Trump closes the asylum loophole.

a new immigration rule Monday that will restrict illegal immigrants from countries, other than those bordering the United States, for applying for asylum first in the U.S. if they have attempted “to enter the United States across the southern border after failing to apply for protection in a third country.”

Trump threatened Mexico with tariffs, they gave asylum. Mexico agreed to new asylum rules designed to meet the long established US rules on third country asylum, and now Trump can deport hundreds of thousands of people pouring over the border, a quarter of a million last year, if the borders remain open, likely increasing, if Democrats continue to hold the borders open, to a million next year, four million the year after that, sixty million in 2026, a billion in 2030.

New rules apply allowing Trump to immediately deport asylum applicants back to Mexico.

If the flood of people demanding asylum from the poverty, violence, chaos, and destruction that they created and intend to inflict upon us continues to grow exponentially there will be over a billion black male military age Muslims in the US by 2030 screaming for infidel blood and white pussy.

If we go by what the asylum seekers are saying, they believe that all white people need killing, that the poverty and violence from which they fled is the result of us stealing from them, that our wealth is an indication of our sinfulness, and destroying our wealth will make them rich.

Now maybe they are just saying that like Havel’s greengrocer. Maybe they are just saying that because the murder of white people, the destruction of white property, and the destruction of the technology that white people developed is politically correct, and don’t really intend any of it. Marxist economics has become dangerous to doubt. But that is what they are saying.

Judges are likely to rule Trump’s order illegal and order the borders remain open, a flagrant abuse of judicial power, and an abuse that is likely to get my children killed and my property destroyed. At some point, Trump has to do a Jackson, or threaten a Jackson and see if the judges back down.

If Trump is defeated on this, hundreds of millions of Americans are likely to be murdered. If the current asylum seekers, like Havel’s Greengrocer, do not truly believe what they are saying, and quite likely they do not truly believe, they are eventually going to be massively outnumbered by a billion black male Muslim military age asylum seekers from black Africa in 2030 who do truly believe it, in so far as they are capable of any thought beyond “gibmedat”.

At some point Trump has to just damn well close the border against illegal immigration, which Judges are likely to rule illegal and unconstitutional. And if he hopes to win the 2020 election, he has to do it well before the end of 2020. And if he loses the election he and his family are going to be arrested, and once you start arresting ex presidents, you soon start killing them.

109 Responses to “Trump closes the asylum loophole.”

  1. My opinion is that migrants need to be stopped south of the border. And this has to go souther and souther. Mexico cannot take up that sixty million or billion either, waiting for their asylum process. They will flake out at some point unless the migrants are stopped south from THEIR border. And so on. Eventually the West will have to put soldiers on the borders or inside all migrant-emitting countries to nip it in the bud, so that people don’t even start going on that long trek.

    I am not that familiar with the situation in the US but I think it is analogous to ours here. I’ve heard there are a million migrants living in tiny Lebanon in camps. In Turkey as well, in Lybia, a lot of them. Sooner or later they will be unable to cope with the inpour and send them all to Europe. We cannot expect them to take huge numbers in. Thus, we have to stop migration south from THEIR borders, sending soldiers right into Nigeria etc. and telling them to stay put.

    Yes, this sounds like invading the world and micromanaging the world. Which is a very bad idea. But what else can be done? Like Sherlock Holmes, exclude the impossible and work with what you have left. We don’t want and cannot take them in. We also cannot expect countries like Mexico to Lybia to take them in. Not such huge numbers. They will flake out. Nor other countries south from them. Only solution is if all migrants just stay home, not go even just one country north. Which means stopping them at their home country. Which means sending soldiers there…

    • jim says:

      > And this has to go souther and souther. Mexico cannot take up that sixty million or billion either

      The poor pitiful Rohingya refugees being cruelly persecuted by Myanmar are in fact a flood of Bangladeshi Muslims invading Myanmar. They speak, all of them, Bangladeshi dialects not Myanmar dialects. Australia has quietly made forward defense arrangements with Myanmar and Thailand to halt the invaders from invading Australia. Which, strange to report, resulted in the problem of the evil persecution of poor innocent Muslims mysteriously going away.

      So forward defense is already in place and working, at least for Australia against hostile and aggressive Bangladeshi invaders.

      • Roland says:

        Please provide more info about Australia, or at least a good place to find it if you like – I had noticed that the Rohingya agitating had stopped but didn’t know why.

        • jim says:

          I regret that I cannot give you links. There was an international conference on the problem of the poor pitiful Rohingya refugees, at which the US diplomats and the Australian diplomats talked right past each other – the US diplomats talking about dispossessed refugees who needed a home, and the Australians talking about illegal movement of people which needed to be stopped. Myanmar, Thailand, and Indonesia said yes to Australia, and yes, to the US, but their “Yes” to the US turned out to be the infamous Asian “yes” that means no, while their “yes” to Australia was followed by military cooperation on land and sea to halt the hostile invasion of Bangladeshi Muslims.

          Now maybe it is true that some of the invaders being thrown out had been in Myanmar and Thailand a long time, but not bloody many of them, and precisely zero of them had been integrating with or assimilating to the population they were invading and conquering.

          • Roland says:

            Thanks for the details –
            It’s good to know that the trash in the universities has not completely corrupted the government.

            In my circles the advance of Morrison despite all odds precipitated much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

  2. The Cominator says:

    https://i.ibb.co/SV3wXCp/66647666-10216131740298885-6484783275540742144-n.jpg

    Theoretically Barr’s determination that Mexico is a safe 3rd country is unreviewable. If the courts fuck with Trump and Barr its a perfect chance to do a Jackson for all nationalities other then Mexican.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158

    • BC says:

      Outstanding.

    • jim says:

      The courts, of course, are going to review what is unreviewable.’

      8 U.S. Code § 1158. Asylum

      (a) Authority to apply for asylum

      (2) Exceptions

      (A) Safe third country

      Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an alien if the Attorney General determines that … removed … to a country … in which the alien’s life or freedom would not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and where the alien would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection

      Well, the Attorney General has determined that … Let us see the courts overrule him.

      There will never be a better time to try a Jackson.

      • pdimov says:

        (3) Limitation on judicial review

        No court shall have jurisdiction to review any determination of the Attorney General under paragraph (2).

        • Frederick Algernon says:

          “shall not be infringed” worked so well, i don’t see this being a problem either.

      • The Cominator says:

        I suspect Trump will irritatingly let it go through the Supreme Court rather then immediately ignoring lower courts and see if they uphold his view that the law is unambigious but if Roberts proves to be a compromised cunt again then you will get to see him pull a Jackson.

        If Roberts does I predict …

        Statement from the White House “John Roberts has made another bad and terrible ruling which prevents me from doing my job to defend this great country of ours, I have read the law myself and it states in very clear clear terms “No court shall have jurisdiction to review any determination of the Attorney General under paragraph (2). But yet John Roberts and the four liberals have once again found that it is unconstitutional to keep terrorists, murderers, MS13 gangsters, heroin mules, child traffickers and other viscious terrible terrible people out of the country the way I promised to do and the way the people of this great country deserves.

        Well I can read the law too and after consulting with our great great Attorney General William Barr he agrees with me that it says that his decision to protect this great country is Unreviewable in court. I am thus directing immigration authorities to ignore the decision of the Supreme Court, I’m not ignoring the law because the law says unreviewable in the plainest language imaginable. If officers want to follow the court and not me and the AG here is what I will say to them Your Fired. I have to protect this country folks its my job as president… I can’t listen to a bunch of partisan lawyers tell me its unconstitutional for me not to let in terrorists murderers child rapists and other scum of the earth by the tens of thousands. Thank you god bless ICE and god bless America.

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          Nice fanfic, brah. The average person couldn’t even tell you what “unreviewable” means, and Trump is smart enough to know it. He will bitch about it in words easily understood by the lowest of common denominators, and do nothing else. There is no way he has the balls to defy the mysterious unearthly powers of the Council of Nine.

          • jim says:

            Duterte blew off the courts, Tony Abbot blew off the courts, and Trump is at least as much a man as Duterte and Tony Abbot.

            Tony Abbot took his time and waited for the right moment, giving the courts enough rope to hang themselves, and letting them go out on a limb, and then, when it seemed that all was lost, that the borders were about to be wide open for all the world to come to Australia to live on crime, welfare, and voting for the left, he taught them their proper place, that they have remained in since.

            • Mandos says:

              This. Reining in the courts is likely to become a matter of life and death for Trump at some point, literally, so he has some very strong incentives to get this under control. Liberals themselves have prepared the field by undermining the Supreme Court authority over the last two nominees, exposing it further as a partisan issue and some map point to be captured in order to rule from the bench. Stuff like the ridiculous wave of RBG idolatry last year doesn’t help either.

              A scenario where Trump and Barr literally send the courts to fuck off doesn’t seem far-fetched at all; in fact, it is more and more an obvious prerequisite for future steps in the culture war.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              >no wall
              >illegal immigration higher than ever
              >”Lowest Black unemployment of all time!!!”

              Trump isn’t 1/100th the man Duterte is. I’d like to believe otherwise, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. He picked a fight he can’t, or isn’t willing to, win. He still thinks he’s just going to leave office and be an ex-President like W or Obama rather than spend the rest of his life in a dungeon (if he’s lucky).

              • The Cominator says:

                Your 1st two statements are lies. Some parts of the wall have been built.

                Illegal immigration is not the highest ever and they are being sent back.

                Your 3rd statement was a campaign promise and there is nothing wrong with him creating an economy where everyone including blacks can find jobs.

                NRx wants a society with segregated neighborhoods at least available, we want the Jared Taylor laws, we do not hate blacks so much we want them hopeless and unemployed. That is however the kind of thing an entryist would think.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  It’s not that I hate Blacks and want to see them unemployed. It’s that I despise Trump’s typical boomer view of helping Blacks as the summum bonum. Nobody voted for him because they wanted to help Blacks, and no Blacks will vote for him no matter what he does for them. So why bow and scrape before them? Because he truly believes that makes him a good person.

                • jim says:

                  Nuts

                  Trump gives the stuff about black employment and black opportunity in order to give white progressives an excuse to vote their race and sex interest.

                  He gives the stuff about black enterprise zones to counter the progressive “secret stash” economic doctrine, that anything that one person gets, is necessarily subtracted from another person, so that any time white males create physical objects with value, they are oppressing coloreds and women, and therefore production of wealth is a dire crime that must be stopped and deserves punishment, particularly the production of physical things like qualified natural gas.

                  “Black Unemployment is the lowest ever” was a campaign promise that we of the reaction totally agree with, totally supported and totally support, and it is also an excuse for whites to vote against getting their houses burned down and their children murdered.

                  “Black enterprise zones” is an explanation to whites that burning the supermarket down and beating the hell out of the checkout girl is not in fact a noble act that will improve the condition of black people and does not in fact demonstrate the superior holiness of the man with the gasoline and the baseball bat.

                  We supported Trumps promise to help blacks, we support Trumps successful efforts to lower black unemployment, and continue to support them. We want whites to rule blacks because that is better for both blacks and whites, not because we hate blacks.

                  We don’t hate blacks any more than we hate bears. We just don’t want bears near our front door.

                  We want the best for everyone, including black people and bears. We don’t hate far. Rather, we are cynical when near gives his deep concern for the welfare of far as an excuse for damaging near, and doubly cynical when near explains that smashing the apple cart and grabbing the apples is doing a big favor for far.

                  When Trump talks “black enterprise zone” he is explaining that burning down the supermarket and thumping the checkout girl with a baseball bat is not in fact doing a huge favor for black people that shows what a deeply caring person you are.

              • jim says:

                Trump is picking a fight he has in fact won, and is now moving onto the next fight. The wall is now being built, next step, merit based immigration. The 2016 election was about the wall. The 2020 election will consist of a victory lap in front of the wall, and a campaign on merit based immigration. As 2016 was all about the wall, 2020 will be all about bringing in Republican voters to work and pay taxes, instead of Democrat voters to live on crime and welfare.

                • Ojsk says:

                  “We want whites to rule blacks because that is better for both blacks and whites, not because we hate blacks.”

                  There are other people (of a group different than Whites) who think exactly the same, just with their race’s name in place of “whites”, and whites (alongside everyone else, perhaps) in place of “blacks”.

                  They may be thought to be thinking that due to reasons not unlike yours for writing what you wrote.

                  I would be for:

                  1) Separation for people who don’t want to be ruled over by others of different races

                  2) Coexistence for people who have no qualms about being ruled over by others of different races.

                  Which could mean separation between a part of conservatives, and “progressives”, maybe.

                  If humans were a bit wiser than they are, they’d form groups who share tastes and wants, and let others do the same without working hard (as they do) to annex and coerce them.

                • jim says:

                  > > “We want whites to rule blacks because that is better for both blacks and whites, not because we hate blacks.”

                  > There are other people (of a group different than Whites) who think exactly the same,

                  History proves they are wrong and we are right. Compare the white ruled Congo with today’s Congo, Compare Rhodesia with Zimbabwe.

                  Further, they don’t think exactly the same. They intend to kill us all, and say so on twitter and facebook all the time. You don’t hear any of us saying we intend to kill all the blacks. No one intends to rule whites, any more than anyone intends to rule Jews – they intend to exterminate whites. People want to rule their inferiors, to restrain their inferiors from doing stupid stuff. No one thinks white people are doing stupid stuff.

                  It is biosocialism, the secret stash theory of where wealth comes from. You hear it from Jihad Barbie all the time. If white people build things, they are making nonwhites poorer.

                  If you are thinking of the Jews, nah, they don’t intend to rule us – they are disinclined to acknowledge that they rule us to the extent that they do. They prefer the self image that they are not invited to the country club.

                • Friendly Fred says:

                  Ojsk, there actually aren’t other people of the group you mention who think in that way with those name-replacements. I myself suggested on another blog that Whites would be better off ruled by the group you have in mind, but I was just kidding in order to tease someone who was always grumbling about that group; most people of that group don’t get into that kind of science-fiction-type of joke. The only members of that group who think “We’re this awesome special group!” are too busy studying the ins and outs of their canonical literature to care about ruling Whites. This is an absolute fact and the truth and I know from personal experience that this is so — they DON’T FUCKING CARE ABOUT RULING YOU.

                • Friendly Fred says:

                  Host-Teacher, how come sometimes comments await moderation and sometimes not? Is it that you moderate comments from people who have especially annoyed you recently?

                • jim says:

                  I don’t understand, and have trouble controlling, WordPress’s moderation and spam detection algorithm. In particular, I would love to whitelist certain IPs, but cannot. The whitelist plugins do the opposite of what I want.

                • Not Tom says:

                  There are other people (of a group different than Whites) who think exactly the same, just with their race’s name in place of “whites”, and whites (alongside everyone else, perhaps) in place of “blacks”.

                  Show us one example of one of them saying that, without relying on unusual subjective interpretation or unusual assembly of random disconnected fragments. It shouldn’t be hard, if it’s an entire group. After all, here we are saying it plain language without the substitutions.

  3. Mister Grumpus says:

    Don knows how to turn up the heat, not just in “reality” but in the hearts and minds of people. By Election Day 2020, people will be spontaneously breaking down in public hysterics nationwide. No wait. Worldwide.

    And surely the media will be calling for his imprisonment and (implied) execution by then. If so, the election won’t be about whether Don should be president again, or about “policies” and “priorities”, but about his own personal life or death.

    (Of course I’m just guessing. I don’t KNOW any of this for sure, but I’m trying to imagine… what… 15 more months of this escalation, and where this curve on the graph might reach, in finite time.)

  4. Encelad says:

    If Trump loses the next elections, he would have no more power, what’s the point of the left going after him then?

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Silly noob. That’s why they go after him at all. Powerless man must be destroyed. The less powerful, the more he deserves it.

      We’re talking about people here.

    • jim says:

      1. Maniacal insane rage, that nothing can sate.

      2. Superior holiness. It is a start on the holiest action of all, which is killing everyone and destroying everything.

      3. When things really go pear shaped, and there is no one plausibly legitimate as president, they will kill him to prevent the military from grabbing him and re-installing him as president.

      • Encelad says:

        I see… It is mostly a fight for status: “I will be remembered as the one who stopped the king of nazis!”
        With “starting the holiest action of all” you mean as an part of the escalation towards what you call the Singularity, correct? They do not intend to slaughter millions at the beginning, they just think they will bend the rules, as an unfortunate necessity, for the last time, after which, in their minds, everything will get back to normal and everyone will live happily ever after.

  5. Mister Grumpus says:

    “Australia has quietly made forward defense arrangements with Myanmar and Thailand to halt the invaders from invading Australia. Which, strange to report, resulted in the problem of the evil persecution of poor innocent Muslims mysteriously going away.”

    Fantastic bit of noticing there. Thank you.

    Is this because the Ozzie-man-bad stories aren’t working now, so the print space and TV time are re-directed to attainable fruit? Like, consciously, at the editors’ meeting every Wednesday?

    Or did it all simply happen unconsciously, a shit test being passed, and the media/NGO’s switching from “angry and bitchy” to “calm and obedient” for mysterious impossible reasons that no one who’s bad with women could ever have surmised?

    (Note of course the implied prediction on how reporting on the southern border might soon change, in similar fashion and for similar reasons. We can only hope.)

  6. Atavisionary says:

    I am wondering where the funding for this is coming from. How are all these poor people affording to get across the atlantic and make the long trek north through alien countries before getting to the US. Who is sending so much money through western union that San Antonio runs out every day?

    https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/06/29/san-antonio-tx-cant-keep-up-with-arriving-migrants-ability-to-withdraw-cash/

    If you target the NGOs or whoever is apparently bankrolling this mass movement of people, you could probably put an end to it.

    • Not Tom says:

      The problem with targeting NGOs is that there are so many of them, it’s trivial to start up new ones, each one is just a placeholder for the same type of subversion, and the money flows through them literally without limit. If Trump wants to ban one, or some, then he’s going to have to ban them all, like Orban. And even then, many are international.

      Killing off the migration money spigot is probably a coup-complete problem, requiring iron-fist control over the IRS and State department.

      • Frederick Algernon says:

        It is easier solved as coup-complete, but i bet there are tools to go after orgs that are funding trans-oceanic migration.

        – possible RICO charges if you can legally demonstrate that orgs are using charity/nonprofit funding to turn a profit
        – possible conspiracy to commit/RICO charges if you can legally demonstrate that “in the know” orgs are contributing to the delinquency of ignorant parties by misinforming them as to what asylum is, how port of entry rules work, what they are paying for when they start their journey

        Just pulled those out of thin air. It isn’t without precedent, either. There used to be far more orgs running charter boat services under the guise of SAR as well as semi-official liaison with criminal orgs in the Med before key member nations of the EU cracked down on them.

    • Reziac says:

      Would be interesting to know how that withdrawn money gets spent (which is to say, who winds up with the bulk of it)… because to me this smells like money laundering: a way for cartels to convert crappy Mexican currency into cold hard American dollars, with minimal bother and expense. After all you can always get another MS13er.

  7. Mike in Boston says:

    Halting the importation of hostile left-wing Central Americans would be great.

    Unfortunately, the Establishment is pivoting towards the importation of hostile left-wing South Asians.

  8. Wilbur Hassenfus says:

    The foreign judges presiding over American courts are key. When Americans go to their houses and kill them dead, one after another, things will start to change. But you’re not volunteering to do that, and neither am I.

    There is no resistance. There is a little talk, but there is no resistance.

    Nothing will change.

    • alf says:

      I bet you also thought Trump was never gonna be president.

      • Wilbur Hassenfus says:

        Voting is normal for the right. Fighting back is not. Won’t happen until the only other option is being killed *without* fighting back. Then a few percent will fight back. But that’s quite a ways off yet.

    • Not Tom says:

      Thanks for the tip, fed.

      • lalit says:

        You really think he is a Fed or are you just trolling him?

        I also noticed elsewhere in the comments to another post where people seem to believe CR is a paid shill/entryist. If not for Jim mentioning the same, I would not have believed it. I feel like I am entering the twilight zone. This means Jim is in the gunsights of power. And this means that all commenters are as well. Doesn’t that spook you guys?

        • BC says:

          Anyone encouraging violence is Fed. They’re looking for idiots they intend to give fake bombs to and then arrest them for being terrorists. 99% of FBI terrorism busts work that way.

          >This means Jim is in the gunsights of power. And this means that all commenters are as well. Doesn’t that spook you guys?

          No. Standard operating procedure for the left. They infiltrate everything. From the smallest church, to the boy scouts, to your local PTA. The people in the greatest danger are liberals who are not quite leftist enough because they actually have power.

          • Wilbur Hassenfus says:

            If anybody hands you a bomb, don’t take it.

            But I’m not handing you a bomb. I’m observing that we’re not going to talk our way out of this, which you knew. And that nobody’s going to do anything but talk until it’s far too late, which you also knew.

          • Wilbur Hassenfus says:

            PS killing colonist judges is illegal and they’ll execute you for it. But you knew that too.

          • lalit says:

            Fair enough. Their fetish for infiltrating everything is well known. But would they actually pay someone to infiltrate small fry? What’s blowing my mind is someone being paid to infiltrate this blog. That does not look like a progressive amateur. These guys seem to be professionals. That means actual power, no? And that’s what is spooky.

            • jim says:

              I have thirty thousand unique visitors a month. The threshold for entryism is way smaller than that. Thirty thousand is not small fry by their standards. They target every boy scout troop and two bit church congregation.

              • lalit says:

                Thirty thousand is not small fry by their standards given some sites such as NYT receive millions of visitors?

                If the threshold is way lower, that means these guys are swimming in money. How much do you think CR gets paid for trying to infiltrate you? Say minimum wage? But then there is his supervisor to pay as well. Let me do some quick back of the envelope calculation.

                1. Say blog.jim.com is assigned just to CR. S

                2. eeing the number of posts CR posts, let’s say he spends 20 hrs/wk. I set it at 20 since that’s the threshold for benefits.

                3. Given the US minimum wage of 7.25/hr, that means CR gets paid $145/wk. Thats about $7000/yr.

                4. Assuming his boss costs 20% of that, that close to $9000/yr these guys are willing to pay to infiltrate you. Minimum. Given how inefficient these guys are with money, it probably costs them closer to $20k/yr to infiltrate you.

                I’d like to know their roster. What could their budget to infiltrate the all the popular reactionary intellectuals be? Damn, I wish we had some sort of guy inside who could give us details like these via wikileaks or something.

                • BC says:

                  >eeing the number of posts CR posts, let’s say he spends 20 hrs/wk. I set it at 20 since that’s the threshold for benefits.

                  I doubt he spends that much time. Remember, everything they post is scripts from some database someone else wrote. Copy/Paste with keyword lookup to match the scripts is quite fast.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Piecework isn’t subject to minimum wage. Outfits like Shareblue pay a lot less. It’s not an employment contract.

                  Fedposting doesn’t always mean literally working directly for the FBI, could be NPCs with professional handlers, or could be managed through a third party NGO. But they almost invariably have scripts to follow, and almost all scripts encourage low-level violence, some more subtly than others; CR posting arguments that logically end in violence without explicitly saying so, vs. this stable genius straight-up telling us to shoot federal judges in their homes.

                  Also note that “entryist” is not the same as “fed”. Entryists could be feds, but the term simply means someone who is not like us pretending to be like us in order to gain status, regardless of their ultimate motivation for doing so.

                  Anyway, I believe it’s way less interesting than you imagine. Think boiler rooms and mechanical turks, not war rooms and think tanks.

                • alf says:

                  Anyway, I believe it’s way less interesting than you imagine. Think boiler rooms and mechanical turks, not war rooms and think tanks.

                  Exactly. I imagine entryists are otherwise on the payroll of NGOs, or in the case of CR, perhaps academia.

                  Do you think CR’s job description literally includes ‘entrying online communities’? Or perhaps something more vague, like ‘researching divergent ideological internet spectrums’?

              • The Cominator says:

                Even tiny conservative facebook groups on fagbook get shills.

        • R7 Rocket says:

          @lalit

          It turns out that Deep State power is unable to comprehend the RedPill on women, a huge weakness. A weakness that President Trump is exploiting right now.

          • pooch says:

            how so?

            • R7 Rocket says:

              Failure of the Pee Pee Dossier to intimidate President Trump. And the entryists here on this blog who continually fail the WRP test. The RedPill on women test has caught fed shills 100% of the time.

        • When I had a post linked to by Heartiste, and my traffic exploded overnight, about a week later the local cops started conspicuously following me around, and for about a month I couldn’t drive or walk anywhere without seeing a cop car when I know for a fact that my town employs two officers. And then back to normal. We are in the sights of power, but the resources devoted to us are likely fairly limited and once my blog dropped below a traffic threshold they stopped giving a shit.

          My name is probably on a list somewhere that private employers do not have access to but government employers do, and if things go ass-up, if Trump is executed, this list will probably be leaked to a proxy force like antifa who will try to invade my home or mob me when I’m walking the streets at night. I doubt I’m important enough to get a guy with a badge and a gun kicking my door in.

      • Wilbur Hassenfus says:

        Imbecile.

        Read what I wrote, imbecile. I don’t know who the fuck you are, and I don’t want to.

        Dumb fuck. As I said, nobody here is going to do shit.

        • Not Tom says:

          Your explosive over-the-top reaction to being called a fed totally proves that you are absolutely totally not a fed. I stand humbly corrected.

          • lalit says:

            Hahahahahaha!

            Entertaining insults are allowed.

          • jim says:

            It certainly suggests he is not a fed. The standard fed response to accusations of being a fed is “Everyone knows the feds never infiltrate anyone, and suggesting otherwise is ridiculous paranoia.”

            • Not Tom says:

              He hasn’t said that yet, but his posts have still left that door open.

              Let’s put it to the test, shall we? “Wilbur Hassenfus”, do you acknowledge that fed infiltration is real and pervasive, and assert that you are not really one of them, but merely a pathological blackpiller with violent fantasies and no filter?

    • So you martyr a bunch of judges, and judges respond by stealing even more power. Violence only works if the perpetrators can get away with it. Every revolution, every coup, is a civil war between already-powerful factions that have the ability to protect their thugs from repercussions.

      We are not an already-powerful faction and behaving as if we are is stupid and self-destructive.

  9. Frederick Algernon says:

    The US should invade and subsume Mexico.

    Fait acompli ultimatum in three tiers, a six month warning to do the impossible, a 3 week demand to do the impossible better, and a 72 hour requirement of proof that the impossible was impossible.

    When they fail this un-passable test, JSOC and SoF sweep in under land based aerial cover to secure the regional control centers, petrol-chemical nexii, and a bloody assassination spree of all cartels. During the dramatized build up, all IC assets will be set loose to promise money, power, and prestige to mid- and upper-level military officers who will assist in making Mexico great again.

    In tandem with the decapitation, regular units will strong side every border population center with shoot-to-kill curfews and martial law writ, establishing a border region of ~50 miles in depth. SoF will either retract into each other, exfil, or hold in place depending on outcome of primary and secondary targets. Then the invasion pauses to let the refugee swarm pass through the front line into “lavish” containment zones where the best of mexi-America will be on offer (of course, Blue will get its dick wet hunting down Mexi-nationalists who start shit in the US due to the invasion… 3 million birds with one stone). After a 6 week training course in being a meso-American, the retrained refugees will be sent back into the contested zone to establish the state governments and social infrastructure for the ~30 new states of the US underneath the loyal Batavii… i mean meso-American freedom fighters and their martial law.

    This semi-autonomous region will be spanish speaking. Being a documented citizen of the former republic of Mexico makes one a citizen of the new S-A region. All others get a week’s worth of provisions and a ride to the nearest port or port of entry. The UN and NGOs will be contracted to repatriate these poor souls, with the US footing ~50% of the gross total bill for 1 year.

    The US now captures all remittances heading south via taxes and commerce. The US now has an incredibly smaller southern border. The US now has a place to put people that don’t want to speak English and marry their own kind. The US now has a reason to capture or kill counter-revolutionaries and ne’er-do-wells that threaten national stability. The US now controls N.America in name and spirit. The US can send peaceniks to its other S-A region up north.

    The US should invade and subsume Mexico.

    • The Cominator says:

      For now… It would be Cathedral rule not Trump rule and Mexico would end up like Iraq, we would end up making Mexico even worse and creating even more refugees.

      • Frederick Algernon says:

        Disagree. SOP for cathedral is to fight wars that don’t end and take no territory. They instill their values through subversive culture, not through the sword. We have gone over this in regards to Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria.

        The ascendant cathedral attempted to spread their pietism through World Wars One and Two and failed. They learned from this. Conscription was eliminated, effectively turning the military into a mercenary force. Generals/officers were neutered as cultural icons.

        I am advocating the use of tactics and strategy learned from the un-holy war in Iraq, but at basically a theater level down. We would not be “spreading democracy,” we would be establishing a vassal state. The point of full incorporation is to create a buffer region. Mexico has a hard cap in terms of population/productivity due to its riverine systems and topography, just like Canada.

        https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/geopolitics-united-states-part-1-inevitable-empire

        I am very aware of what Stratfor is; i disagree with many of their positions. regardless, the document makes some very interesting and, in my assessment, valid analysis. If you’ve read the piece and disagree with it, i’d like to hear your points. If you haven’t, i recommend you do, as well part 2.

        • BC says:

          You’re a really poor shill. Are you from a different group than CR or did they down ground your scripts DB?

          • Not Tom says:

            I don’t think what he’s saying is totally ridiculous. Moldbug was pro-colonialism; NRx in general seems divided on the issue but it’s certainly not outlandish to suggest a military takeover of subversive neighbor-states, and Mexico has a long history of being a scheming, manipulative little bitch. Let’s not label everyone a shill because of a few wacky ideas; intent matters.

            But Cominator is right that it would end in disaster if done today. Military occupation requires competent leadership. U.S. officers don’t have a grasp-the-nettle mindset. If we can’t even bust up a throng of black-bloc pantifags, I fail to see how we’d succeed at busting up deeply-entrenched and extremely violent Mexican and Central American cartels.

            • jim says:

              The Mexican cartels are revivals of the old Gods. They cannot be taken down by mere guns. To rule Mexico, will need guns plus the faith.

              An America capable of invading Mexico and ruling it would be an America with a governing faith capable of taking on the governing faiths of the cartels – which would mean women in their place, sacred altars in the Church, a sovereign under God, and all that. Need to conquer women, before we could conquer Mexico.

              • Frederick Algernon says:

                You and Tom make good points. I do believe that a violent expansion of actual territory, while being risky and complicated, would serve to align those domestic issues whilst simultaneously creating a more positive international situation.

                The root issue is the religion question, there you have an unassailable point. Unfortunately, every time we try to discuss The State Religion (coup complete), the dialogue devolves into How To Train Your Female. Not that this isn’t important, it is just a very large tree in a forest unexplored.

              • pooch says:

                Ruling Mexico requires the same as ruling any foreign land: Colonists willing to move and live there.

                America easily invaded and defeated Iraq and Afghanistan militarily but could not hold them because no Americans wanted to move there.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  You make a very interesting point. As a counter:

                  1) I wish i had had the opportunity to be a colonist. I would enjoy the opportunity to live and work in either Iraq or Afghanistan, or Vietnam for that matter, but there were no such programs. I admit that my temperament and fascination with/enjoyment of frontier zones is probably representative of a very narrow segment of the population. After WWII England gave money and wives to vets who would pack up and move to South Rhodesia. If the US actually wanted to win in Iraq or Afghanistan they would have done something similar.

                  In terms of invading Mexico, we have colonists ready to go. Any latino that has citizenship could be easily incentivized to move south. Their will be an instantaneous status bump as well as far more opportunities to become more influential. In addition, meso-America, being federated but semi-autonomous, will develop a unique culture all its own. This will create a border more powerful than any wall, as the populations on either side will be self motivated to maintain the divide.

                  Great point, and i’m embarrassed that i didn’t think of it in greater depth.

                • The Cominator says:

                  We have to win the war here before we think of taking over anywhere.

                  But to link Mexico and Iraq if we had a sane government one good way of undermining Islamic cohesion in the Middle East and giving them a distraction to fight instead of trying to export Islamic terrorism, would have been to deport all the illegals… to the Middle East.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Indeed. We should para-drop our prison population on nations that do us dirty or subvert our global intentions.

                  This issue of coup-complete is interesting. In a theoretical sense i agree; dividing goals/labor into easy/moderate/hard/currently impossible/always impossible is a good way to figure out what should be focused on.

                  …but given Nrx’ complete failure to exploit 2016 i feel like we are presented with a choice: go to ground and wait ~50 years or apply a HLvM strategy to a very wide spectrum of issues. I am not trying to force a dichotomy; there may be other, better options. But my Team seems content to sit on the sidelines and talk exclusively about a coup-complete world and how it would be ordered. To me, that seems a bit idle.

                  All this to say that a good ol’ crusade or invasion would push a lot of people off the fence IMO.

                • The Cominator says:

                  It would have solved two problems at once just like when Cromwell dumped the Covenanter die-hards in Northern Ireland.

                  And hell if you want a crusade to reclaim the Middle East for Christendom… Mexicans are on average dumber then Arabs but Mexicans especially with a few Castizo types to serve as officers are capable of a far greater level of military discipline and cohesion then Arabs are so with a few intelligent officers from higher races the Mexicans should utterly crush the Arabs.

                  So dumping a bunch of them in the Middle East… likely to gradually see a Christian reconquest take place over time.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Deus Vult, but in spanish.

                  I know it is long, but did you get a chance to read that Stratfor piece? Also, here is another one that is interesting:

                  https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/775669.pdf [WARNING PDF]

                  It would appear that Lawrence agrees with your sentiment on Arab military cohesion…

                • Not Tom says:

                  But my Team seems content to sit on the sidelines and talk exclusively about a coup-complete world and how it would be ordered. To me, that seems a bit idle.

                  That’s passivism, and it’s an important tenet of the memeplex that you’re lamenting always veers into WRP discussion.

                  Briefly summarized, it says: don’t act unless you have the backing of a plausible, powerful authority. If Trump declares himself Emperor with military backing, and California, New York and DC rebel, then we can act. If Emperor Trump declares that certain federal judges are guilty of treason and demands that they and anyone who helps them evade military authority are to be captured, dead or alive, then we can act.

                  But acting alone, without official backing, accomplishes the opposite of the intended effect. Taking sides before sides are declared means you either get absorbed into the Cathedral or disappeared by the Cathedral. Armed resistance to nominal authorities (currently controlled by Cathedral) forces the desired future authorities (future Emperor Trump) to distance themselves from you if they aren’t ready to claim authority and declare a coup.

                  Thus, passivism. The goal of NRx isn’t to incite a revolution, it’s to survive any revolutions while awaiting the restoration.

            • Frederick Algernon says:

              There does seem to be a schism in terms of the Nrx position on colonization. What do you think the reason for this is? That peace on Iran by Moldbug was formative for me, and my studies since then have served to reinforce what i feel is obvious: the best form empires, and the best empires have lots of colonies. Yet when the topic is broached, there is always significant push back.

              On a more personal note, BC continues to imply i am a shill yet never engages with me directly when i ask him directly. My assumption is that he is the lowest jew on the totem pole in terms of IQ and thus needs to punch goy-ward to lvl. up. Either that, or he can cobble no better insult than “shill.” Regardless, it makes very little difference to me. I have a lot of wacky ideas and if that is his issue and he merely lacks the ability to express himself, i’ll ignore it. If he actually thinks i am a fed or an entryist, then that needs to be addressed directly. Neither your pigs nor farm, i know, but you seem to be able to translate his incoherence into discernible thought.

              • Not Tom says:

                There’s a legitimate debate over whether it is:
                (a) possible to civilize the uncivilized;
                (b) beneficial to the colonizer to civilize the uncivilized; and
                (c) morally right to civilize the uncivilized, against their will.

                History suggests the answer to (a) is yes, in the short term, but questionable in the long term without wiping out the natives. (b) is also quite difficult, as colonialism can be profitable in the short term but can also make powerful enemies and hollow out the domestic economy. (c) is the most profound – is it a form of noblesse oblige, or are we meddling with forces we don’t understand, and do we need we allow the weak and stupid to die off or wallow in their own filth for the good of the human species?

                Keep in mind, Moldbug made a very clear distinction between imperium and suzerainty. Empire as a form of government, pretty good; empire as expansionism and distant puppet states, not so good.

                I’ve always been partial to the defensive expansion model: don’t attack unless provoked, but if continually provoked, Conan the Barbarian.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Solid points. I think in two minds on most issues (what is happening now and how I fit in & what may happen down the road and how I fit in) and sometimes the wires get crossed.

                  Message received on the passivism. Like our esteemed host, my path to Here started on the extreme left; sometimes that creeps into my perspective in terms of action v. non-action. That is a bad thing, and one of a few key reasons why I am unfit for formal leadership. Thank you for reminding me; it is the better path to be ready to surf, as opposed to making waves.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Message received on the passivism. Like our esteemed host, my path to Here started on the extreme left

                  Jesus Christ is everyone here but me a David Horowitz? I would expect maybe one person here would be an ex leftist…

                  Its quite obvious the views of the left are lies, it was not all that obvious until the years of Bush the younger that the conservatives were controlled opposition so I did expect to see ex libertarians and ex more conventional conservatives. Its quite beyond me that any intelligent man can accept the lies of the real left though…

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Two forces at play here, i think.

                  1) You have the -tism power up, so you look at things differently and are thus able to make more objective assessments about holistic realities.

                  2) You have the -tism handicap so you didn’t play the poon game with the same set of tools.

                  I grew up in a devoutly christian family that collectively backslid. I rebelled against a rigid, religious system duee to excessive reading habits and an inquisitive nature in an environment ill suited to handle a trouble student of my flavor. I went to Public highschool, played football and hockey, and quickly learned that vegetarian girls put out, particularly if you give them access to illicit substances. It is a hop-skip-jump from passively accepting liberal ideology in exchange for pussy access to exploiting bird boned beta boys revulsion for physical activity to get unshaved sluts to temporarily bestow a pussy pass. I would probably be a quiet little cuck playing on the other team if i hadn’t accidentally found the Future Primeval. This was a horrible path. I am so grateful for what GNON has seen fit to grant me, especially considering everything i threw away, esteeming fools wise.

                  I humbly suggest you consider my story, as well as others, as anecdotal evidence that there are still brothers of value and substance to be culled from the ranks of the enemy. For me, it took losing almost everything i had built, friendships and relationships and a career, as well as spending almost 4 straight months waking at sunrise, working til dusk, lifting, and reading a massive amount of bloggetry to expose and widen the cracks in my progressive ideology. The way is narrow, and it should be, but there should always be a path back to grace for those worthy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  and quickly learned that vegetarian girls put out, particularly if you give them access to illicit substances.

                  New Agey vegetarian hippie/raver chicks to the extent they are leftists genuinely want to help people and be nice to people they aren’t status seekers or fanatics (in fact belief in the new age memeplex given that to some degree its an actual religion somewhat crowds out the progressive religion).

                  I knew a lot of them too, none of them gave a shit that I was outspokenly pro Trump. It was every other type of leftist that is a problem. Sometimes they’ll say something anti Trump when the media floats a particulary bad piece of anti-Trump propaganda… but they’ll actually listen to you when you explain why its propaganda.

                  They are certainly not a reason to become a leftist yourself.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  I’m not trying to excuse my degeneracy, nor am I beholden to you to account for my organic game methodology, flawed though it was. Simply put, life was very different for those of us in highschool in pre-9/11 America.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Jesus Christ is everyone here but me a David Horowitz? I would expect maybe one person here would be an ex leftist…

                  Keep in mind, we do want to convert progressives, thus we should expect to have former progressives in our ranks. Emphasis on former. Progressives who are still progressives have to go, and waffling progressives with high recidivism rates need to be carefully monitored.

                  I’m not an ex-leftist. I flirted with right-libertarianism for a while, but was mostly just an unwoke normie-con beforehand, laughing at boomer memes on socialism and wringing hands over “identity politics”. It’s unfortunate that most conservatives are never able to move past that stage, but it is what it is.

                • jim says:

                  If you are David Horowitz, you are apt to appreciate that the left is always right on the edge of murder, frequently commits murder and gets away with it, and might well go to large scale mass murder at any time, as it has done so many times during the twentieth century. This is something conservatives fail to appreciate.

                • Colonialism is a deep inward necessity of our people and our culture. Its positive and negative aspects pale before the fact that Europeans -need- to be expanding and pushing their frontiers. Jim has said that the Chinese don’t seem to need an official religion and the West does. The hawk and the tiger play by different rules. China is perfectly content to be the Middle Kingdom and have the barbarians pay them tribute and trade with them on China’s terms.

                  The history of the West, on the other hand, is the history of political expansion. If we don’t figure out how to rule inferior conquered peoples, we’re doomed. The English came very close, but in every historical case, successful colonial governments were defeated not by savage blacks and browns but by leftists at home interfering.

                  Until we can colonize space, we need to keep ourselves busy colonizing the globe. Which is coup-complete, I agree, need elite fertility, for sure, but a discussion of its merits and practicality is besides the point. I can’t think of a single period in the history of the West that could be described as “defensive expansion”. Columbus set sail for the new world the day, the literal day, that the last Moorish stronghold in Spain was burned.

                • jim says:

                  yinyangNo yang without yin. Cannot have the outward and conquering urge except we have sons. Cannot have sons except we own women.

                  Men and women have to be stuck with each other – men have to have an absolute property right over women they have sex with, except that they cannot resell them, give them away, or abandon them.

                  Conquest and expansion is the core of the western spirit, and the western spirit is male, but to be male, must possess women and never let them go.

                • The Cominator says:

                  If you are David Horowitz, you are apt to appreciate that the left is always right on the edge of murder, frequently commits murder and gets away with it, and might well go to large scale mass murder at any time, as it has done so many times during the twentieth century. This is something conservatives fail to appreciate.

                  Yes sure but given that I’m NOT a former leftist and yet realize absolutely the nature of the left I guess I’m uniquely okay with advocating that the restoration government should carry out the most total and uncompromising extermination of them.

                  Realizing their nature I consider them evil and insane, not being a former member I have no sympathy for them only a fanatical hatred. If we’re even going to discuss killing bastards (who after all did nothing wrong themselves) why should we even think to show any mercy to the demonic bugmen who have created this hell on earth and would bring it back if they could.

                  Now of course former leftists like Horowitz who have switched sides are fine but any who don’t switch before the restoration need to become part of “The Final Helicopter Ride”.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I can’t think of a single period in the history of the West that could be described as “defensive expansion”.

                  True that this is not an Anglosphere norm. I think it plausibly describes modern Russia, and modern Israel, or at least what Israel would like to be if the USA were not hampering them. My medieval knowledge isn’t the best, but I would bet on finding at least a few examples in that period.

                  Say we establish the religion, we win the meme war, we go forth and conquer all of the third-world toilets. What happens when we run out? We’re going to have a lot of warriors with nothing to do. Space might turn out to be empty. Explosive infighting comes next.

                  So I’m still not sold on unlimited expansion. We have to learn how to exist in peacetime, without going soft. We have to be able to conquer – which means actually doing it sometimes to stay in practice – without becoming so obsessed with conquering that we spread ourselves too thin, send all of our warriors off to die, and end up with an emasculated population worshiping sluts and African migrants.

                  Or is the consensus that it is the white man’s nature to endlessly divide and make war against his cousins, and that this is part of some grander evolutionary process?

                • Tom, I think the most surefire way to cause infighting, explosive or corrosive, is for our people to meet a barrier to expansion. There’s a chance that space being empty will mean pioneering it and settling it fails to fulfill that drive to conquer and expand. But then again, it might.

                  I don’t want to talk a super macho game on war when I’m not a soldier and have never killed a man, but it seems to me that we evolved to fight other groups of human beings, which is why hominid intelligence continued to expand past the bare minimum necessary for survival, making war a deep fundamental part of GNON’s will for us.

                  I don’t have a huge problem with white countries fighting other white countries when there’s not a common enemy breathing down our necks.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I don’t have a huge problem with white countries fighting other white countries when there’s not a common enemy breathing down our necks.

                  Well the 1st world war all but destroyed our civilization.

                  Jim thinks a lot of things went downhill in the 19th century and they did but really they went downhill because of WW1. The war saw democracy become the standard government in the world, it saw colonialism over inferiors de-legitimized as classical international law was replaced with “self-deterimination”, it saw communism come into power for the 1st time, it immensely boasted feminism as women were mobilized en masse to work for the 1st time, it saw troublesome Islamic states gain independence and it didn’t even establish a stable peace. It was also probably the opposite of eugenic.

                • BC says:

                  > It was also probably the opposite of eugenic.

                  Correct. I read a recent book about Verdun where someone finally explained why French battle tactics were so awful during WW1: The Socialist goverment of France hated the Roman Catholic army. So they made sure that every general put in charge was a socialist who insisted on feeding French men head first into the meat grinder, probably with the goal to get most of them killed.

                  This greatly confused the Germans, who couldn’t understand why the French just kept sending men to their death for no gains and they thought that eventually the French goverment sue for peace after all the losses.

                  Verdun was an exception to this rule because a Roman Catholic general named Pétain ended up in charge. Later when the military mutinied Pétain end up in charge and won the war.

                • Not Tom says:

                  The war saw democracy become the standard government in the world

                  Indeed. And important. There is something about democracy that appears to make it highly adaptive to expansive warfare. Perhaps it is the sense of ownership, that you aren’t fighting for your king whom you secretly feel might be sending a few too many warriors to their deaths, but actually fighting because you want to, because after all you voted for it, even if you didn’t technically vote for it. Or perhaps it’s just that democracy necessitates an extreme degree of state propaganda that is easily transferred to a war effort.

                  Whatever the exact mechanism is, some evidence exists that democracy is an outcome of sustained war, or at least a failure mode that we aren’t completely sure how to prevent. Maybe the new reactionary faith will prove to be even better at warfare than democracy, without any of the negative side effects, but I don’t see how to support that claim right now without a lot of speculation and handwaving.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Indeed. And important. There is something about democracy that appears to make it highly adaptive to expansive warfare.

                  Demotic governments do have an advantage in manufacturing consent despite being inferior in almost every other respect.

                  They have somewhat lost this in the West as the ruling class keeps pushing very very unpopular policies with the backing of the state church to the point where the % of the right who openly want a monarchy is probably at least 20%.

                  Governments that don’t pretend to be demotic (its important to note that communist governments at least pretend to be demotic) actually have far less freedom to go too much against public opinion. I am of course talking about males only, one good thing about monarchy is they only have to worry about men revolting they won’t worry about what women think at all.

                • WWI was in practice and probably in intent a series of leftist governments feeding any and all potentially reactionary elements within their own societies into the meat grinder, should be considered by history an intentional class genocide similar to the Holodomor.

                • The Cominator says:

                  WWI was in practice and probably in intent a series of leftist governments feeding any and all potentially reactionary elements within their own societies into the meat grinder,

                  With England and France yes… though I can’t blame Lloyd George in England entirely because I know he wanted that idiot Haig out.

                  Germany had a right wing government but it was fighting a defensive war and definitely not deliberately trying to get everyone killed.

                  Nicholas II was just an idiot who the leftists duped into their attack Germany scheme and he should have been put in a home for retarded people instead of ever being allowed to be Emperor.

              • jim says:

                > There does seem to be a schism in terms of the Nrx position on colonization.

                Not seeing it:

                When we have elite fertility, then we can conquer and colonize. Until then, we cannot. If you don’t have elite fertility, the people you send overseas to rule are carpetbaggers, as when Harvard ruled Haiti after the earthquake, and everything collapses. The lights go out, you get human shit on the streets, and medieval plague stalks the land.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Ah, ok. Order of operation issue. I think my meso-America plan would work, but it seems to be definitely a coup-complete structure.

        • Install a viceroy/satrap and give him broad discretionary powers to run his satrapy(the Moldbug plan for Iraq) or do the Habsburg thing and give it to a cadet branch of the Imperial family (Barron, Eric, etc.) to administer as their own kingdom.

          Or alternately, give it to the local elites with the understanding that they’re now formal satraps of the Empire and the purpose of their country is to serve the Empire.

          All three options have advantages and disadvantages, all are coup-complete solutions.

      • alf says:

        Once we have proper throne, altar, freehold in place, I think it will be only natural for the empire to consider expansion. But until then, will only be Cathedral operated mess.

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      “The US should invade and subsume Mexico.”

      Puerto Rico writ large, with a population of 126 million.

      • BC says:

        Indeed. It’s an insane idea.

        • Frederick Algernon says:

          Second time asking you: are you calling me a shill?

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          Why? If they don’t have the vote and we don’t spend on social services, what does it matter their numbers? The Mongols were able to run China for a couple generations with even worse population ratios.

          • jim says:

            The Mongols went to China, stayed there, ruled, they had a fertile ruling elite. When Harvard went to rule Haiti they lived out of airline carryon bags, and each Harvard ngo employee stole anything not nailed down, and left when he had cleaned out any portable assets, which usually happened in a week.

            The ratio of rulers to ruled does not matter. The ratio of elite children to elite parents matters.

  10. It’s awesome for me to have a web page, which is helpful
    designed for my experience. thanks admin

  11. […] on Trump closing the asylum loophole in the US. On General Flynn’s involvement in the shitshow of delusion known as […]

  12. Time2Repent says:

    Everything happening to America, and to Europe, and to Australia, is to be expected.

    Obedience, or you will be punished.

    14If, however, you fail to obey Me and to carry out all these commandments, 15and if you reject My statutes, despise My ordinances, and neglect to carry out all My commandments, and so break My covenant, 16then this is what I will do to you: I will bring upon you sudden terror, wasting disease, and fever that will destroy your sight and drain your life. You will sow your seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17And I will set My face against you, so that you will be defeated by your enemies. Those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee when no one pursues you.

    18And if after all this you will not obey Me, I will proceed to punish you sevenfold for your sins. 19I will break down your stubborn pride and make your sky like iron and your land like bronze, 20and your strength will be spent in vain. For your land will not yield its produce, and the trees of the land will not bear their fruit.

    21If you walk in hostility toward Me and refuse to obey Me, I will multiply your plagues seven times, according to your sins. 22I will send wild animals against you to rob you of your children, destroy your livestock, and reduce your numbers, until your roads lie desolate.

    23And if in spite of these things you do not accept My discipline, but continue to walk in hostility toward Me, 24then I will act with hostility toward you and strike you sevenfold for your sins. 25And I will bring a sword against you to execute the vengeance of the covenant. Though you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be delivered into the hand of the enemy. 26When I cut off your supplyb of bread, ten women will bake your bread in a single oven and dole out your bread by weight, so that you will eat but not be satisfied.

    27But if in spite of all this you do not obey Me, but continue to walk in hostility toward Me, 28I will act with furious rage against you, and I Myself will punish you sevenfold for your sins. 29You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters. 30I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars, and heap your dead bodiesc on the remains of your idols; and My soul will despise you.

    31I will reduce your cities to rubble and lay waste to your sanctuaries, and I will refuse to smell the pleasing aroma of your sacrifices. 32And I will lay waste to the land, so that your enemies who dwell in it will be appalled. 33But I will scatter you among the nations and will draw out a sword after you as your land becomes desolate and your cities are laid waste.

    34Then the land shall enjoy its Sabbaths all the days it lies desolate, while you are in the land of your enemies. At that time the land will rest and enjoy its Sabbaths. 35As long as it lies desolate, the land will have the rest it did not receive during the Sabbaths when you lived in it.

    36As for those of you who survive, I will send a faintness into their hearts in the lands of their enemies, so that even the sound of a windblown leaf will put them to flight. And they will flee as one flees the sword, and fall when no one pursues them. 37They will stumble over one another as before the sword, though no one is behind them. So you will not be able to stand against your enemies.

    38You will perish among the nations, and the land of your enemies will consume you. 39Those of you who survive in the lands of your enemies will waste away in their iniquity and will decay in the sins of their fathers.

    God Remembers Those Who Repent

    40But if they will confess their iniquity and that of their fathers in the unfaithfulness that they practiced against Me, by which they have also walked in hostility toward Me— 41and I acted with hostility toward them and brought them into the land of their enemies—and if their uncircumcised hearts will be humbled and they will make amends for their iniquity, 42then I will remember My covenant with Jacob and My covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land.

    43For the land will be abandoned by them, and it will enjoy its Sabbaths by lying desolate without them. And they will pay the penalty for their iniquity, because they rejected My ordinances and abhorred My statutes.

    44Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject or despise them so as to destroy them and break My covenant with them; for I am the LORD their God. 45But for their sake I will remember the covenant with their fathers, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God. I am the LORD.”

    46These are the statutes, ordinances, and laws that the LORD established between Himself and the Israelites through Moses on Mount Sinai.

    We were His people, just as Israel was.

    Repent now.

Leave a Reply