RobinReborn

Do we need to Rethink Immigration?

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, RobinReborn said:

 

???  There is no slander, there's plenty of evidence that there's systemic racism within the police, your ignorance of that does not make me foolish.

 

Do you actually know the definition of the word slander?  I'd suggest you mean libel but if your views on who is the victim in the conflict between African Americans and the police are any indication of your views on reality, you have a tendency to distort the meanings of concepts.

No sweat, dude. I'm logging off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2017 at 8:56 AM, Neil Parille said:

Fantastic new essay on immigration by Objectivist Ed Powell:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1zcuw4wvhhztwq/Powell-Immigration-v3.pdf?dl=0

No time to read it all yet, but so far it's very good--and important.

Of course a country has the right and duty to secure its borders. It's national defense. Also all property in this country is either privately or publicly owned. The public property is in effect held in trust for the citizens. They have the right through their government to say you can come here but with vetting and permission of our agent which is our national government. Otherwise it's trespassing--criminal trespassing.

--Brant

Binswanger is stupid smart except his smart smarts aren't worth much regardless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time has passed since the last post on this top and what has happened?

Ann Coulter wrote: . . . All we need is love . . . and Deportations . . . Poland doesn't admit Muslims: It has no terrorism. Japan doesn't admit Muslims: It has no terrorism. The United Kingdom and the United States used to have very few Muslims: They used to have almost no terrorism. end quote

Everyone except the terrorists think they should be banned from entering other countries. What would I do if I were President? Declare an emergency before the next attack and broaden the ban on Muslims. I would ban Muslims and not just regions or countries. Tighten the immigration process. Their religion is a religion of violence and hatred. Their religion is incompatible with freedom.

As Britain’s Prime Minister May said, “Enough is enough!” Our Congress and the British House should back the President and The Prime Minister. Give the Supreme Court an immigration case to work on.       

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Peter said:

Time has passed since the last post on this top and what has happened?

Ann Coulter wrote: . . . All we need is love . . . and Deportations . . . Poland doesn't admit Muslims: It has no terrorism. Japan doesn't admit Muslims: It has no terrorism. The United Kingdom and the United States used to have very few Muslims: They used to have almost no terrorism. end quote

Everyone except the terrorists think they should be banned from entering other countries. What would I do if I were President? Declare an emergency before the next attack and broaden the ban on Muslims. I would ban Muslims and not just regions or countries. Tighten the immigration process. Their religion is a religion of violence and hatred. Their religion is incompatible with freedom.

As Britain’s Prime Minister May said, “Enough is enough!” Our Congress and the British House should back the President and The Prime Minister. Give the Supreme Court an immigration case to work on.       

Peter

Japan does have domestic terrorism.  About ten years ago a Japanese group of fanatics  set off a sarin gas  explosion in the Tokyo metro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started getting email again from OL but it was in my junk mail so I highlighted them and put them in my inbox.

I remember the domestic terrorism in Japan, but I was talking about imported terrorism and terrorism stemming from hateful religions, and I am sure Annie Oakley Coulter was speaking about Islamic monsters too. The evil needs to be named. I have no doubt 95 percent of the world’s terrorism stems from the Islamists. Their religion is incompatible with a Constitution guaranteeing individual rights. Accept for extremely “vetted” relatives of current Muslims living in America I would ban them. I would demand the countries they come from, “do something about” the terrorists in their midst or they are to be held accountable for fostering murderers.

Someone knocks at your door . . . .      

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Peter said:

I started getting email again from OL but it was in my junk mail so I highlighted them and put them in my inbox.

I remember the domestic terrorism in Japan, but I was talking about imported terrorism and terrorism stemming from hateful religions, and I am sure Annie Oakley Coulter was speaking about Islamic monsters too. The evil needs to be named. I have no doubt 95 percent of the world’s terrorism stems from the Islamists. Their religion is incompatible with a Constitution guaranteeing individual rights. Accept for extremely “vetted” relatives of current Muslims living in America I would ban them. I would demand the countries they come from, “do something about” the terrorists in their midst or they are to be held accountable for fostering murderers.

Someone knocks at your door . . . .      

Peter

As long as the Muslims in America do nothing illegal  we don't have a major problem.  If you look very carefully at Roman Catholicism  you will see they are no friends of liberty either.  But we do not persecute law abiding Catholics,  do we?  Protestantism was established by Martin Luether  who was a fullminating Jew hater  and no friend of liberty either.   John Calvin and his buddies had no problem burning alive those who disagreed with them.  The same can be said for that Man of All Seasons, Thomas More who presided over a half dozen burnings alive  of heretics. But he was for a while a good buddy of Henry sub 8 who headed the Protestant Church of England.  Christianity has as little to recommend it (philosophically)  as does Islam.  Judaism is the outlier.  For purely historical and accidental reasons  Judaism  mostly cleary its nest  of theological extremism.  The Jews in the Babylonian dispersion  learned a thing or two about living with Others while in Babylon.  Most of the Talmud  was  composed by Jewish sages in Babylon and has produced a religion that not only can co-exist with other religions but almost always leads to a constructive relation with the Jewish society around them.  In the last two hundred years Protestants have discovered a modus vivendi  with secular orders so they are generally safe to be around except for the few fanatics who blow up abortion clinics.

So Islam produces two planes crashing into tall buildings  and Judaism produces two Jewish doctors who found a prevention of polio.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There exists an organization called the Muslim Brotherhood. They have a plan to implement sharia all over the world. This plan is called The Project. You can read it.

The Project 

Plus lots of other web pages.

In addition you can listen to Brigitte Gabriel explaining the Muslim Brotherhood and The Project.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

Hilarious. You don't want to go there, bub.

Yes, I do.  The Jews got the shit beaten out of the by the Assyrians,  the Babylonians,  the Romans, the Christians, the Muslims and the Germans. Only two outcomes are possible.  Destruction and learning how to survive.  Jews learned how to survive, keep their wits  and they also learned how to interact with strangers who are sometimes hostile.  So here we are 3000 years later, small in numbers, but contributing to the societies we live in disproportionately.  For examples Jews who are 1/50 th of the population have one 1/4 of the Nobel prizes.   And polio has been wiped off the face of the Earth by two Jewish doctors,  Salk and Sabin.  Things like that.  We live by out wits and we are in no position to oppress other peoples  or dream  of  being  kings of the world.  I leave that to the Muslims.  Like I said,  Jews are outliers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

President Trump has Jews in his family. He is a deal maker and a negotiator. He is a straight talker. Smart. Sort of secular except for show. Bob, I think we have a Jew in the top job.

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

President Trump has Jews in his family. He is a deal maker and a negotiator. He is a straight talker. Smart. Sort of secular except for show. Bob, I think we have a Jew in the top job.

Peter

No we don't.   If Joe Lieberman had been elected or had become President, then we would have.  It is clear that Trump while he is not Jewish is also not an antisemite. Trump has a Jewish son-in-law.  I have a non-Jewish son-in-law  who I consider to be one of the best humans I have ever met.  He is a blessing to my daughter and to my family. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob wrote: It is clear that Trump while he is not Jewish is also not an anti-Semite. end quote

The National Enquirer said Donald was Bar Mitzvah’ed at the Temple Israel in New York City and Melania was B’not Mitzvah’ed at Temple Bat Yam in Slovenia. And Baron is dreading his upcoming circumcision. Hmmph. You racist.

Peter   

Bar Mitzvah (Hebrew: בַּר מִצְוָה‎) and Bat Mitzvah (Hebrew: בַּת מִצְוָה‎) (Ashkenazi pronunciation: "Bas Mitzvah") (plural: B'nai Mitzvah for boys, and B'not Mitzvah – Ashkenazi pronunciation: "B'nos Mitzvah" – for girls) are Jewish coming of age rituals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now