politics November 27, 2019 Mayflower Caravan at out Southern Border on Thanksgiving Day Posted by in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post PentecostalTheology .com Previous articleA Thanksgiving ministry idea Next articleThanksgiving: A Narrative 151 Comments Reply November 22, 2018 Varnel Watson YES Link Hudson Not all of the Mayflower’s passengers were motivated by religion. The Mayflower actually carried three distinct groups of passengers within the walls of its curving hull. About half were in fact Separatists, the people we now know as the Pilgrims. Another handful of those on board were sympathetic to the Separatist cause but weren’t actually part of that core group of dissidents. The remaining passengers were really just hired hands—laborers, soldiers and craftsmen of various stripes whose skills were required for both the transatlantic crossing and those vital first few months ashore. Community leader John Alden, for instance, was originally a cooper, brought along to make and repair barrels on board the ship. Myles Standish, who would eventually become the military leader of Plymouth Colony, was a soldier hired for protection against whatever natives the settlers might encounter. Abendpost — April 27, 1899 Criminals Among the Pilgrim Fathers Long ago it has been proven, even if many Anglo-Americans prefer not to be reminded of it, that our largest supply from the criminal ranks, has been brought to our shores by England during the colonial period and even later. Many a young “Pilgrim father” grew into manhood, devoid of any education, so it not surprising that they developed into crooks and criminals in due time. In this enumeration we must include Samuel Eaton, whose exemplary mother died during that dismal winter and his step-mother, likewise did not survive very long. A few years later, the court records show: “was tried and convicted;… put into irons for stealing and fighting.” He and others, generally followed the precipitous path they had selected. With many others the trend was in a constant downward direction and we soon find a band of hoodlums under the leadership of Thomas Weston who attempted to start a settlement of their own, 25 miles north of Plymouth. This bunch created animosity among the Indians. The previously mentioned Captain Standish had to subdue them in a battle. After a short interim, we find another vagabond center, with the euphonious appellative “Merry Mount” which excelled in ruthless drinking bouts. These results we find within 25 years after the Pilgrim Fathers disembarked; they did not improve subsequently. The unavoidable consequence was, that it produced a large number of austere laws, to control crime and vice. https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/21/opinions/story-of-thanksgiving-is-the-story-of-a-migrant-caravan-parini/index.html Reply November 23, 2018 Varnel Watson Link Hudson our Daniel J Hesse has just informed us THAT 1/3 of the children in the Bay Colony were born outside of wedlock making their parents common criminals at the time Reply November 23, 2018 Varnel Watson Jan Dixon Sykes Gerardo de Dominicis There is no good move for the Republicans on immigration now. Yes, unlike the millions of clueless conservatives, I read the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) currently in force, Ted Kennedy’s brainchild of back in 1965, which now mysteriously became the favorite law of Republicans and conservatives. Yes, the Law places all power and authority in the area of immigration and travel and visiting and work in the hands of the Executive. There is no power given to Congress, and there is no power given to the courts in it when it comes to immigration. The courts only have the power to decide on naturalization, which is different from immigration. For all the decisions concerning immigration issues or non-immigration permits and visas, the decisions are made by the Attorney General (part of the Executive) [NOW FIRED], with some made by the Secretary of State (part of the Executive), [FIRED and re-HIRED] and some veto and revocation power given to the Director of the DHS (part of the Executive). And of course, they all can delegate their authority down the hierarchy, to the lowest bureaucratic levels in the US Consulates around the world. Reply November 23, 2018 Varnel Watson @Nelson Banuchi so many months after addressing this issue I am still quire surprised how little Bob Wizenhut and Hugh Lowrie know about current politics, American history or our way of life. Perhaps they are illegal immigrants sent to spy with Jan Dixon Sykes ? 🙂 There was at the time when Texas ranchers worked to keep the border open and helped their Mexican workers get legal papers in the US. In the 1980s it was Ronald Reagan who called for open borders and amnesty, and was blocked by an alliance of liberal Republicans and Democrats – although, the amnesty did pass, somewhat. In 1995, it was extremely liberal Harry Reid called for building a wall on the border and for closing the borders. Conservative republicans are all against Reid you remember? For most of the history of the US, ordinary working Americans didn’t care about immigration one way or another – except that immigration proved to them the superiority of the American way of life, people from all over the world wanted to be Americans. Ordinary working Americans remembered that they were all immigrants. In fact, for most of its history the US didn’t have any immigration controls; the Constitution did not grant this prerogative to the federal government. The feds were allowed to control naturalization, not immigration. The first law regulating and restricting immigration appeared in 1921. Even then, Texas refused to comply for another 30+ years, and kept its border open. It wasn’t until the 1950s when President Eisenhower used troops returning from Europe to force Texas into compliance, in the so-called Operation Wetback. Multiple farms in Texas were raided, people were murdered, thousands of Hispanics – most of whom were born in the US – were rounded up and taken to the Sonora Desert in Mexico and left there; as a result, many died. Immigration restrictions in the US have a history of murder and robbery by the government that many Christians today don’t know about. http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/pentecostal-theology-of-political-asylum-in-america-today/ Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson Nelson Banuchi appears Jan Dixon Sykes Gerardo de Dominicis and even Bob Wizenhut have realized the absurdness of the situation and have chosen to stay home and eat turkey while thousands starving are held at our border I do hope the church does not do the same to all sinners – hold them at the church gate because they dont have papers to enter and enjoy the Support of the Lamb Reply November 26, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Troy Day being able to enter the church would be the least of their worries. I just hope they have photo IDs to buy cereal at the grocery store. Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson Daniel Kenis you would too note the said folk run away from this topic like (well you know) Reply November 26, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day no body is starving at the border. Those “migrants” are living in the “migrant house” in Tijuana, there they have beads, showers and food. Trying to portrait them as victims is unreal. Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson read the article I posted below pls Reply November 26, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis I see the news in my country and have seen the interviews made to the “migrants” and even some interviews to their relatives in Honduras. I see that you have a big heart for the people in need and that’s beautiful but these migrants aren’t in need nor desperate and should be taken back to their country. Thanks my government is opening their eyes and has started the deportation process. Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson Mexico is using the migrants as targets https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/11/16/its-your-right-to-go-to-the-us-what-i-saw-when-i-visited-the-migrant-caravan Reply November 26, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day Mexico let them cross because signed a treaty about letting migrants pass trough the country. We don’t want them in here, they are causing problems since they entered through Chiapas and along all their way to the north. Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson seems like its using them as targets overall Reply November 26, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Gerardo de Dominicis If they are being housed and fed, betcha 2 to 1 it’s Christians providing for them… giving them strength and encouragement to try to cross over tomorrow. Reply November 27, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Why the snark about me choosing to sit home to eat turkey while thousands are starving at the border, Troy? You weren’t there, either. You chose to TALK about them. So I joined in your talk fest. Reply November 27, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Nelson Banuchi no, aren’t Christians, the help comes from non profit organizations like “the migrant’s house”, “people without borders” and others like that. Reply November 27, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Gerardo de Dominicis Oh, are you saying, Christians are not at all, either with these organizations or otherwise, helping them? Reply November 26, 2018 Varnel Watson THANK YOU Again Dr. Eddie L. Hyatt https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/11/16/its-your-right-to-go-to-the-us-what-i-saw-when-i-visited-the-migrant-caravan/ Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson Daniel J Hesse Daniel Kenis what is yalls take on this here OP? Seems like all closed borders proponents are silent Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel J Hesse How can we deny the poor, tired, and helpless masses when they come here and work 16 hours a day doing work while read posts on Facebook? Curious? Are these the folks who make America great and realize their dreams? Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson by saying they are criminals before proven guilty ? Gerardo de Dominicis Jan Dixon Sykes James Hail Reply November 27, 2018 Ron Culbreth I am 100% in favor of helping the poor but, we are a nation of laws. There is a right way to enter the country, Since this was posted we have seen many try and force their way into the country. The border patrol was right in using tear gas to drive them back. Help the poor, yes but, they must obey the law. Reply November 27, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day they refused registration at the border in the south and by their tattoos you can know if they are members of gangs like the Mara. Also among them are like 50 agitators, the ones that move the rest, one of them even said that the USA will let them in because they have the support of a powerful country (Russia). Reply November 27, 2018 James Hail Troy Day not sure how I got pulled into this discussion. I will say this based on your comment. They are not criminals unless they have broken laws. Should any enter a country illegally they would be considered criminals. I also believe crimes vary in degree. Vetting is essential. Reply November 27, 2018 James Hail Gerardo de Dominicis be cautious about qualifying a person for a tattoo. They are permanent, yet people change. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson James Hail I hear they will be placed in OK state Reply November 27, 2018 James Hail Troy Day I have not heard that. I know we are a poor state and cannot take care of our own. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson Large fields – lots of work May even helps some open range farms in Kansas right? Jan Dixon Sykes Reply November 27, 2018 James Hail Troy Day no agricultural work this time of year. Most large fields are worked with machinery and not people. Oil field work is in decline. I would like to know where you got your information. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson James Hail OK has been in the talks since 2016 when Hillary wanted to bring migrant workers and now is getting noted again https://newsok.com/article/5530294/oklahoma-sees-immigration-increasing-from-central-america Reply November 27, 2018 James Hail Troy Day this is a lot of talk with little substance. The likelihood is even smaller with our recent election results. This economic state of OK has changed over the past two years. Rig counts are down and this was the source of work for many immigrants, documented or not. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson well Jan Dixon Sykes has mentioned Canada and being part of NAFTA this is also an option I think Reply November 28, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis James Hail I know people change but in those gangs the only way to get out is dying. Recently I read a story about women in the gangs in El Salvador and this girl said a lot of things about the way gangs work and the rol women have to play. Reply November 28, 2018 James Hail Gerardo de Dominicis so could this be their reason for fleeing northward? ? I minister to hardcore bikers and see the power of Christ working. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Keep them moving north & drop them off at Canada. Our farms do not need them. Most farmers & ranchers around here do their own work & any hired hands are long term employees. Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson Most farmers & ranchers nowadays are not even American Reply November 30, 2018 James Hail According to modernfarmers.com: “More than 92 percent of the country’s 2.1 million farmers are non-Hispanic whites, and more than 86 percent of those farm operators are men. The average age of farmers, which has been rising for decades, continued to inch up. In 2012, the average farmer was 58.3 years old, up from 57.1 years in 2007.Feb 20, 2014” Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson have you been pass the Mason–Dixon line recently? 🙂 if so you’d know I can just see 92% TX farmers being non-Hispanic Reply November 30, 2018 James Hail So, it must be safe to say you have seen all the farmers in TX ? BTW, I live on OK. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson YES Jan Dixon Sykes Christians in this country have always stood for open borders We know most Christians in America think in the terms of Old Testament Vatican values but that;s not what what the Bible calls for in the New Testament BTW my exact words were Christian Republicans – pls dont twist them If you have lost understanding on what a Christian Republicans is – think all early Pilgrims to AMERICA Leviticus 19:33-34 ESV When a stranger sojourns with you in YOUR land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God. Reply November 27, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes The native Americans did not have deeds to land parcels with a formalized government. I have no problem with the Central American going on up to Northern Canada in search of unclaimed land up there. ……………. Open borders are not Biblical. It lays a foundation for a one world goverment (Complete with an antiChrist) to take over. …….. Sojourn does not mean settle. It means a TEMPORARY stay. I’d take in a “sojourner.” You haven’t moved a single settler into your house. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson Jan Dixon Sykes your argument was already made by Gerardo de Dominicis and was proven NOT to be true #fakenews For example, the Manhattan sale: a letter written by Dutch merchant Pieter Schage on November 5, 1626, to directors of the West India Company, which was instrumental in the exploration and settlement of “New Netherland states “They have purchased the Island of Manhattes from the savages for the value of 60 guilders.” 60 guilders = 24 U.S. dollars at that time OR about $730 today . There is a surviving deed for Manhattan and Long Island So lets put to rest this fantasy of yours. Gerardo de Dominicis was already shown that the village which later became Plymouth was also owned by the locals and the too often kicked the white folk out of their lands Remember the Trail of Tears? I live very close to it BTW – them natives were crying with tears because they were being separated with land that owned them – much more powerful than a deed if you ask me Reply November 27, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Okay, so we BOUGHT Manhattan. Good. The trail of tears thing, though, was an atrocity. Proof positive an invasion is awful. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson Invasion YES Political asylum – you guessed it The Land of the free should be free for political asylums or is not land of the free no more now is it? Reply November 29, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Asylum is conditional. Must prove severe persecution from home country like the Muslims are beheading us Christians or the dictator is putting us journalists into a 2×2 cell. Coming here for better standard of living does not meet the standard to get asylum. Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson You obviously have not read a LINE of all I wrote in the past 2-3 days under this OP Thank you ! Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I disagree with your idea of what a refugee is. Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson I see you keep on posting BUT you have to actually read my idea in the posts above before you can confront it Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I read them. I have my own beliefs. You haven’t yet told me what your occupation is. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson wrong again Jan Dixon Sykes In a lecture of mine during the Honduran crises, I showed the Biblical view of immigration, the history of immigration laws in Christendom, and gave an analysis of the situation with the immigration laws today. To make a long story short, the Biblical view of immigration is that the government should not be involved in controlling the movement of non-criminal individuals. People should be free to cross any borders and settle and do business and get hired and hire anywhere they desire, as long as they do not commit crimes. Criminals should be dealt with the same way, whether they are homeborn or foreigners. (Not deport foreign criminals.) The line should be drawn at the voting booth: migration is a right, voting is a privilege. Thus, the Biblical system is open borders and limited political franchise. Reply November 27, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes So why does Jerusalem have a wall around it? Jesus never once spoke against it. Reply November 27, 2018 Varnel Watson Good question Actually he did say stone upon stone if you remember In this sense we rely upon the law, When we go to the Law, we don’t just want to know what the Law says. We also want to know to whom it says it. If the Law says we need to take care of the poor, it is of utmost importance to also know who it is, what institution it is that is commanded to take care of the poor. Because if we pick the wrong institution – not the one the Law prescribes for the action – we will end up in socialism, and the final result will be not care for the poor but making everyone poor. We can’t separate the abstract meaning of the Law from its institutional implementation. This principle also needs to be kept in mind when we consider modern legislation and government practices. For every law we insist to see enforced, there is an institution that will enforce it; and if we don’t take in account the nature and the goals of that institution, we will end up surprised. This has already happened in the area of education; American conservatives wanted free government education, they got it. We now discover that free government education comes with government educators and educational bureaucrats, whose agenda is destructive to everything we believe; and, as an additional bonus, we get an increasing tax burden, because, free education translated into real-world terms means school districts as a taxing authority of unlimited power. And guess what, if you don’t pay up, you can lose your house. The same ignorance of real-world implementation, of institutional embodiment is seen in the immigration debate. For most – if not all – defenders of immigration restrictions and control, these immigration restrictions are some abstract reality out there, and if “we just obey the law,” there would be no problems, and everything will be alright. Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel Kenis I am not a Christian so I don’t really care what the Bible says. Mostly I struggle to understand why people don’t want more immigration beyond the obvious explanation of “being white nationalists.” I want more immigrants for the same reason i want more tourists, or more growth. I am proud of our culture and want more people to live in it and contribute to it. Maybe a valid argument is that population growth from immigration isn’t sustainable, though that seems like a solvable problem that doesn’t require comparing immigrants to invading armies or vermin Reply November 27, 2018 Link Hudson One issue is that immigration be legal, not people walking through a hole in the fence instead of border patrol. You could vote for people who want easy immigration. Easy immigration is tough on rich countries, though, where wages are higher. Decreasing the value of the dollar and increasing the value of the peso and other currencies might help this problem, but cause others. Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson do you have any evidence to support your assertion that immigration is tough on rich countries? Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel Kenis For example, i am looking at a map of the states by immigrant population percents. I see no correlation between states with lots of immigrants and states with high unemployment. Do you have some other rubric in mind? Or are you just repeating some received wisdom? Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel Kenis Here’s a more detailed reference. No correlation between increased immigration and unemployment. Or wages. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/first_quarter_2017/mixing-the-melting-pot-the-impact-of-immigration-on-labor-markets Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis I do not care to look up any stats on this. You can look for news articles dealing with providing social services for illegal aliens, car accidents by illegals who did not have insurance, etc. The population of the US has grown quite a bit, but the growth does not primarily seem to be the children of the previous generation of citizens. By ‘tough on’, I mean there is a lot of inflow to deal with. It’s not the same kinds of problems as not having enough food. Reply November 28, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson don’t tell me to google support for your own claim. Can you support what you said with evidence? It sure seems like you were bearing false witness. Reply November 28, 2018 Louise Cummings It’s one thing to say you are not a Christian. And another to say you don’t care what the Bible says. Then you expect people to enjoy all the good things the Lord provided. But the Lord still loves you enough to provide for a house and food. And you don’t even care what God said. Well I say start living for Him and read His Word. Because what are you going to say in eternity. What are you going to say when you stand before Him. It breathes my heart for a person to just out and say I don’t care what the Bible says. Then you expect food and shelter. He is the one Who provides you know. I’m just concerned for more than food and shelter. I’m concerned about your soul. God have Mercy on you. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis if you have the Internet and do not live under a rock I shouldnot have to substantiate such a vague claim. You are clealy being obtuse. Reply November 28, 2018 Daniel Kenis Louise Cummings i do appreciate your concern for my immortal soul. Believe it or not, i have read and studied the bible, and if you want to get into a religion debate, i am always game! But maybe start a new topic and tag me. I don’t want to derail this topic. Reply November 29, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson so are you ever going to explain why you believe immigration is “tough on rich countries?” Can you support this statement? Or is it like some kind of faith based religious belief? Reply November 29, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis I’ll give you an example of legal imigration. Go look up some of the financial difficulties Hawaii has had with legal Micronesians– guaranteed a right to enter the US after the US blew up atomic bombs and dumped radiation on their islands to test them. But a lot of them would go to Hawaii, and Hawaii’s social welfare system was expected to deal with the large influx and fund the federal governments promise. That’s just an example. It is hard for a society with well-developed legal and social institutions that requires documenting everyone to deal with issues related to undocumented people. That’s what I was talking about. There are uninsured motorists who are illegals who do not want to get the proper paperwork for fear of deportation. The costs are paid by motorists who have to get insurance to cover that. If you know of some kind of intersection between this issue and religious belief, let me know. That’s not what I had in mind. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Daniel, your study didn’t differentiate between legal & illegal immigration. We want legal immigration. Even immigration that doesn’t become citizens but merely has a green card to work here. Thst’s why the term “undocumented” came about. We just want everyone vetted and already to have a sponsor or employer or a means to be assimilated. We do not want an underground class. …………… This underground class often works off the books, so requiring an e-verify system doesn’t catch them. They are maids, landscapers, roofers, etc. and are paid cash. They therefore can underbid those who pay taxes. I’m in the rental house business. ………. My local roofer was put out of business by illegals underbidding too many of his projects. My unskilled landscapers have dropped THEIR prices trying to hang onto what businesses they have. The ones illegals hurt the most are in unskilled & semi skilled jobs. ………. Not to mention the crimes they commit. MS-13 is vicious Central American gang. They are Unvaccinated, so they bring in diseases. Remember Ellis Island? Immigrants were vetted, held there until the were well if they were sick. ……….. Their children overload the school system, requiring hiring translators. I had a cousin who married a Mexican woman whom the school hired to help process the new crop of Mexican children on enrollment. Yet, illegals own no house, so they are paying no property tax to help finance said school. …………….. Your study showed how Cubans do not hurt our economy. You do realize Cubans here are true refugees of Castro putting dissidents in jail, and therefore aren’t here merely cuz they couldn’t make a living? Yet Obama ended our wet foot/dry foot policy. Why? Because he was racist? Not a peep from the left. He even ended the medical parole program that rescues Cuban Medical professionals abroad from working as slavelabor, while their salaries go directly to the Cuban givernment. Reply November 30, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson your example about hawaii is an unsourced anecdote. Please cite or link to evidence that supports your claim. Do not tell me to google it. As for the problem with undocumented immigration, i think you are smart enough to understand this is a red herring. I want more immigration, we are debating the merits of more immigration. More immigration doesn’t mean more undocumented. Ideally it means far fewer undocumented immigrants. Reply November 30, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes you also have a lot of anecdotes. And you are likewise talking about problems with undocumented immigrants. Jan: do you want more or less immigration? Don’t bring up some imagined hypocrisy from the Obama era. Just answer the question. I am guessing your answer is less because you seem utterly terrified of the disease ridden ms13 gang. But i would appreciate a straight answer nonetheless. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I want zero undocumented immigration, Daniel. We have typically immigrated a million new people to be nationalized citizens a year. I’m fine with that. Plus, I’m fine with foreigners getting documents for temp jobs and visas for school and green cards for full time specialized employment. Anything LEGAL and vetted. I like Trump’s policy of merit based immigration. Refugees should be real ones. Like families getting beheaded by jihadis. Like dissidents sitting in prison. Not poor people wanting a better lifestyle. Yes, I have lots of anecdotes. Used to be a partner in an international conglomerate. Was married to a man born in Puerto Rico. Traveled to 27 foreign countries. Have been all through Central America. Used to scuba dive in Honduras. The people there need to confront govt corruption & fix it. It’s a great place for tourism. These migrants are hurting its image. ………….. My position in showing compassion is to go THERE and create a safe space for anyone who needs one. Like the Good Samaritan did for the victim he found on the road. Put him up in a nearby safe hotel. Paid for it. THAT’S what Christ told all these virtue signalers to do. Reply November 30, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis No, you can Google it if you want to know. My commitment to this thread is pretty much nil. I unsubscribed and just got your message because you tagged my name. I used to live in Hawaii and this was an issue there several years back. I believe a court decided in the state’s favor against the federal government or they got some kind of commitment for support. Reply November 30, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson do you often engage people in debate by demanding they google proof for your position, you huckster? Reply November 30, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes that’s not what i asked you. You know it’s not what i asked. If i read your answer charitably it seems like you want exactly the same amount of legal immigration there is now. Why don’t you support more legal immigration? If Trump said he wants to let 10x as many immigrants in legally would you support that? Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I would need a good reason for the increase. Yes, I’m good with the exact same rate we have now. We have 325 million people. That’s enough. As recent as 1980, we had 225 million. There are now 7.5 billion in the world. They should make their own countries great again. Reply November 30, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes how did you determine 325 million people is enough? And your argument here applies equally well to procreation among american citizens. Millions more people want to live here. I have yet to see evidence of negative effects from increased migration. I posted a study showing the opposite. Do you have a reason for opposing the principle inscribed on the statue of liberty? Or just a general feeling of xenophobia? Reply November 30, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis i made a comment and you try to turn it into a debate. And now you accuse me. You may be acting obtuse and argumentative. But I will assume that you are not a total imbecile and that you know a lot of immigration can put a strain on a government and nation in many ways. If you are going to slander me over nothing how about you just do not address me at all. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes The Statue of Liberty is not our constitution. It’s about assimilation. There is not unoccupied land. Our cities are already too conjested. Drive time for me in just Kansas City is one hour. Rats in a cage reflexively bite each other. We need to get everybody self-reliant, and we have not. We are 21 trillion in debt. ………….. Thanks for accusing me of xenophobia. I already said I had married a Puerto Rican. Traveled to 27 countries. Was a partner in an international conglomerate. I now have to defend my virtue instead of just making my case? Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Daniel, I voted for independence from a world government. The guy I voted for is ORANGE. Who desegregated hs golf club at Mar a Lago back in the 80s before any other club in the south did. Who has Jewish grandkids. Who dated a black woman for two years. Like anybody in NYC could ever succeed if he were a bigot. You even been to NYC? This is what I voted against: Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes But if you’re against racism— Reply November 27, 2018 Daniel J Hesse I can a line drawn in the sand when the President and leaders discuss negative elements crossing over the borders. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson With the violence in border areas of Mexico several years ago, concern over criminals mixing in with the caravans is a legitimate concern. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis Strawman argument. I never said such a thing. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson In our modern society where people have to have photo IDs, insurance, etc. to survive, immigrants have to come through legal processes through legal checkpoints. If you think immigration should be more open, elect leaders who think that way. We have to deal with our own criminals who are our citizens. Even if the percentage of immigrants who are violent criminals are the same or less than our own, why would we want to admit them into our country? That’s the sort of thing border patrol agents should be checking for if they can. Whether they are doing it or not, terrorist organizations could send people into our country across our borders on land or by sea. They do not all have to fly in. If they can get into Canada, it would be easier to cross there, but it could be easier to get into Mexico. Reply November 28, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson i think criminals and terrorists should be brought to justice. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson Daniel Kenis In general, we agree. Of couse, with all the multiplied thousands of laws on the books, we are all criminals. Illegal aliens are also breaking the law. Reply November 28, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson misdemeanors don’t rank too high on my priority list Reply November 28, 2018 Daniel Kenis Link Hudson as for the felons—the gangsters and terrorists—where will justice find them? Who will protect their victims? This is a feature of immigration, not a bug. For all its flaws, i think our justice system and law enforcement do great and important work. I want more people to benefit from that work, and contribute to it. Reply November 28, 2018 Louise Cummings Thank God for America. Reply November 28, 2018 Louise Cummings And I wrote Thank God for America before I read your articles.But it is God that makes me appreciate it. If you tried loving God and living for Him. Things might be better for you. I feel for people that doesn’t have things they need. But I sure hope they don’t have your attitude. Reply November 28, 2018 Varnel Watson Link Hudson the criminal gangs argument was already made and poorly saw by Jan Dixon Sykes and Gerardo de Dominicis WHO could not tell us how regardless of extreme vetting migrants to America slave owners, Irish gangs, Italian mafia and more recently Russian, Albanian and other mafias? The same ignorance of real-world implementation, of institutional embodiment is seen in the immigration debate. For most – if not all – defenders of immigration restrictions and control, these immigration restrictions are some abstract reality out there, and if “we just obey the law,” there would be no problems, and everything will be alright. What is always missed is that behind these abstract immigration laws they want to see enforced, there is an institutional arrangement, and that that institutional arrangement is just as destructive to America as are the government schools. And certainly more destructive to America than any threat open borders could involve. That institutional arrangement is the same executive state of which I have talked before. The same executive state which is characteristic of pagan societies, because the Law of God does not allow the civil government to control non-criminal individuals, whether homeborn or foreigners. And every time we insist that these immigration laws are enforced, all we are insisting is that more power is given to the Federal government to control people. We imagine that it is to control only foreigners, but the real purpose of these laws is control over us, the US citizens. Reply November 28, 2018 Link Hudson Did Ezra or Nehemiah’s government follow your theory of government– having a certain percentage of citizens live in Jerusalem? Working around the clock on the wall? Sending away wives and children of forbidden marriage. Israelites were not allowed to oppress foreigners, though. Reply November 28, 2018 Varnel Watson Yes, they sifted via families and households.As for our current context in AMERICA, let’s take one of the most common objections of many Christians and conservatives in general against the idea of open borders (which, by the way, is the original constitutional arrangement of the US): “We can’t have open borders with a welfare state. We need to keep the borders closed until we remove the welfare state, and only then open the borders.” Jan Dixon Sykes even says go join them or bring them to your home or whatever. Taken in its abstract form, this proposition makes perfect sense; many immigrants come here only for the welfare, so let’s limit immigration by law, meanwhile work to abolish the welfare state, and then finally, we can open the borders and have only those who would come here to work. In a world of idealized theorizing, this theory is quite convincing. Let’s have a process of sifting visitors and immigrants, until we deal with the problem. Reply November 28, 2018 Varnel Watson Link Hudson The problem comes when we connect the theory to the real world. Who do you think profits the most from the welfare state? Federal bureaucrats of the executive branch. Thus, who do you think is your real enemy in the war against the welfare state? Federal bureaucrats of the executive branch. And now, listen carefully. Who do you think, according to the immigration law, controls the admission of immigrants? Yes, you got it. Federal bureaucrats of the executive branch. So, what is the logic of trusting the same enemies whom you are fighting politically over the welfare state, to provide an administrative defense of your fight against the welfare state? In whose favor do you think they will tilt their decisions when they admit immigrants, in your favor or in favor of their own political agenda? Reply November 28, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis If the US wants to stop illegal immigration they can do it easily: stop giving the us citizen by iuris soli and change it to ius sanguinis (like most European countries) and imprison American citizens that hire illegals. Once you cut the two “attractiveness” of the US for foreigners (citizenship and work) the problem is over. Reply November 29, 2018 Varnel Watson WELL what do you think the difference is between legal and illegal? For most people, there is some kind of abstract law somewhere, and immigrants are defined “legal” or “illegal” according to that abstract law. Not in the real world. According to the Immigration and Nationality Act currently in force, all final decisions about immigration or non-immigration travel are made by two top-level bureaucrats of the Federal executive branch: the Secretary of State and the Attorney General. Of course, in the real world, these two are not going to be reviewing every single case before they decide. In reality, it is low level bureaucrats in the consulates or in some office in the US who make the decisions. In the case of immigrants, they have to be persuaded that the applicant is not going to be a burden to the society. How is that done objectively? In the case of non-immigrant travel, the consular worker must be persuaded that the applicant is not a potential immigrant. How is this done objectively? Other than direct information of committed crimes or terrorist activity (which applies to less than one-tenth of a percent of all applicants), there are no objective rules by which that low-level bureaucrat is expected to operate. His decisions are entirely arbitrary. It is on these arbitrary decisions that the difference between “legal” and “illegal” hangs on. And when you hear a Christian or a conservative say that he is all for legal but not for illegal immigration, he is actually saying, “I am all for trusting the subjective decisions of low-level unelected bureaucrats.” like Jan Dixon Sykes and Bob Wizenhut Reply November 29, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day I’ll tell you my experience: as a Mexican citizen if I want to enter the US I’ve to go to the American consulate where they ask me about my intentions for traveling to the country, if I’ve money for my travel, my work in Mexico and my income (you have to provide and bring documents that prove what you say: bank accounts, job letters, your mortgage in case you are paying your house, etc). The officer at the consulate check and verify the documents and if you prove that you have enough reasons to come back to your own country and not staying in the US, then a 10 year personal visa is issued. This is for the first time you apply, the next time is way more easier: you only have to bring the documents if you’re renovating your visa and no questions are asked, you don’t even have to see an American officer an the consulate. It isn’t that difficult to get a Visa, I’ve had mine since I was 8 years old and the process is very easy. When a visa is negated is because the applicant didn’t submitted the right documents, had contradictory answers in the interview or didn’t demonstrated to have a good income. This is the procedure for tourist and business visas, for residence and other reasons the procedure change but I don’t know it ?. So in my experience the procedure isn’t arbitrary but follows a set of rules that the applicant has to obey and if you miss one then your request is negated. I think when a conservative says that they are for legal immigration is that they are for respecting the law of the land and as Christians we have to obey the authorities that are above us because they are there appointed by God. Reply November 29, 2018 Varnel Watson All this is well known and non-partial to what were are talking about here. You are NOT a political asylum, not persecuted therefore not applicable. This also brings us to another argument, concerning the recent issues about amnesty under Obama, and the conservative outcry against Obama who supposedly wanted to enforce amnesty for illegal immigrants. Now, I said “supposedly,” because the facts of the real world show that Obama is actually the President who deported more illegal aliens than all the 19 presidents before him (taking the whole 20th century), taken together. Between 2.5 and 3 million people were deported under Obama. But let’s suppose that he does really want to enforce amnesty. The conservative cry is, “Obey the law, no amnesty.” So, in that idealized view, the law has objective standards, and amnesty is some kind of perversion or violation of the law. But in the real world, the Immigration and Nationality Act currently in force actually gives the executive branch that legal power of amnesty. There is no limitation on the executive branch as to who and how and why would be amnestied and allowed to stay. Any applicant can apply and re-apply. And the decision in the hands of the bureaucrats. They can amnesty each one according to the same law that conservatives wan to be obeyed. When they cry “Obey the law,” their real cry is, “Use your power according to that law, including the power to amnesty.” Reply November 29, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day I agree that I’m not an asylum nor persecuted but the system works according to a system established in the law and administrative procedure manuals, it isn’t about the personal ideas of the officer in touch with the applicant. I agree that amnesty is part of the law and it’s up to the president to decide to apply it or not. Not all cases are the same and sometimes to give amnesty or concede refugee status is right, other times there’s no way that is possible because the applicant doesn’t fulfill the requirements of law. I understand the feeling Us citizens have about immigration and I understand when say that they are not against immigration but want it according to the law. That’s the correct way to do it. I can come to your house and demand food and clothing just because in my house I’m in need. An open borders policy would destroy the US, the same way is happening in Europe with the Arabs that are flooding them. The answer to immigration problems is not opening your borders to every one, but solving the problems in the countries of origin. Trump said once that people leave their countries because the corruption of the governments, and he is right, the moral problem comes when you realize that the US corporations benefits from that corruption too in order to get economical gains and is there when the pro migrant sector claims: the US (and the rest of the developed world) is in part responsible for these problems. I don’t agree 100% with Trump but he says things as he thinks and doesn’t remain silent nor restrain himself the same way politicians do and he has said a lot of truths, even hard to swallow ones. Reply November 28, 2018 Varnel Watson Gerardo de Dominicis I have asked this question hundreds of times. I have never gotten an answer from those who use this argument. And yet, they continue repeating the same abstract mantra. Somehow, for most Christians and conservatives in general, the practical application of their abstract ideas has no value whatsoever. The real world doesn’t matter. And, of course, we can add another practical argument here: What exactly are you protecting when protecting welfare money from immigrants? Is that money yours to use? It is stolen money, and you are not getting it back. By protecting that money, aren’t you protecting and perpetuating the very welfare state that you want to fight? Isn’t it better to let more people hang on it so that it collapses under its own weight? Why are you so concerned about the solvency of the very thief you claim to resist? If you are so concerned about that money, then you don’t really believe that money was stolen from you, you see that money as still belonging to you in some way, and therefore you are simply legitimizing the very system you want to fight. We can file under the same heading of “abstract nonsense” another argument: “I am not against legal immigration, only against illegal immigration.” Again, the abstract logic seems to hold water perfectly well: rule of law, you know, thus, those who break the law are not welcome. But if you are legal, you are OK. Reply November 29, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day I think “welfare money” is only an argument but the main issue. Xenophobia could be part of the problem but also a right understanding of the rule of law and the necessity to preserve it. What can you expect from someone that enters your country breaking the law? Of course that entering illegally doesn’t mean that you are a criminal but in the minds of the citizens you are an invader and untrustworthy. At least that’s what I would think. Reply November 29, 2018 Varnel Watson And how about that other argument, that the Federal government can easily round up and deport all illegal aliens? Again, as an abstract proposition, it makes perfect sense, why not? The question is, How would Federal agents practically know legal from illegal? And then, even worse, how would they know a citizen from non-citizen? No US citizen is obligated by law to carry a proof that he is a US citizen. The only way for such an action to be possible in the real world is if US citizens are obligated to carry some sort of a federal ID, which means National ID. And, guess what, anti-immigration politicians have been trying to push National ID on the American people for over 20 years now. Perhaps there is a connection here, in the real world of applied legislation? BUT Jan Dixon Sykes Bob Wizenhut and other wanna be rightists dont wanna even touch these issues. They run from them as from fire – no comments no anything. Which reminds us that modern day evangelical republicans are NOT only separated from republican values; they may very well have parted with evangelical such as well Nelson Banuchi Reply November 29, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Troy, I am running from nothing. Nor am a wannabe rightist. I am a national sovereignist. I have a birth certificate that says I was born here. Ask me to carry it, and I will. I also have a passport which I can carry that I had to use my birth certificate to get. ……………. So yes, I am perfectly fine with Uncle Sam rounding up all illegals and deporting them. And legal doesn’t just mean people who are nationalized citizens, but simply have documentation to be here. My own company used to get foreigners green cards to work for us legally. We had specialized jobs no locals were qualified to do. It’s easy to document people you need to work for you. No need to hire illegals. I never do even now. Nor do I rent to them. Had a family try to this summer and I said no. ………. Btw, what is your occupation? Reply November 29, 2018 Varnel Watson And on, and on, and on. All the arguments for immigration controls are of the same sort: foolish, unrealistic, and abstract. All of them miss the practical reality of the nature of government and the nature of its institutions. All of them, when applied in practice, lead to worse problems. All of them, when taken to their logical conclusions, will in practice lead to the enslavement of the American society under the jackboot of the Federal government. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes You did not answer my question. What is your occupation? ……………. Open borders destroy countries. People MUST be vetted and assimilate. Unvetted migrants turn their new countries into the former cultures. We destroyed the nomadic American Indian culture Sharia Law followers are now destroying European culture. They have their own Sharia courts. Little girls are having their genitals cut out right in England. England is refusing a Christian Pakistani women fighting for her life for having blasphemed Allah for fear of Muslim uprisings. America now has cases that were thrown out of court because the judge said the federal govt couldn’t make a law against gential mutilation of minor girls. ……… Noticeably absent about the outrage about stopping the caravan is NONE over Obama ending wet foot/dry foot as he exited the presidency. Cuban refugees typically vote Republican, so who wants THEM? Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson My occupation, qualifications and experience are all clearly posted. You would understand if I cannot take the time to explain obvious details to every one of the 5000 members of this group. Now what is your specific objection to ALL I wrote in this post alone? Pls be specific if you can Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I didn’t ask your personal history. I asked what was your occupation. That is a one word answer. Plumber. Mechanic. Farmer. ……… What objections do you want me to repeat? I’ve been telling you I want people coming into this country vetted and documented. The American Indians didn’t do well when the Europeans came over and didn’t assimilate. I don’t want the cycle repeated. Reply November 29, 2018 Varnel Watson Link Hudson Gerardo de Dominicis Another argument is that, why do they have to come here illegally, why not just apply and wait until their turn is come? Again, as an abstract argument this seems quite reasonable. Because abstractly, the laws do not stop anyone from applying, they just establish some sort of a legal order for the process of application and approval. Just like getting a driver’s license: you can apply, there’s just a procedure how you are gonna get that driver’s license. In reality however, the Immigration and Nationality Act is not about an administrative procedure, like a driver’s license. The Act is discriminational. It declares the eligibility of certain people for applying for immigrant status, and it excludes the vast majority of potential immigrants from even applying. This is the very introductory text to the main body of the Act in the very first text of Chapter 1: Exclusive of aliens described in subsection (b), aliens born in a foreign state or dependent area who may be issued immigrant visas or who may otherwise acquire the status of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence are limited to– Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson Gerardo de Dominicis Jan Dixon Sykes I see you dropped the ball again so here is the BOTTOM LINE – Deep behind that folly, of course, is a covenantal issue; it is an issue of lack of understanding concerning the Biblical view of government, and the nature of modern government. Biblical government is only judiciary: courts which are activated only when there is a crime committed or where there is a dispute to be resolved. Biblical government doesn’t control non-criminal individuals, whether they are homeborn or foreigners. (Remember, One law is there to be for the homeborn and the stranger, Ex. 12:49.) At the other end, a pagan government is always executive: an all-encompassing state which controls everyone for the purposes of a small elite of social engineers. That small elite decides where a person can live or not live, where he will work or not work, and where he will travel or not travel. The hope of the supporters of pagan government is that the government will always use its executive power against other groups. The truth is, the government always ends up using its executive power against them. And it is there where the folly of modern American Christians and conservatives is – they believe that they can trick God against His Law. But God is not tricked; and neither is He mocked. And the more Christians and conservatives root for un-Biblical laws on immigration, the deeper under tyranny they will fall. Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Borders are VERY Biblical. God pointed out the borders of the land he gave Abraham. The punishment for the Israelites was to be invaded and dispersed. The blessing was to come back into Israel and thrive. Ezekiel 37 prophesies that God will bring them into their OWN land. He will make them one NATION. …………. If there were no borders, there is no private property. Take the locks off your doors. …………. We would all end up with answering to whomever took over the whole world since there would be no individual countries to stop him. If you don’t want to be under the control of a small elite, you want multiple, individual countries. God destroyed the Tower of Babel. Even created diverse languages so the people couldn’t create another single government. Countries often become corrupt & people trapped in them need outside help or role models in how to overthrow their oppressors. We had the help of the French, remember? Reply November 30, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day we don’t live in a biblical government but a pagan one but even then we have to obey the law of the land. The bible says that we have to obey the superior authorities because has been established by God, and also says that the “magistrates” are God’s servants. These two verses are about the civil authorities in the Roman Empire (not very biblical government, right?). The Roman Empire had good and bad laws but the Christians always obeyed the laws except when were contradictory to Christian principles. To support legal immigration is to support the law of the land because there’s not ANY biblical COMMANDMENT that opposes to that law. Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson I disagree Such argumentation makes no sense at all Not to mention it is not even Biblical That’s really it Reply November 30, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes So should have France taken all us colonists into France instead of helping us defeat England? I mean, we could have just stayed a colony of England. Maybe we shouldn’t help Europe to fight Russia in NATO, either. Russia can just annex Europe since sovereignty makes no difference. Or all of Europe can move here. Except then maybe Russia can annex US. Makes no difference, huh? Viva open borders. Reply November 30, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day why not? Because it doesn’t agree with your idea about immigration? The Bible doesn’t address immigration and when it does it was about Israel and their neighbors, not XXI century nations. The Bible tell us to love each other and to do good but it doesn’t mean that we have to support illegal immigration, to support people that disregard the law and demand asylum even when they don’t need it. All the migrants from Honduras asking for asylum or a refugee status, why they didn’t ask for it in Guatemala or Mexico? Because they want to live in the US, they’re not escaping persecution. Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson I already answered very clearly and Biblically what you 2 are asking. I do not see a point of repeating myself again. Done this before – again and again Jan will come back with some wrong Biblical interpretation that the Samaritan paid the bill but did not the man in his home NEVER MIND such interpretation is NOT even Biblical 1. the Samaritan was a traveler – taking a man all the way home could have killed him with the journey 2. his land was seen by both the inn keeper and the injured man as UNCLEAN – so to take them there would have equate their status from citizens to strangers – exactly the opposite point to our migrant dilemma 3. the migrants dont want to go to Jan’s home just like they are currently NOT living in Gerardo’s home. They want asylum – healing from persecution which we can offer yet we dont do good when we know how to do it And so on and so on theology proper Come on yall, I’ve seen Link do better theology than yall Reply November 30, 2018 Link Hudson Troy Day I could follow your metjod and ‘do theology’ by posting links. ☺ Reply November 30, 2018 Varnel Watson that was a compliment 🙂 Reply November 30, 2018 Gerardo de Dominicis Troy Day the thing is: are they really fleeing from persecution? I bet they are not. If they would they would ask asylum in Guatemala or Mexico, two countries which aren’t in a war (by the way Honduras isn’t in a war either), with the same language and similar history and culture. It doesn’t make sense at all. Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I used to work in Europe. Went from spending francs & liras & marks to Euros. Watched the countries answer to Brussels, which was not even in their country. Think I wanted a Western Hemisphere EU like Hillary wanted for us? Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes The CFR is the unelected international agency that makes decisions which benefit the international money changers which we never vote on. Our Sec Of State should have been there to tell them what SHE thought. Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Oh, I forgot this little white nationalist gem. Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes And then there was this: Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes But TRUMP is the racist. Lol Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Binary thinking is I either care about people or I voted for a racist. Sorry. There are more reasons than two. Trump is stalling the plans of the international banksters who are puppetmasters to our politicians. This is my battleground. Reply December 1, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes i am going to be honest with you. You sound like a lunatic. Here are the things that terrify you: – MS-13 posing as immigrants – an international conspiracy of bankers – the lying media Replace “ms-13” with “jews” and this is indistinguishable from literal nazi propaganda. You are a stupid and dishonest woman. I hope one day you come to realize you have the capacity to be better than this. Reply December 1, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I never hired you to be either my shrink or my priest. Cuz you aren’t qualified. People who can’t defend their case, however, resort to character assassination. Had Trump called me (a female senior citizen) stupid, the media would have had it on a 24/7 loop as proof as his misogyny. Reply December 1, 2018 Varnel Watson THANKS Micael Grenholm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ2L-R8NgrA Reply December 1, 2018 Varnel Watson hey Daniel Kenis I tried to tell you that Jan Dixon would tell you like it is She may make no sense while doing it but she will still tell you like it is For example she’d tell you Trump is a Christian playboy. Now go figure it out on your own Nelson Banuchi Reply December 1, 2018 Varnel Watson yes grandma Louise Cummings Thank GOD for AMERICA which still accepts immigrants as part of us… https://i.imgur.com/xGVlPF6.jpg Reply December 3, 2018 Varnel Watson Nelson Banuchi Notice the kind of immigrants Lady Liberty is seeking out? Apparently, they’re not the kind Trump or Evangelical Christians want to welcome into America… Reply December 1, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Jan Dixon Sykes “Had Trump called me (a female senior citizen) stupid, the media would have had it on a 24/7 loop as proof as his misogyny.” Aren’t you thinking too highly of yourself? Reply December 1, 2018 Varnel Watson always 🙂 Reply December 2, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes i think calling you stupid was too harsh. You are clearly intelligent. I meant that you are willfully ignorant. You choose to be this way. I think you know better than to make the kinds of arguments and excuses you are making. And i do think you can be better than this. As for judgment: you are posting this stuff on a public forum. We are all judged by what we say and what we believe. Reply December 2, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Okay, guys all, judging ME is classic deflection from making your case. It doesn’t advance your position a bit. So what if I am stupid, willfully ignorant, or make no sense. There is either a global bankster cabal or there isn’t. If you don’t think there is one, then present your case. Using shame to try to convince a person is counterproductive. Reply December 2, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Jan Dixon Sykes Don’t count me in. In any case, I think this phrase might be more relevant to the conversation at hand: Attack the message, not the messenger. Trump is incompetent, whether an idiot or a genius says it. Reply December 2, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Was the “aren’t you thinking too highly of yourself” snark or an actual joke, Nelson? ………. As for Trump, he built skyscrapers in metro downtowns, the hardest places to build them. Also golf courses. From that, he managed to achieve a 4 billion net worth. He made payroll for 22,500 employees. He then beat 16 seasoned politicians to win the primary. He then beat a woman who had rigged the system. Not sure how that represents incompetence. Reply December 2, 2018 Nelson Banuchi That not passing judgment. That’s asking a question. As for Trump… (without mentioning all of his bankruptcies, lawsuits, how banks judge his business acumen) I don’t care; it doesn’t make him less incompetent and disloyal to the American people that he should step down… or, if necessary, be forced down. Reply December 2, 2018 Varnel Watson Jan Dixon Sykes Trump also bankrupted others while doing it as well as himself About a decade ago in the Dominican republic he took lots of investors for millions and never build nothing His NY buildings were all done by illegal migrant workers from Poland – he said he didnt know they were illegal And So on. Also not sure HOW calling him 70 years old playboy is any excuse Jan. Back in my day we called a 70 years old playboy with its real name – a perv Anyhow, ALL these arguments have been made and countered in this group alone I am not sure what is this thing about people repeated the same old stuff acting like they just discovered America. It has been said; it has been countered If you cant remember it read the archived threads and deal with it BUT dont bring it back like it is a valid argument or something Reply December 2, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Trump did not bankrupt others. They bankrupted themselves if they did a shoddy job & he didn’t pay them in full or he was their only client and they lost money. You forget I did construction projects near Trump’s buildings. You sometimes lose money on individual accounts, but the others make up for it. And these vendors couldn’t have been that small, or they wouldn’t have been big enough to do a whole skyscraper. But it’s nice to blame someone else if we go under. Had Trump been a cheat, other vendors would have boycotted him. The world is small at that level. ……………. As for Trump’s OWN bankruptcies, there were only four. Twice on two casinos in Atlantic City when the city was tanking. And the bankruptcies weren’t chapter 7s where you don’t pay your bills. They were chapter 11s, where you reorganize your bills. …………. The only skyscraper done by illegals in NYC was for Trump Tower, when the company which was demolishing the original building hired some illegals. I have roofs replaced on my houses. I hire a local company that is legal. I drive by. I’m supposed to know a couple guys my contractor hired were illegal? Why would Trump know who all his contractor hired on a big project like a skyscraper demolition? ……………. Trump is no longer a playboy. I said if God can change murdering Saul to missionary Paul, he can change Playboy Trump to Praying Trump. And he did. …………. I have seen incompetency. It is a half-built eyesore in a skyline. Trump’s buildings were of such quality, other developers started wanting his name on their buildings! Also, of all the builders, Trump won the contract to transform the DC Post Office into a luxury hotel. The vetting for a federal showpiece would have been the most rigorous of any. The post office sits between the White House and Capitol. …………… You’re sincerely asking me, Nelson, if I think if I’m more intelligent than “stupid,” I could be thinking too highly of myself??? Reply December 3, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes I’m curious. Do you think people in the 1930s were generally correct about the Jews? Millions of people believed the Jews were an international cabal that controlled the banks and the “lying media,” and that they promoted communism and other anti-nationalist ills through their influence among artists and scholars. How close is this to what you believe, Jan? Reply December 3, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes I don’t think the cabal has anything to do with religion. The Rockefellers are not Jewish. Powermongers worship power, don’t they? Reply December 3, 2018 Nelson Banuchi Jan Dixon Sykes “Powermongers worship power, don’t they?” Not necessarily. Look at Trump. One can say he’s a “powermonger” but he worships himself (and wants everyone else to pretty much do the same; just think of things he said about Putin or Jong-un: “I like them; they like me, they really like me”). ? I’m sorry; I couldn’t help laughing. Reply December 3, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Trump does not belong to the cabal. The cabal hates him for not being their puppet. He got out of their TPP & Paris Accord schemes to further diminish America. He has now redone NAFTA because it had been driving our factories to Mexico. The cabal owns mainstream media. Hence, the constant Trump bashing. Reply December 3, 2018 Daniel Kenis Jan Dixon Sykes hold up. I get you don’t think the identity of the cabal members is “jewish.” But you generally agree with the rest of it, yes? Bankers, media, scholars, artists, communists—all conspiring against nationalists? Reply December 3, 2018 Varnel Watson How did a conversation about thousands of persecuted people turned to be about Trump being persecuted? Reply December 3, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes No, Daniel, I think there is a tiny number at the very top of the totem pole related to likes the Rothchilds & Rockefellers (& not all of them) who manipulate the media, educational systems, governments, etc. to carry out their agenda of setting up a World Government. I see all the people below this cabal as pawns (including presidents like the Bushes, Clintons, & Obamas). These politicians like the glory of power, but they are mere puppets. ……………. However, I think some may even agree with the agenda and happily cooperate. Nothing like a true believer to do this work. Because you see, there is this thing called cognitive dissonance. The brain has to agree with itself. If you do a certain behavior for so long, the brain eventually has to think the behavior is the right thing to do, or it would eventually stop you from doing it. So I think people like Hillary & Soros have bought in. Yes! Depopulate the world through wars, diseases, etc. and all the easier to control the proletariates! Bankrupt America! We have a digital international currency under our control from the IMF waiting in the wings! ………………. As I said, I’ve personally watched European countries fall to step one of this plan (the Euro), and I don’t want America to fall to step two of their plan (like some Amero currency for the Western Hemisphere). I’m now watching how the UN is using Agenda 21 & it’s “sustainable development” program to subjugate every country by exploiting global warming. I want America out of the UN. We are disproportionately funding an entity that picks on Israel and doesn’t do a decent job defending anybody’s borders, which was the guise under which it was founded. Did it prevent the 90’s genocide in Rwanda? No. After the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, did the UN use the river as its sewer and therefore kill thousands more from cholera? Yes. Reply December 3, 2018 Varnel Watson oh same ol same ol Jan Dixon Sykes anything new? Reply December 3, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Trump is not persecuted. I said the cabal has used its resources to bash him. But I think it affects him like rain on a duck‘s back. Little David slayed Goliath just fine with five stones. ………… And your snark does not flatter you, Troy. Aren’t you a Pastor, so your standard for decency is of a higher standard than us mere laymen? I was answering Daniel’s legitimate question. Reply December 3, 2018 Varnel Watson Jan I think you really have nothing to say about ALL I wrote on the topic of the current migration and now you are going back to the Trump topic to which I got nothing more to say Reply December 3, 2018 Jan Dixon Sykes Troy, Daniel used the label “nationalist.” He had brought up Trump as opposing immigration based on “white nationalism.” I have been explaining the distinction of my nationalism (and Trump’s) from the white SUPREMACISTS. Trump, and my vote for him, are simply fighting for SOVEREIGNTY against those who want to make America a mere state in a federation of states. We want to fly an USA flag, not a UN flag—or even an EU flag like Europe is now doing. I do not like the battle for sovereignty to be derailed over accusations of xenophobia. The motives are different. I enjoy diversity of cultures. But in America, our economy is based on capitalism (not communism), our justice system is based on Judeo-Christian laws (not Sharia Law), our currency is the dollar (not the peso or yuan), our women are equal & taught to read just like men, everyone can be upwardly mobile instead of stuck in a caste system. So although everyone is welcome, the prerequisite is they can assimilate and quickly be self-supporting. Which is why they have to be vetted. That is what Ellis Island was. Vetting. Documenting. The sick couldn’t even leave till they got well. Several immigrant families Anglicized their last names so we could better pronounce their eastern European names to help them assimilate. ……….. Guess you DID have more to say: “same old same ol.” Glad my positions don’t pander to what will gain me favor in the moment, like Bill Clinton’s did when he had Dick Morris take a poll before deciding where he stood on each topic. Reply December 3, 2018 Varnel Watson WOW Nelson Banuchi Daniel Kenis Micael Grenholm I jsut dont know DONT KNOW HOW this otherwise great topic was again turned by liberal Christian republicans-wannabes to a topic about 70 yer old playboy whom back in my day we just called a 70yr old perv? These liberal theology kingdom now socialism-bordering fellers just dont see the world for what it is Making America Great Again is namely taking our fellow migrants into the land of the free like were all were once welcomed After all WHAT should the Christian church in this country do with migrants who are basically fellows Catholic believers and a major part of our global Christian family but they are MS13 said Gerardo de Dominicis This one is so easy Sort them out MS13 have great big tattoos on their backs and even their faces Cant miss them from a mile. Says clearly MS13 on the tats – so sort them out and let in the women children and Catholic Christian men who are clearly NOT MS13 It’s that easy Reply August 31, 2019 Varnel Watson https://www.charismanews.com/politics/76578-how-the-conservative-agenda-is-being-born-again-through-mike-pence?fbclid=IwAR13g_G2CplKLGx1Vp0CRqdq6cL10SEh4yJn5dHbmbs-PQSLmgPvKgagK50 Reply November 27, 2019 Varnel Watson coming soon to a city near you what should the church / christians DO? Reply November 28, 2019 Varnel Watson Let me be clear. Google just fired 4 of my coworkers for daring to ask the question “is Google helping separate families or cage children at the border?” https://twitter.com/amrtgaber/status/1199155879884546048 Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply. Cancel replyComment Name Email Website This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.