Unkotare
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2011
- 131,294
- 25,591
- 2,180
USA should stop immigration......
Not going to happen. Move on.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
USA should stop immigration......
Dear TheGreatKing...may not be so outlandish after all. Despite the hysterical rantings of the PC crowd, we are currently at the mercy of untold numbers of Muslim terrorists who wish to enter our country. Since we currently have no effective screening procedures in place to prevent this, a moratorium on allowing further infiltration is not only logically justified, but a practical necessity.
But isn't this unconstitutional religious discrimination, you ask? No, it is not if it only applies to non-U.S. citizens. We have a perfect right and obligation to screen and delay or deny entry into the United Sates any persons who pose a potential threat to our security.
Some have suggested a geographic, rather than religious, moratorium on entry visas, but that transparent attempt to appease Muslim sensibilities would be seen as a ruse, as well as being ineffective. For example, a French-born Muslim terrorist (sound familiar?) would not be affected by such a scheme.
As often said, all Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim. It should also be noted that a basic tenet of that religion is conversion by force and execution of apostates. Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?
First, one has to understand the Trump method of campaigning. Every time the media attention wanes a bit or starts shifting to somebody else, he says something totally outrageous, however much it creates controversy, to shift the attention back on himself. He has received hundreds more hours of attention than anybody else gets using this tactic, both in face time for himself, and in discussions about him.
I call this the Coulter method. If anybody can get past their prejudices about Ann and look at it all objectively, every time she has a new book coming out, she makes a point to say something outrageous. She immediately rockets to the center of attention on message boards, Twitter, news feeds and talk shows, etc. and her book immediately rockets onto the best seller's list.
But strip the political correctness outrage off of both of them, and there is a lot of common sense in what they are saying.
The only mistake Trump made--and it may have been intentional to get the media coverage as described--was in saying "all Muslims" instead of "Muslims from countries harboring terrorists."
The latter is really difficult for anybody to argue with.
Trump is being reserved in saying the whole truth. I am saying all colored people are daughters of the devil and should be annihilated from this planet. They belong only in one place - the fires of hell.
Of your statement on race, two things might be proven scientifically to explain some of this discrimination by color:
1. If we were to study the ill effects of witchcraft sorcery voodoo and other dark magic practices manipulating dark occult energy, this can be shown to correlate with disruptive and destructive violence, addictions, genocide and other generational abuses. The experts who practice spiritual healing are all in agreement this negative energy in curses is carried by generations and has to be spiritually renounced and removed before ppl can heal and be reconciled with positive life giving energy that unites humanity and restores peaceful equal relations and normal health.
So TheGreatKing you can show it is the curses carried by the tribes in Africa and the Native American tribes that stir the hatred behind genocide wars and slavery that send ppl through hell. And this also applies to European tribes and lineage cursed with witchcraft and other unnatural dark practices that affect future generations.
These patterns could be proven by science by mapping the statistics and showing the effect of healing after these root causes are removed by forgiveness therapies that break the generational cycles of abuse addiction and ill will passed down like a sickness.
Correlation can be proved, but causation remains faith based and can be agreed upon even if not proven.
2. Another point that can be proven about Caucasian race vs colored:
Look up the bone marrow donation policies and why they designate four minority groups of African Latino Asian and Native American. Unlike Caucasian donors and recipients who have 9/10 chances of finding matches due to HLA compatibility with each other, people of the other racial groups do not have as compatible HLA factors and only have 1/10 chances. That is why the registry seeks to match donors by ethnicity in order to increase chances of finding a match. And biracial ppl have so little chance it is by luck they find one at all.
So the Caucasian ppl have an advantage in survival here while minorities are in the opposite position. If you want to argue against mixing races, this can be used to argue it is better for survival to keep the races pure.
(I have one anthropologist friend who argues it is better to mix the races and evolve to a higher level where the best traits of all of them survive.)
Whatever you believe TheGreatKing you have the right to that but not to impose on ppl who disagree and have equally protected beliefs.
The best approach I recommend for you is to support tax breaks to encourage and reward ppl in investing in economic and educational development so all countries can have freedom and oppotunity as in America. That way nobody has to depend on coming here to have equal freedom security and justice, but it is established voluntarily and not by force of religion or politics. People naturally organize by like beliefs and culture. So encourage all people to invest in developing campus facilities in all countries to manage education jobs and services, and people from all countries and cultures can benefit equally while helping their own communities.
Dear TheGreatKing...may not be so outlandish after all. Despite the hysterical rantings of the PC crowd, we are currently at the mercy of untold numbers of Muslim terrorists who wish to enter our country. Since we currently have no effective screening procedures in place to prevent this, a moratorium on allowing further infiltration is not only logically justified, but a practical necessity.
But isn't this unconstitutional religious discrimination, you ask? No, it is not if it only applies to non-U.S. citizens. We have a perfect right and obligation to screen and delay or deny entry into the United Sates any persons who pose a potential threat to our security.
Some have suggested a geographic, rather than religious, moratorium on entry visas, but that transparent attempt to appease Muslim sensibilities would be seen as a ruse, as well as being ineffective. For example, a French-born Muslim terrorist (sound familiar?) would not be affected by such a scheme.
As often said, all Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim. It should also be noted that a basic tenet of that religion is conversion by force and execution of apostates. Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?
First, one has to understand the Trump method of campaigning. Every time the media attention wanes a bit or starts shifting to somebody else, he says something totally outrageous, however much it creates controversy, to shift the attention back on himself. He has received hundreds more hours of attention than anybody else gets using this tactic, both in face time for himself, and in discussions about him.
I call this the Coulter method. If anybody can get past their prejudices about Ann and look at it all objectively, every time she has a new book coming out, she makes a point to say something outrageous. She immediately rockets to the center of attention on message boards, Twitter, news feeds and talk shows, etc. and her book immediately rockets onto the best seller's list.
But strip the political correctness outrage off of both of them, and there is a lot of common sense in what they are saying.
The only mistake Trump made--and it may have been intentional to get the media coverage as described--was in saying "all Muslims" instead of "Muslims from countries harboring terrorists."
The latter is really difficult for anybody to argue with.
Trump is being reserved in saying the whole truth. I am saying all colored people are daughters of the devil and should be annihilated from this planet. They belong only in one place - the fires of hell.
Of your statement on race, two things might be proven scientifically to explain some of this discrimination by color:
1. If we were to study the ill effects of witchcraft sorcery voodoo and other dark magic practices manipulating dark occult energy, this can be shown to correlate with disruptive and destructive violence, addictions, genocide and other generational abuses. The experts who practice spiritual healing are all in agreement this negative energy in curses is carried by generations and has to be spiritually renounced and removed before ppl can heal and be reconciled with positive life giving energy that unites humanity and restores peaceful equal relations and normal health.
So TheGreatKing you can show it is the curses carried by the tribes in Africa and the Native American tribes that stir the hatred behind genocide wars and slavery that send ppl through hell. And this also applies to European tribes and lineage cursed with witchcraft and other unnatural dark practices that affect future generations.
These patterns could be proven by science by mapping the statistics and showing the effect of healing after these root causes are removed by forgiveness therapies that break the generational cycles of abuse addiction and ill will passed down like a sickness.
Correlation can be proved, but causation remains faith based and can be agreed upon even if not proven.
2. Another point that can be proven about Caucasian race vs colored:
Look up the bone marrow donation policies and why they designate four minority groups of African Latino Asian and Native American. Unlike Caucasian donors and recipients who have 9/10 chances of finding matches due to HLA compatibility with each other, people of the other racial groups do not have as compatible HLA factors and only have 1/10 chances. That is why the registry seeks to match donors by ethnicity in order to increase chances of finding a match. And biracial ppl have so little chance it is by luck they find one at all.
So the Caucasian ppl have an advantage in survival here while minorities are in the opposite position. If you want to argue against mixing races, this can be used to argue it is better for survival to keep the races pure.
(I have one anthropologist friend who argues it is better to mix the races and evolve to a higher level where the best traits of all of them survive.)
Whatever you believe TheGreatKing you have the right to that but not to impose on ppl who disagree and have equally protected beliefs.
The best approach I recommend for you is to support tax breaks to encourage and reward ppl in investing in economic and educational development so all countries can have freedom and oppotunity as in America. That way nobody has to depend on coming here to have equal freedom security and justice, but it is established voluntarily and not by force of religion or politics. People naturally organize by like beliefs and culture. So encourage all people to invest in developing campus facilities in all countries to manage education jobs and services, and people from all countries and cultures can benefit equally while helping their own communities.
Well, that was a big pile of 'crazy.'
....
Trump is being reserved in saying the whole truth. I am saying all colored people are daughters of the devil and should be annihilated from this planet. They belong only in one place - the fires of hell.
..... it is a very deep difficult topic ......
Dear jwoodie why not require all sponsoring organizations to accept legal and financial responsibility for adopting immigrants....may not be so outlandish after all. Despite the hysterical rantings of the PC crowd, we are currently at the mercy of untold numbers of Muslim terrorists who wish to enter our country. Since we currently have no effective screening procedures in place to prevent this, a moratorium on allowing further infiltration is not only logically justified, but a practical necessity.
But isn't this unconstitutional religious discrimination, you ask? No, it is not if it only applies to non-U.S. citizens. We have a perfect right and obligation to screen and delay or deny entry into the United Sates any persons who pose a potential threat to our security.
Some have suggested a geographic, rather than religious, moratorium on entry visas, but that transparent attempt to appease Muslim sensibilities would be seen as a ruse, as well as being ineffective. For example, a French-born Muslim terrorist (sound familiar?) would not be affected by such a scheme.
As often said, all Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim. It should also be noted that a basic tenet of that religion is conversion by force and execution of apostates. Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?
The truth should be told and should be enforced. And we have the power to blow away all the lies of the devil.
"Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?"
You have not posed any principles for discussion, but only conceptual aggregates flexible in their constituents and briskly unsubscribed by your eager inquiry.
As often said, all Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim. It should also be noted that a basic tenet of that religion is conversion by force and execution of apostates. Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?
Dear jwoodie why not require all sponsoring organizations to accept legal and financial responsibility for adopting immigrants. . . .
...may not be so outlandish after all. Despite the hysterical rantings of the PC crowd, we are currently at the mercy of untold numbers of Muslim terrorists who wish to enter our country. Since we currently have no effective screening procedures in place to prevent this, a moratorium on allowing further infiltration is not only logically justified, but a practical necessity.
But isn't this unconstitutional religious discrimination, you ask? No, it is not if it only applies to non-U.S. citizens. We have a perfect right and obligation to screen and delay or deny entry into the United Sates any persons who pose a potential threat to our security.
Some have suggested a geographic, rather than religious, moratorium on entry visas, but that transparent attempt to appease Muslim sensibilities would be seen as a ruse, as well as being ineffective. For example, a French-born Muslim terrorist (sound familiar?) would not be affected by such a scheme.
As often said, all Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim. It should also be noted that a basic tenet of that religion is conversion by force and execution of apostates. Until we can determine whether someone has truly rejected these principles, shouldn't we err on the side of protecting our citizens?