Direct Action for Open Borders

[Raineyrocks]

ya i guess i will have to leave this one to the liberals and mecha types if there are any around here.

Thats a new word for me, what's a mecha type?

LaMecha and LaRaza are racist groups who vow to take over the land in the southwest from the USA. They often have large violent demonstrations where they openly show their hatred for 'white' America, vow to kill them, and burn American flags. They are shored up by the Maldef Society which is funded by the Rockefellers, the Ford Foundation, Bill Gates, and all the other global elitists and companies (I may not buy a new Toyota when it's time to get a truck because of this) who are working to bring about this borderless world society...in which they can control everyone and from which there will be no escaping to 'another' country.

Apologists will tell they are simply groups that are promoting the rights of indigent people, but they are really just the KKK in reverse.

Whoa!  So some of those demonstrations that were held in a few states this year regarding immigration had that group in them?  I heard some of them were openly burning the flag and saying bad things about us gringos.   I don't know, the future seems to look pretty dismal right now in my opinion.  Do you think the elitist plans will be stopped?

[CNHT]

Whoa!  So some of those demonstrations that were held in a few states this year regarding immigration had that group in them?  I heard some of them were openly burning the flag and saying bad things about us gringos.   I don't know, the future seems to look pretty dismal right now in my opinion.  Do you think the elitist plans will be stopped?

If this were about having smoother immigration, the global elitist corporations would not be providing the funds for these people to be doing these sorts of things. Even some of the elected officials in the southwestern states are riling these people up. It's really funny to see a Mexican descent cop standing there, watching some protester scream obscenities at him as if he were part of the problem.

They WANT the strife to exist because it creates a crisis. We don't see the crisis here, because our immigrants in NH are here not causing any trouble.
People are used as pawns on boths sides -- the ones allowing themselves to be riled up into thinking they own the land down there and others who go along with it because they are convinced these people have the 'right' to come and take over.

It would be like me saying, wow, Rainey and Rick have a nice new house, with food and warm beds, and I just love it so I think I'll move in and take over because IT'S MY RIGHT TO BE FED AND SHELTERED don't you know?  LOL

I have posted some videos here before, but people still argue that we are racists for opposing this, even while watching these people say they have the right to come here for a piece of the pie and they will kill us if necessary.

Just do a search on Google for LaRaza and Mecha. and you'll find the videos. Tell me what you think.

http://www.mayorno.com/WhoIsMecha.html

[Caleb]

Wonderful. A sit-in.
The perfect way to alienate anyone who might have had even the remotest chance of agreeing with you.

Given that Sununu is probably the most Libertarian Senator in Washington, and given that many Libertarians (like myself) used to be Republicans until the libertarian position on immigration was clearly explained, he might just come around to our way of thinking, if you cared enough to really engage him on a respectful, intellectual level.

Or, you can make pests of yourselves and take over his office.
Not the way to start a productive exchange of philosophies, JP.

Denny G has all the answers. That must be why we are so free.

[FTL_Ian]

Freedom isn't free -- it doesn't mean I can walk into your home and raid your fridge anytime I wish just because...

That is an awful cliché.  No one is saying that you should open your home, Jane.  We're just saying that closed borders means a big government police state.  You can't have it any other way.

[forsytjr]

I have studied up on the NAU, and I agree that it is evil, and A Bad Thing. As would be the Amero.

While open borders are one of the things called for by the NAU, opening the borders is not the same thing as joining NAU.

OK, so be careful what bills you support.  The current reform bill accelerated the NAU.  When the newspapers print stuff about the protests, they aren't going to get the subtle distinction that you want open borders, but strongly oppose the NAU 

[forsytjr]

We're just saying that closed borders means a big government police state.  You can't have it any other way.

I think this is a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If you have closed borders, we have a big immigration police force, and a big fence.  If we open up the borders, we get the NAU, and a bigger government that involves Mexico and Canada.  I honestly think (based on a lot of listening to your show), that you are only seeing one side of this issue.

[FTL_Ian]

If we open up the borders, we get the NAU, and a bigger government that involves Mexico and Canada.

Non sequitur, does not follow.  The NAU is a completely separate concept from open borders.  If the NAU comes to fruition, it does not mean borders disappear, it simply means that they are expanded to a larger landmass. 

If the country is moving toward smaller government and the borders are opened, then there is no need for concern.

If New Hampshire secedes and opens its borders, then there is no need for concern.

[forsytjr]

If the country is moving toward smaller government and the borders are opened, then there is no need for concern.

I agree.  But the country is NOT moving towards smaller government.  That's my problem.  We are turning more socialist/fascist, and combining with other countries will just accelerate that, IMO.  We've got a President signing the NAU agreements with no act of Congress!!!  That's completely illegal since treaties with other countries need to be negotiated by congress.  And every mainstream candidate supports the NAU, despite the lack of popular support for it (is this a coincidence, or have they been bought out?)

If NH seceded, and formed a free government (which would mean not getting involved with Vermont in their desire to be part of the UN), then I would have no problem with open borders.  But order of operations is important here.  Stop the NAU first, then open the borders.  I see a lot of open borders activity going on, but nothing protesting against the NAU.

[CNHT]

That is an awful cliché.  No one is saying that you should open your home, Jane.  We're just saying that closed borders means a big government police state.  You can't have it any other way.

Oh really? Well I happen to think the opposite would happen and since it's hypothetical just like your opinion, it's equally valid -- and that is that open borders means it will lead to even bigger and more universal government out of control. But if you haven't studied that for 30 years, you would not know that total chaos bringing about peace and order, especially in these times, is a very naive conclusion.

We are moving toward socialism and making it 'one world' as suggested in some of your anarchist movies just will seal the deal to the police state and the total and universal control over humans.

[forsytjr]

Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev, "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

Echoing that sentiment was perennial Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas : "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

[CNHT]

Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev, "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

Echoing that sentiment was perennial Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas : "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

We've always had orderly immigration and it's not been a police state.
Open borders would in my opinion invite a police state even faster.
This 'anarchy' stuff isn't viable at all at this point, unless you start with two people on a desert island who agree to have it... geesh.

Face it we're heading towards world gov't, where you will be UNIVERSALLY controlled by the same laws, but if you don't like it, there will be no 'sovereign' country to escape to...

You want that Ian?

[Raineyrocks]

Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev, "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

Echoing that sentiment was perennial Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas : "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

We've always had orderly immigration and it's not been a police state.
Open borders would in my opinion invite a police state even faster.
This 'anarchy' stuff isn't viable at all at this point, unless you start with two people on a desert island who agree to have it... geesh.

Face it we're heading towards world gov't, where you will be UNIVERSALLY controlled by the same laws, but if you don't like it, there will be no 'sovereign' country to escape to...

You want that Ian?

You know what it seems like to me, that maybe some people are taking anti open borders as a form of prejudice but it's not.  If you see most of the entire picture of open borders and really look into why the government wants to do this I think maybe you might see the evil, manipulative purpose behind it.  When does the government ever do something that seems nice and right without trying to gain more control of the population?
I would love to live in a world where everyone was free to go wherever and do whatever as long as it was not hurting anyone but that's not the world we live in.

[CNHT]

You know what it seems like to me, that maybe some people are taking anti open borders as a form of prejudice but it's not.  If you see most of the entire picture of open borders and really look into why the government wants to do this I think maybe you might see the evil, manipulative purpose behind it.  When does the government ever do something that seems nice and right without trying to gain more control of the population?
I would love to live in a world where everyone was free to go wherever and do whatever as long as it was not hurting anyone but that's not the world we live in.

Thanks for that! Too many people debase the conversation into a racism issue when it's not. It's an issue of what would be the consequences of this? When socialists want something badly, they try to shame you into it with political correctness, and I'm sad that some on his forum tend to do that. It's fine if you really believe that having no country means freedom, but argue it from that standpoint, not that anyone else is a racist or doesn't like 'too many Catholics' (I wasn't aware there was a religious litmus test for legally emigrating?)

Because when you start arguing like a socialist, then people will perceive you to be helping them to get bigger gov't.

[FTL_Ian]

Oh really? Well I happen to think the opposite would happen and since it's hypothetical just like your opinion, it's equally valid

My position is not hypothetical; it is based on facts about how government operates.  If you want government to handle something - in this case control immigration - than government will get bigger, more expensive, and more oppressive.  The immigration controls government implements will end up controlling all of us.

-- and that is that open borders means it will lead to even bigger and more universal government out of control.

Another non sequitur.  Government by its nature gets bigger and bigger.  In order for borders to be opened, government would have to be getting smaller in the first place (eliminating border patrol, for instance).  You ignored my point about how what you're describing in the NAU situation is not actually open borders but simply expanded borders.

But if you haven't studied that for 30 years, you would not know that total chaos bringing about peace and order, especially in these times, is a very naive conclusion.

I think I'd have to study that sentence for 30 years to make sense out of it.

[FTL_Ian]

Open borders would in my opinion invite a police state even faster.

Considering that to open the borders people would have to have a smaller government mindset in the first place, how can you even make this claim?

Face it we're heading towards world gov't, where you will be UNIVERSALLY controlled by the same laws, but if you don't like it, there will be no 'sovereign' country to escape to...

You want that Ian?

Of course I don't want one world government.  Though I'd like to point out that no law controls me (in the same way that they won't control the immigrants either).  They never have, as they are just words on paper.