do insist we have too much legal immigration at present (literally you just posted a complaint about legal visa holders in your response) and would rather we go back to economically choking low numbers of visas. I have more than 25 years in IT as a career. Lack of both qualified local candidates and visas is choking the industry out of the states and taking innovation/capital/patents overseas with it. I’ve covered this with you in numerous threads. But I’m intellectually dishonest? Okay. This is how I don’t understand you. You called me intellectually dishonest (agitation) and follow quickly with links from highly biased sources (propaganda). I just don’t understand the agitprop and divisiveness it brings to a pro-2A community. Why? What’s the endgame here?

Bkite said:
You say paying taxes is a deeply patriotic duty. What do you say about the millions and billions of taxpayer dollars being given to foreign entities and domestic entities in this recent relief bill that has nothing to do with the Chinese Virus? Is it patriotic on the part of the politicians to take from patriotic Americans who pay their taxes dutifully and then give to such causes? Is that patriotic? Does it strengthen America somehow?

I do believe I said I mutter and grumble but still see at as a patriotic duty to pay them.

45_Fan said:
I may grumble about the amount of taxes I pay or if my favorites lose in the election but I was raised to view voting, accepting the outcome of elections, and paying taxes as deeply patriotic duties.

Yep, I definitely said that.

45_Fan

· #36 · Mar 17, 2021

Bkite said:
You'll have to forgive me but I don't recall dialoging with you about legal immigration. You'll have to pull some of those examples out to prove you are accurate on that. As far as me referring to the visa holders in this particular thread, I did that to highlight the difference between legal and illegal and possibly get you to acknowledge the differences. It worked to an extent didn't it?
The information in those articles I posted is accurate. Read the name of the thread and follow along and you will see what my end game is. In my opinion this nation is being destroyed and illegal immigrants as well as so called "refugees" have been weaponized to kill our Constitutional Republic. The end game is to share information. I did that in the appropriate forum. If it bothers you move along and ignore.

The CATO Institute says the FAIRUS report is fatally flawed. FAIR’s “Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration” Study Is Fatally Flawed

The other link was a deep-linked Breitbart hit piece on an extensive report on STEM in the US. Selectively quoting that report to throw a punch at H1Bs kind of ignores the very points I’ve made here about a lack of qualified candidates already in the states. Some decent commentary in there about the costs of schooling (loans) and imbalance (or lack of) advanced degrees between native born citizens and H1B applicants.

I am, again, not understanding how non-voting, non-welfare eligible folks that are attempting to come here to build a better future for their family (ie living the American Dream in the most historical sense possible) are destroying that very dream. Your links in this thread have not been helpful in explaining the mechanism by which you claim this is occurring.

45_Fan

· #39 · Mar 17, 2021

Bkite said:
I believe now you are purposefully remaining ignorant or you are blatant lying. As far as the CATO institute..hahahahaha.
Cato Institute - Media Bias Fact Check
You know good an well that the millions upon millions of illegals here are a net drain on America and you blather and divert to suggest otherwise.

For full context...

Overall, we rate the Cato Institute Right-Center Biased. While Cato’s economic and environmental positions are strongly right, they also hold liberal positions through immigration and social liberty issues. On the whole, this places them Right-Center as we weigh economic theory more heavily in the overall score. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information and recognizing the consensus of science.

Whether you like CATO or not, the data provided from FAIR is demonstrably broken. CATO literally cites sources conflicting with the FAIR claims. If you are using FAIR as proof of your claim of a net drain, that is why I can’t follow your reasoning.

If you want to bandy about with a bias checker on your sources...
FAIR - Media Bias Fact Check

Overall, we rate FAIR Questionable based on Extreme Right-Wing Bias as it relates to immigration, promotion of propaganda and conspiracies, as well as having connections to documented Hate Groups.

Again, this adds to my difficulty following your reasoning as to how sovereignty is being destroyed.

Bkite said:
I will wait a limited time for your response because your type almost always have to have the last word on something. I will answer any direct clear question in the last post of yours that I will read before I put you on ignore list. I pray that the ears God gave you will become able to hear and that the eyes he has given you will become able to see but I will no longer cast pearls before swine.

Why bring additional government scrutiny to this place for the benefit of a non-2A topic?

See less See more

45_Fan

· #48 · Mar 21, 2021

Schweisshund said:
I have not read his comments to be divisive at all. However, I do read your comments to be divisive. Perhaps you should reflect on the events that lead up to The Capitol Riots. What possibly could have caused it? Could it have possibly been the divisive (and hateful) rhetoric aimed at President Trump and his supporters for the 4 years he was in office? Could it possibly be that the Democrats so boldly stole the election right in front of the faces of 80+ million voters?

If a court does not uphold the law, it does not deserve to stand. How's that for "divisive"? If a system of justice does not enforce it's own rules, what is it's purpose then? Why do we tolerate it?

Maybe YOU can tolerate the bending of laws, because you have empathy with criminals, but I do not. Our nation's sovereignty depends upon the implementation of our laws. We have immigration laws. We have ICE, Customs and Border Protection and other agencies to enforce those laws. We have Law Enforcement Officers that enforce State, Local and Municipality Laws. And ...for some reason, the left just doesn't like those laws so they declared a war on the police. When a political party steals an election and decides they no longer "like" our nation's immigration policies, and they begin to pick and choose which laws to enforce, to the detriment of the American People, it is an act of war. I did not declare this war.

You would have others believe, in blind faith even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, in such a narrative? How can a republic even exist when a core belief of any losing side in any election is “this is fraud” and “this means war”?

45_Fan

· #57 · Mar 27, 2021

Schweisshund said:
You were shown evidence of fraud. I think a better question would be "How can a Republic exist when evidence of fraud is dismissed and/or ignored by corrupt officials?"

I was shown conspiracy theories and allegations that, as of yet, you have failed to actually provide credible evidence to support.

45_Fan

· #59 · Mar 27, 2021

Schweisshund said:
You haven't been able to back up any of your fraudulent claims liar.

Can you clarify what I should be backing up yet haven’t been?
My stance is: ”No evidence of fraud sufficient enough to have changed a single electoral vote has both been provided and survived the smallest degree of scrutiny.”

45_Fan

· #71 · Apr 13, 2021

Schweisshund said:
There is a difference between illegal immigration and legal immigration.

One is only semi-supported in a constitutional freedom of movement and the other is leveraged by conservatives to expand the authoritarian reach of government.*

*”Papers Citizen” gives that nice warm reassurance deep down that you can be detained by armed agents of government at any time on the theory that you shouldn’t be minding your own business but this is somehow ”protecting” our great nation and is A Wonderful Thing.

45_Fan

· #102 · Apr 14, 2021

Craftsman said:
Even if we do allow almost unlimited immigration, shouldn't we still track exactly who comes into the country and why? Even hard-core libertarians agree there are actions that disqualify persons from walking around amongst the rest of us. I suggest it is essential to determine if any potential immigrant has performed such actions or intends to do so once they enter the country. We also need to be able to enforce the ejection of persons who have failed to meet the minimum standards of visitors or guest residents. So even if we allow unlimited immigration, we still need basic border enforcement and identity checks as people cross the border. To do any less would be defaulting on the basic obligation of a country to protect its territorial sovereignty and thereby failing to protect its citizens from harmful invaders. So the distinction of legal vs. illegal immigration still remains, even if you allow "no-excuse" immigration. There must be a process to enter and remain in the country. We can argue about the process and who should or should not be allowed, but there are always people that should be turned away at the border, hence there will always be illegal immigrants.

There‘s a veritable swirl of conflicting ideas here. The government doesn’t just track, judge worthiness, or limit some people based on an arbitrary assignment of power. It eventually uses the granted power against all people. Here in Georgia we’re still fighting to roll back some of that power (specifically the power to regulate arms) that was assigned to the government over a century ago for “safety”.

If people are driving tanks across a border and shooting citizens then they’re not immigrants. They’re an invading army. Biden has not yet signed an EO permitting/allowing/inviting/requesting foreign tanks, warships, etc.

If people are coming across the border to work, earn money, feed their families, and seek an education, nothing says the opposite of small government and freedom like regulating those microcosms.

45_Fan

· #103 · Apr 14, 2021

Phil1979 said:
Well, the U.S. is not a white supremacist country nor is all the rest of the world only minorities, so I fail to see how limits on immigration by us could be remotely viewed as racist. Only a troll would present that viewpoint, whether they believed it or not.

I'll play. Let's not limit immigration based on raw numbers. Rather, let's have across the board qualifications that applies to everyone, and let everyone come here that wants to, who qualifies.

Qualifications such as non-terrorist, speak english, understand and agree to support and defend our Constitution (with a clear and strong support of the first, second, fourth, and fifth amendments), free of dangerous disease, of a sound mind, have a means to support themselves and their families.

If that lowers the numbers, who cares? Why shouldn't we desire only immigrants that will help preserve the things we value as free Americans? It's because of our freedom and opportunities that they want to come here in the first place, so why would even they oppose these common sense qualifications?

This is not the land of the handouts, although it's heading that way. When the handouts are gone, the handoutees will not be happy. Then what?

I think as many people as can get here should immigrate here. Why? I think we’ve got the best system on the planet. We’re made stronger by the mixing of ideas and joint labors. Heck, we should be exporting our way of life but we’re so short on workers that we’re sending jobs and innovation over seas to give up the lead we have. Also, immigrants are 4x less likely to commit crimes than native born, the systems in place require 10 years of paying in before being eligible for welfare, and every major economic boom this country has experienced has been the result of immigration (yes, even some forced immigration unfortunately). What would be the benefit of curtailed immigration in the face of those facts?

45_Fan

· #105 · Apr 14, 2021

Craftsman said:
Who said anything about arbitrary standards? If you want open immigration, there are still people that should not be allowed to enter and we can make an objective standard for all persons to meet. We can argue what those standards are, but to say anyone can come (even those who were previously ejected for violent crimes against persons?) is a very foolish position. If an immigrant commits a violent felony and part of the sentence is revocation of residence, then we need an enforcement mechanism. That means borders, security, and identity checks. Hence the concept of an "illegal immigrant" will always be part of our legal framework. Now we just need to define exactly what that means.

Who did say anything about arbitrary standards? It wasn’t me.

I pointed out that advocating giving a government special power over any person or group of people gives a government special power over every person within that government’s reach.

If there is a felon (in a forceable felony sense), be they native born or otherwise, that needs to be under government supervision to avoid hurting others, it’s 4x less likely to be an immigrant for the same population size so it probably a discussion for another thread.

Craftsman said:
If you believe mass immigration actually helps anyone, I suggest you watch the following:
Immigration World Poverty and Gumballs 2010 - Immigration Doesn't Work - YouTube

That’s not an answer or counterpoint to an argument I made. I don’t expect immigration to solve global poverty anymore than I expect to be able to be able to fabricate a working bulldozer out of a pile of ham and eggs.

45_Fan

· #212 · May 3, 2021

OWM said:
This seems a fitting place for the link below. A good read. Keep it it mind for when you have time to read it carefully.

Who in America Is Entitled to Call Who an Insurrectionist These Days?

A friend recently asked me an interesting hypothetical question: if fraud and other means of chicanery were found to have been employed by insurrectionists to unlawfully upend the results of our nations 2020 election process, would that unlawful regime of insurrectionists have the moral...

townhall.com

The problem is it’s all premised on a very unsupportable hypothetical ”IF” that lacks factual basis. An act of insurrection based on myth and rumor is treason and not patriotism.

45_Fan

· #214 · May 3, 2021

OWM said:
The article is based on IF that happen. If it was proven by fact and if it indeed was proven to have happen. I see nowhere it stated insurrection based on rumor and other bullshit should happen. Your last sentence is correct.

Okay, less polite mode. The article constructs a leading question based on falsehoods and is even thoughtfully formatted to copycat the Declaration of Independence for emotional (not patriotic) connection. It contains at best a dehumanization of the “other” or, worse, a basis in ad hominem to evoke strong emotional reactions from those too stressed to challenge the wall of hypotheticals (falsehoods) and presents a “fix” to the despairing by setting up a “hey, that wouldn’t be treason IF one truly believes it” emotional plea. Brutus was an honorable man...

45_Fan

· #217 · May 6, 2021

moe mensale said:
The Arizona recount hasn't been completed yet. I'd withhold judgement until it is.

About that recount...

www.politico.com

U.S. Justice Department worried about Arizona vote recount

The DOJ wants to guarantee that federal law is followed.

www.politico.com

www.politico.com

They are apparently recounting less than 25,000 ballots per day?

The developments come as the counting of 2.1 million ballots from the November election won by President Joe Biden are off to a slow pace. Bennett told the Associated Press Tuesday night that teams doing a hand recount of the presidential race lost by former President Donald Trump and the U.S. Senate race won by Democrat Mark Kelly has tallied less than 10% of the ballots since starting on April 23.

This is on top of other problems such as ballot security and apparent lack of explainable recount processes. I’m not holding my breath on this one.

45_Fan

· #232 · Jun 12, 2021

Phil1979 said:
We've been told over and over that this is a nothing-burger. What happens if it is clearly shown to be a whopper? So let's say hypothetically that it turns out Trump really won, but nothing can be done because fraudulent ballots were certified. Thoughts?

What if the claim of fraud falls flat, again? How many more audit/recount/recertification circuses must occur to placate the ever-shrinking conservative minority?

45_Fan

· #252 · Jul 23, 2021

With those numbers, that should be seen as positive pressure to update our immigration system to handle all those that want to come here and pay taxes. Businesses around here are being strangled by lack of workers.

45_Fan

· #254 · Jul 26, 2021

phantoms said:
Not lack of workers, but rather lack of those that want to work. In addition, lack of good pay is a big contributing factor too. Many businesses do not want to pay what it takes to fill those spots having been struggling just to stay in business during Covid and the increased inflation that's come about lately.

There’s a balance…fast food places can’t sell enough fries to pay a fry cook $1M/yr* so we can’t always blame businesses for not paying enough. I recently heard a story of 10 scheduled interviews to fill 12 positions that had 6 no-shows. When someone no-shows for an interview, that’s either catastrophic circumstances or plain lack of caring…

*In 2021 dollars…2027 dollars may get a fry cook $2.5M/yr but the family sedan may the cost $10M.

Reactions: 1

45_Fan

· #304 · Feb 27, 2022

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/02/marjorie-taylor-greene-spoke-at-white-nationalist-event.html

The Georgia congresswoman’s appearance was introduced shortly after Fuentes asked for “a round of applause for Russia” and the crowd chanted “Putin, Putin” in response.

Reactions: 1

1 - 20 of 487 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.