patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
757,024 comments in 77,874 posts by 11,065 registered users, 3 online now: errc, Fucking White Male, WorkInProgress

new post

The Real Reason for Muslim Immigration

By Quigley   2016 Jan 30, 9:29am   13 links   5,088 views   16 comments   watch (0)   quote      

So we as a people were never consulted on whether to allow in a huge number of people we are essentially in a cultural war with, whose religion tells them to kill and subjugate everyone else. Our dear leaders made that choice for us, acting on orders from their superiors, the wealthy elite bastards who run the country. But why? It wasn't because they are too ignorant to know the Muslim cultural agenda. It wasn't because they're inherently stupid enough to believe their own multiculturalism lies. It was for one simple reason: control. Adding a hostile population to the American citizenry gives them reason and vindication, even a mandate as people grow afraid of their barbarian neighbors, to spy on us and reduce our Constitutionally-held freedoms. They banked on the idea that we would give up our liberty for security, allowing them an ever greater power over us, and to a large extent, this has been the case. The CIA, long prohibited from operating domestically, has been replaced with a plethora of internal spy agencies whose mission is to know everything we do and say. The Patriot Act has been renewed again and again, suspending habeus corpus each time for people considered terror suspects. A Federal NO FLY list has been published to restrict travel that answers to no public or Congressional oversight. Identification requirements have been increased for all movement across borders, now even expanding to domestic flights: as of this year, flights to several states require a passport or similar government ID. We are being slowly boxed into a corner, and it's because of the constant internal threat of Muslim terror attacks that we've allowed it.

Then came the Trump, stated the obvious, and pledged to do the obvious, as no other candidate has before him. It's been said that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. Americans have a candidate who appears at least partially-aware of their hopelessly unrepresented plight, and they're flocking to coronate the one man who can both see the problem and pledges to do something about it.
Add that he sees the overall immigration problem, and the problem with free trade that's killing American jobs, and I think the only reason he doesn't have more support is his bombastic attitude and the general electorate's overall ignorance of his positions.

Thoughts?

Comments 1-16 of 16     Last »

1   TwoScoopsMcGee   2016 Jan 30, 9:33am     ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike   quote    

I partially agree with the hostility creation, but believe is more rooted in economics than anything else.

It's basically this all over again:

The powers that be insist on mass immigration, it's because they want lower wages, higher rents, and most of all, Labor Discipline and Labor Infighting.

In Europe in particular, a declining population is a severe threat to those who run service businesses, extraction industries, and landlords.

2   resistance   2016 Jan 30, 9:43am     ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike   quote    

certainly 9/11 was a great excuse to start spying on the public, taking new powers for the government that never expire. not too sure about higher levels of conspiracy.

but the larger problem is simply that even now, maybe half of all americans (more women than men) do not want to believe there is anything unusual about islam, even as westerners are shot down in the streets in the name of islam repeatedly.

why? maybe the reason is that they know that once that mental domino falls, it is only a few more until it becomes obvious that muslims cannot support both the constitution and islam at the same time. and a few more until it becomes obvious that devout muslims should never be allowed into any western country at all, simply because their deepest beliefs are the absolute opposite of all human rights.

3   gsr   2016 Jan 30, 10:04am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

thunderlips11 says

I partially agree with the hostility creation, but believe is more rooted in economics than anything else.

It's basically this all over again:

You sound like an old southern democrat. No wonder you support Trump.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: Most Americans take for granted that the minimum wage and the 40-hour work week came about as a result of an effort in the early 20th Century to improve the lives of working Americans. Not true. In fact, these measures were rooted in the racism of the era and were part of an effort to benefit white workers at the expense of black tradesmen. The policies helped create persistent high unemployment among blacks—and shed a light on the real motivations of so-called Progressives.

“The Caucasians . . . are not going to let their standard of living be destroyed by negroes, Chinamen, Japs or any others.” — Samuel Gompers, founder of the American Federation of Labor (AFL), 1905

http://capitalresearch.org/2014/06/the-untold-racist-origins-of-progressive-labor-laws-protecting-white-jobs-was-the-purpose-of-union-backed-legislation/

4   TwoScoopsMcGee   2016 Jan 30, 1:01pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

gsr says

Summary: Most Americans take for granted that the minimum wage and the 40-hour work week came about as a result of an effort in the early 20th Century to improve the lives of working Americans. Not true. In fact, these measures were rooted in the racism of the era and were part of an effort to benefit white workers at the expense of black tradesmen. The policies helped create persistent high unemployment among blacks—and shed a light on the real motivations of so-called Progressives.

Unions were key in strictly controlled immigration 1945-1970. The result was the greatest prosperity of all time. The standard of living under Mixed Economy America (and UK, West Germany, France, Japan, etc.) exploded like never before for all classes - including the bottom 25%. Never before in history, ever, by a huge degree. The 1975-today experience is a pale shadow of that incredible growth.

But the wealthy didn't want 5-7% YoY gains, they wanted the good old fashioned massively disruptive markets, where it's possible to make a killing on the upside and downside, so they pushed for immigration, just like they did during the Gilded Era and Earlier. Gotta break the back of Labor to insure there isn't constant pressure to increase wages due to labor shortages, or invest in new technology.

Xenophobia accusations are just a way for the 1% to continue to bask in low wages and high rents, while sheltered from the consequences in their gated communities/penthouses with guards and doormen, kids in private schools, limos on the way to work downtown.

Labor Supremacy in the long term is why Europe beat China.

We're going back to the New Deal / Post-War Prosperity Era. for the bottom 80%, Neoliberalism has been a disaster. Remember in 1959 only HS-graduate (if he graduated) dad worked. Now it's mom and dad with college degrees full time with massive debt just to get the same deal.

Progress is getting more for doing less, not getting less for doing more.

Neoliberals and Economic Libertarians are traitors.

5   TwoScoopsMcGee   2016 Jan 30, 1:10pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

"Flexible, Competitive Workforce" = Rip off of Americans

6   marcus   2016 Jan 30, 1:17pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (2)   quote    


maybe half of all americans (more women than men) do not want to believe there is anything unusual about islam

This is simply wrong. You're too smart for such dishonesty.

Actually people know that the koran says some really crazy shit. Even more than the bible does (i know Patrick, they aren't the same). One of the things that a majority of Muslims have in common with a majority of Christians and Jews is that over time, when living in the western world, they become less dogmatic, less fundamentalist and more okay with secular government etc.

You can argue with this, or the degree to which it's correct. But instead you want to argue that they are all fucked in the head and most of us just don't get that.

The real question is whether integrating Islam into the western world does more harm than good, but also your position begs another question:

How much harm (or do you think good ?) is done by having the entire western world take the position Islam is the enemy of humanity ?

That's really what you are advocating. But you never explain where you think that leads. I'm guessing you haven't thought the implication of you pov through that far.

7   TwoScoopsMcGee   2016 Jan 30, 1:22pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

The 1990 Cairo Declaration, the Islamic Answer to the 1948 Declaration of Universal Human Rights:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/newsroom/cfi_defends_freedom_of_expression_at_the_un_human_rights_council/
http://www.dhimmitude.org/archive/universal_islam.html

Freedom to Religion, but no freedom to criticize religion.
Right of marriage regardless of race, sex - but not religion.

8   gsr   2016 Jan 31, 10:18am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

thunderlips11 says

Unions were key in strictly controlled immigration 1945-1970. The result was the greatest prosperity of all time. The standard of living under Mixed Economy America (and UK, West Germany, France, Japan, etc.) exploded like never before for all classes - including the bottom 25%. Never before in history, ever, by a huge degree. The 1975-today experience is a pale shadow of that incredible growth.

Japan still has the similar immigration policy. And they just have negative interest rate. That tells you a lot about their economy. You are still stuck at 1950s. The world has moved on.

9   TwoScoopsMcGee   2016 Jan 31, 10:26am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

gsr says

Japan still has the similar immigration policy. And they just have negative interest rate. That tells you a lot about their economy. You are still stuck at 1950s. The world has moved on.

Japan doesn't actually need immigrants. They have huge numbers of single people living in internet cafes, they have a huge temporary employment problem with people doing 'piecework' over the internet instead of steady employment. They've outsourced a lot of production to China.

South Korea? Chile? China? All of these countries have recently restricted (or always restricted) immigrants, are developed nations doing just fine. China doesn't take in anybody, and has had fantastic growth, unprecedented in World History, growing faster than the UK or US in the 19th Century.

Australia famously cracked down on refugee boats, and surprise! once the refugees knew the boats would be turned away or at best they'd be interned on Christmas Island or New Guinea, that was end the of that.

Which is exactly what the EU should do, if they don't want people drowning. More lives have been saved by Australia refusing to allow the boats to land than when they did.

The law of Supply and Demand isn't suspended for Labor Power.

Get with the new times: There is a counter-reaction to immigrants, and the 1%ers are doing everything possible to "Manage Democracy" and subvert the public will against immigrants. The Neoliberal Glory days 1980-2008 are ending. CATO is becoming an extremist, outdated organization.

10   MMR   2016 Feb 1, 10:49am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

marcus says

when living in the western world, they become less dogmatic, less fundamentalist and more okay

Not true in nigeria, a predominantly christian country
Not true in Germany
Not true in Sweden
Not true in UK
Not true in France.

United States TBD

11   MMR   2016 Feb 1, 10:51am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

thunderlips11 says

Unions were key in strictly controlled immigration 1945-1970

My family emigrated in the Early 60s to Mid 70s and pursued work in fields not unionized

12   Quigley   2016 Feb 1, 11:02am     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

MMR says

My family emigrated in the Early 60s to Mid 70s and pursued work in fields not unionized

Not every job needs to be union in order for the workforce as a whole to benefit from unions. Competition for labor lifts all boats in states with higher union representation. Even 20% union will put pressure on employers to cut fair deals with employees or risk their best leaving for greener (Union) pastures.

13   87a8   Jan 31, 8:47am     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

The bottom line is very simple if you can not destroy an enemy by military means you infiltrate its society with your so called persecuted! Spread your belief's and culture like a cancer! Read the Koran! They have no desire but to conquer! There so called holy book encourages to lie if you need to as long as it benifets Islam! Sure there are those who need help but over all Islam is a wolf in sheep's clothing!

14   HEY YOU   Jan 31, 9:25am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

It's not immigration that's the problem.Refugees are.
As their habitat slowly disappears,they leave the area
& can't return. Nothing to eat.

"“We’re not arguing that the drought, or even human-induced climate change, caused the uprising,” said Colin Kelley at the University of California in Santa Barbara. “What we are saying is that the long term trend, of less rainfall and warmer temperatures in the region, was a contributing factor, because it made the drought so much more severe.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/02/global-warming-worsened-syria-drought-study

Keep this to ourselves. Man is an animal.It is not above the rules that apply to animals.
Without water & food,you can figure out what happens.

15   sagacious1   May 24, 7:11pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

This assumes recent migration patterns (predominately Muslim) are exceptional, which I feel they are. The issue is consistently portrayed as a refugee problem, and rarely examined as to cause. Some refer to the "Arab spring" as causative, yet this falls short of a full explanation. This forum, specifically this topic on this forum, attracted my attention since it attempts to delve into cause vs consequence. Many of the ideas here seem plausible. Singular events rarely reveal the entire picture....changes of significance occur over time, sometimes spanning generations.

If someone would have described to me 15yrs ago, that the entire Middle East would undergo a complete transformation, and in scope that has not been seen in contemporary history, I would have been skeptical. That Iraq's Saddam Hussein would be toppled and executed, that Egypt's Hosni Mubarak would be deposed, that Lybia's Muammar Gaddafi would be slain by his own citizens, and Syria's Bashar Al-Assad would be clinging to political and physical life...it's astounding what has transpired.

It seems as though after 9/11 a decision was rendered, by those who create these types of historical changes, that the old tolerated core of Middle East leaders are to go...and go they have. If this was the case, certainly it would be silly to think there was no after thought of consequence.

16   curious2   May 24, 7:35pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Quigley says

Adding a hostile population to the American citizenry gives them reason and vindication, even a mandate as people grow afraid of their barbarian neighbors, to spy on us and reduce our Constitutionally-held freedoms. They banked on the idea that we would give up our liberty for security, allowing them an ever greater power over us, and to a large extent, this has been the case. The CIA, long prohibited from operating domestically, has been replaced with a plethora of internal spy agencies whose mission is to know everything we do and say. The Patriot Act has been renewed again and again, suspending habeus corpus each time for people considered terror suspects. A Federal NO FLY list has been published to restrict travel that answers to no public or Congressional oversight. Identification requirements have been increased for all movement across borders, now even expanding to domestic flights: as of this year, flights to several states require a passport or similar government ID.

Hillary Clinton confirmed essentially all of this.

sagacious1 says

this falls short of a full explanation.

I suggest reading two other threads started by Quigley; the second link is to a comment from me:

Quigley says

Hijrah - when migration becomes jihad

curious2 says

Apparently, it goes back at least as far as the W administration....

marcus says

Islam is the enemy of humanity

Finally, even marcus manages to say something accurate. Perhaps he was referring to his alias, "humanity," in which case he may have been calling Islam his enemy.

Comments 1-16 of 16     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
patrick's 40 proposals  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home