"Machete" movie, Jew Hollywood Setting the Agenda

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

A new movie from Robert Rodriguez called Machete is not scheduled to be released until September but that didn't stop him from updating a trailer just in time for Cinco de Mayo.

A pro-illegal immigrant film.

A line from the movie: "We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us!"

Summary of the trailer:
Violent machete toting illegal Mexican immigrant psycho killers = heroes
White Americans trying to stop illegal immigration = evil racists that deserve to be killed

[youtube:1w5tiaf3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTTfjSTGaVI[/youtube]1w5tiaf3]

Producers:
Robert Rodriguez (Mexican-American)
Aaron Kaufman (Jew)
Iliana Nikolic (?)
Rick Schwartz (Jew)
Quentin Tarantino ('Inglorious Basterds' Shabbas Goy)

[superzebra]

this is commercial movie:
robert de reinero
lindsy lohan
jesicca alba
jon jhonson

this is commercial moive to sell the idea the illegal imgt is ok.
another movie against the USA.

[Travis]

Sorry guys but that raises a important question about sovereignty, and illustrates a double standard that some have. Everyone here is against the Jews stealing land from the Palestinians but what about the land that was stolen from the indigenous Americans by white Europeans? In terms of the amount of people killed, and displaced the American genocide is far far worst than the one committed by the Jews in Palestine.

[joeymaclover]

I can't wait to see this action packed movie and buy as much movie merchandise as possible, someone has to support the chosen race!
 :?  :?  :?

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Sorry guys but that raises a important question about sovereignty, and illustrates a double standard that some have. Everyone here is against the Jews stealing land from the Palestinians but what about the land that was stolen from the indigenous Americans by white Europeans? In terms of the amount of people killed, and displaced the American genocide is far far worst than the one committed by the Jews in Palestine.

Travis, that happened about 500 years ago. Let us know when you are finished making the time machine so we can go back and undo what was done to the Natives. And how exactly are we showing a double standard? Must we be pro-illegal immigration because some European Gentiles and Jew financiers pillaged and raped the new world some hundreds of years ago? please let us know why...

And the 63 year occupation and rape of Palestine is probably one of the lesser of Zionist crimes. Have you forgotten the soviet holocaust; the systematic extermination of 60 million Russian, Ukrainian and Polish white folks by Jew Communists?

[Travis]

Sorry guys but that raises a important question about sovereignty, and illustrates a double standard that some have. Everyone here is against the Jews stealing land from the Palestinians but what about the land that was stolen from the indigenous Americans by white Europeans? In terms of the amount of people killed, and displaced the American genocide is far far worst than the one committed by the Jews in Palestine.

Travis, that happened about 500 years ago. Let us know when you are finished making the time machine so we can go back and undo what was done to the Natives. And how exactly are we showing a double standard? Must we be pro-illegal immigration because some European Gentiles and Jew financiers pillaged and raped the new world some hundreds of years ago? please let us know why...

MSMD, It does not matter how long ago it happened, an immoral act does not shed its immorality with the passage of time. In 500 years time will what the Jews have done to Palestinians be acceptable? Will it be acceptable for Jews to complain about immigration into their fraudulent borders?  
In short if we claim to be moral people we should condemn all immoral acts whenever and wherever they occurred.

And how exactly are we showing a double standard? Must we be pro-illegal immigration because some European Gentiles and Jew financiers pillaged and raped the new world some hundreds of years ago? please let us know why...

Why are you taking this personally, I stated that it 'illustrates a double standard that some have' not all have.

The creation of America was a crime, because it involved genocide and enslavement, and it is hypocrisy when Americans complain about immigration when the country was formed by immigrants who murdered and drove out the indigenous population. Surely you can see this point. Yes the Jews have had their hand in many crimes but they are not the only criminals in history.  

Here is the crux of the matter; if one accepts America's borders as they stand, than they have little grounds for condemning Israel's because both were created on immoral grounds, both used ethnic cleansing, and the passage of time is an irrelevant factor.

[jai_mann]

Unfortunately, this so called american genocide never occurred. The bulk of native died not by the hand of white Europeans, but by the diseases that came with them, which they did not have control over.

Additionally, there was plenty of land that was not occupied by natives, that white europeans were able to put to productive use. The bulk of slayings against natives were perpetrated by the US government military.

What has happened to palestinians is far different from what happened in the lands now claimed by the us government. This notion of white europeans savaging the natives is more jewish/masonic bullshit. Those south of the US border have been lapping this up for decades and they're ready to start slaying people over the propaganda.

[jai_mann]

MSMD, It does not matter how long ago it happened, an immoral act does not shed its immorality with the passage of time. In 500 years time will what the Jews have done to Palestinians be acceptable? Will it be acceptable for Jews to complain about immigration into their fraudulent borders?  
In short if we claim to be moral people we should condemn all immoral acts whenever and wherever they occurred.

And how exactly are we showing a double standard? Must we be pro-illegal immigration because some European Gentiles and Jew financiers pillaged and raped the new world some hundreds of years ago? please let us know why...

Why are you taking this personally, I stated that it 'illustrates a double standard that some have' not all have.

The creation of America was a crime, because it involved genocide and enslavement, and it is hypocrisy when Americans complain about immigration when the country was formed by immigrants who murdered and drove out the indigenous population. Surely you can see this point. Yes the Jews have had their hand in many crimes but they are not the only criminals in history.  

Here is the crux of the matter; if one accepts America's borders as they stand, than they have little grounds for condemning Israel's because both were created on immoral grounds, both used ethnic cleansing, and the passage of time is an irrelevant factor.

So we get to the heart of the issue, the construction of fictitious borders. For this we can thank the lawyers, jewish and gentile, for creating the legal fiction, which the brainwashed peasants then defend and fight over. This hits home when you try to cross any of these fictional borders. The scum bags working for "custom" agencies, will damage you/kill you/imprison you, if you don't fill out their forms, walk through their lines, etc. And they all work for the lawyers doing business as the "State". Well, any one who has studied their laws realizes that you do not have to consent to any of it, but they will set up scenario's where they force you to consent or get beat down/killed.

We could solve a lot of problems if we just listened to Shakespeare: "The first thing we do," said the character in Shakespeare's Henry VI, is "kill all the lawyers."

They are the totalitarians which make the mass murdering corporations known as governments.

[Ahmed]

Unfortunately, this so called american genocide never occurred. The bulk of native died not by the hand of white Europeans, but by the diseases that came with them, which they did not have control over.

Besides the British Empire's plan to give Native American babies blankets laced with smallpox:

Sir Jeffrey Amherst's letter to Colonel Henry Bouquet on July 16 1763:

"You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians by means of Blanketts, as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your Scheme for Hunting them Down by Dogs could take Effect, but England is at too great a Distance to think of that at present."

Amherst, like the Brits in general, were eager recipients of that much older brand of evil which pulled their strings. And that Sir Amherst's debased machinations originated not by the toll roads of Seven oaks, Kent but in the pages of the pagan text revered by his Talmudic masters: Rothschild.

[Free Truth]

The goyim are going to be all over this movie.

Look at how "kick ass" it looks, man! And all those "stars!" Ughhh, I gotta see it!

TBH though, the "fked with the wrong Mexican" line at the end did make me smile.
They do a good job.
Look at how simply they control the opinion of the "cool kids" (making $10+ a pop).
*sigh*

...Everyone here is against the Jews stealing land from the Palestinians but what about the land that was stolen from the indigenous Americans by white Europeans? In terms of the amount of people killed, and displaced the American genocide is far far worst than the one committed by the Jews in Palestine.

What does that have to do with anything?

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

In 500 years time will what the Jews have done to Palestinians be acceptable? Will it be acceptable for Jews to complain about immigration into their fraudulent borders?  
In short if we claim to be moral people we should condemn all immoral acts whenever and wherever they occurred.

I never said it was acceptable Trav, i just said it happened 500 years ago and there is nothing that can be done to reverse what happened. Id rather worry about stuff that is happening in the 21st century...

The creation of America was a crime, because it involved genocide and enslavement, and it is hypocrisy when Americans complain about immigration when the country was formed by immigrants who murdered and drove out the indigenous population. Surely you can see this point.

It was a crime but it's not like 200,000,000 modern day White Americans are to blame for it and should pay for it when they had nothing to do with it, and most of which's ancestors probably were not involved in that crime. The nation of America was 100% white European in its founding. Now it's about 75%. Therefore people of that heritage do have a right to complain when their borders are wide open and millions of mexicans are being flooded in to destroy that cultural makeup. I'm sure the Chinese people would object to massive non-Chinese immigration into their country. The point is that Jews and Jewish organizations are behind the immigration crisis because they want to destroy white America because they feel safer and/or believe domination can be achieved easier in a diverse society where everyone's cultures are all mixed together.

Yes the Jews have had their hand in many crimes but they are not the only criminals in history.

Okay, so we have to simultaneously talk about every criminal act ever committed else we have no right to focus on the Jewish ones? Zionist crimes seem to be larger in scale and sophistication and seem to occur more frequently. And their crimes affect everybody so naturally they are more worthy of discussion.

Here is the crux of the matter; if one accepts America's borders as they stand, than they have little grounds for condemning Israel's because both were created on immoral grounds, both used ethnic cleansing, and the passage of time is an irrelevant factor.

So then why do you care about Palestine if it's no biggie compared to what happened to the American indians? Maybe you should be out boycotting the U.S. gov't for their treatment of some natives hundreds of years ago instead of this palestine stuff. We can trivialize pretty much anything going on today by comparing it to other stuff that happened when there was no such thing as human rights and modern moral standards did not exist. You're basically saying we have no right to condemn anything unless we dig up some hundred or thousand year old historical event and condemn that first then demand compensation for people who don't exist anymore. Doesnt make a whole lotta sense.

[Ahmed]

I'll reserve judgement until I see the film.

A line from the movie: "We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us!"

Well that's true.

Many of the Mexicans who rally around Altzan today claim Nahua, Olmec,  Maya, Incan, Toltec and Aztec lineage.

As far as I'm concerned, the American-Mexican War (1846-48) was fought between two groups of invaders on another people's land.

Now whatever the individual circumstances for immigration to the Americas; of which there were many so I'm not going to paint all European foreigners with the same brush.  The facts are that the Marrano Jew run Spanish and Portuguese empires took the South, the Kaabalist-Jew / wealth inspired Anglo-Saxons (look up one of the etymological meanings of the word British), Franks and Danes carved up the North and an untold number of natives got caught in the middle.

The land was rich and the lightly armed natives could be enslaved at gunpoint. Its as banal and ruthless as that.

Again, I'm not some herbal tea drinker who mythologies the natives as magical salt of the Earth types, they were like people anywhere else in the world: some good, some downright vicious but no Native Americans ever had designs on invading anyone.


NORTH AMERICA, MEXICO AND JEWRY.

A lot of info from TFC (Arnold Leese's 'Gentile Folly: The Rothschilds') and the Rothschild archive.

1830: N.M Rothschild secures world monopoly in the mining of mercury, essential to the refining of gold and silver. Mineral wealth in Mexico slowly taken over.

1830: Mexican President Anastasio Bustamante limits white American immigration to Coahuila y Tejas. (Later Texas) because they thought too many foreigners were coming in! (Whites were still free to settle anywhere else in Mexico).

1832: William de Drusina and Lionel Davidson appointed Rothschild agents in Mexico.

1833: Mexican President Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna approves most of the White settlers (many of whom now had separatist intentions) proposals for Coahuila y Tejas.

One of the trade disputes involved farming cotton, Rothschild had bought up most of the industry to destabalize allocation.

Both parties had legitimate grievances; the political situation IMO seems to mirror Russia-Chechnya.

The Mexicans, still trying to establish themselves after Spanish rule, didn't want to cede territory or promote a build up of Whites in an area where talk of separatism was rife. Whereas the whites weren't used to some of the laws (particularly after Santa Anna's abolition of the 1824 constitution in 1835), many Protestants also didn't like the idea of paying tribute (tithes) to the Pope. Incidentally, The Rothschilds had already taken over the Catholic Church's finances in 1823.

1832: The Spanish wing of Rothschild lend 15 million francs to the Government, used to quell the Mexican uprising against Spanish colonial rule. The Rothschild's, perhaps favouring their Marrano Jew cousins within the empire, charged a lower interest rate on the loan. In exchange, they got the Almaden quicksilver mines in Spain.

1835: Don Carlos was fighting to gain the throne from the Queen Regent and was threatening the safety of the Rothschild controlled Almaden silver mines. Rothschild's agent Mendizabal was the Queen Regent's Finance Minister and secured the French to fight for their interests against Carlos, however, the Rothschild's patron in Austria; Chancellor Metternich, supported Carlos. Nathan Rothschild put the British into battle for the Regent whilst simultaneously sticking the knife in the Spanish by negative speculation on their funding. The Queen eventually won the war thus keeping the mines in Rothschild control.

October 2, 1835. The Battle of Gonzales: White settlers begin the first attack on Mexico over a disputed cannon (Mexican government wanted it back, they didn't want to return it). And I'm sure you know the rest: Siege of Bexar, The Alamo, Battle of San Jacinto etc.

1836: White settlers won the war and Santa Anna had to sign the Treaty of Velasco. The treaty was NEVER ratified in Mexico, as they obviously wanted to continue.
 
1836: Rothschilds purged from U.S. by President Andrew Jackson.

1837:  Rothschilds send August Belmont (real name Schoenberg) to salvage their U.S. banking interests.

1838: In a tactic they'd partially repeat during the Lincoln presidency, Rothschild manoeuvred the French into Mexico in a bid to show America the possibility of the threat that could be used against them. In The Pastry War as it was known, Santa Anna rose to prominence once more and the French gained a Pyrrhic victory.

1840: The Rothschilds become the Bank of England's bullion brokers. They open an agency in California.

1841: President John Tyler, in spite of death threats from Zionist Jews and their acolytes, vetoes the act to renew the charter for the Rothschild Bank of the United States.

1845: Texas Annexation as the 28th state of the U.S. provokes the American-Mexican war. Mexico lost approximately 55% of her territory in this war.  

A month before the war ended, President James Polk was criticized in a House of Representatives amendment to a bill praising Major General Zachary Taylor for "a war unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the President of the United States." Ulysses S. Grant, who became president in 1869, served as a lieutenant in the American-Mexican war and described his experience: "Generally, the officers of the army were indifferent whether the annexation was consummated or not; but not so all of them. For myself, I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory".


Many Mexican people are amongst the most sincere and vocal anti-Zionists in the world today, so my message to White America is not to regard immigrants as hostiles but as one of the strongest anti-Zionist communities you could ever hope to be gifted.

You seriously think these Mexicans are going to be cleaning cars and washing dishes forever? Of course not, the battle for the new wave begins here, get these immigrants on the right side and you'll have subverted the Talmudic agenda right there. Treat them badly and you could well be manipulated into the race war that Zionism craves.

Gung-ho minutemen and yee-ha cowboys are useful idiots for the Talmudists who must be laughing their asses off in Herzelia every time a Zionist Jew controlled patsy like Shawna Forde kills a nine year old Mexican in the name of U.S. patriotism. Remember, that the U.S. Minutemen movement was intimately linked with Glenn Spencer; allegedly an ex-JDL terrorist with known familial ties to Zionist Jewry and Shabbos goy / Zio-contra criminal for the Rothschilds in Nicaragua; John Adams (good pals with Dubya and Ehud Barak).

The long term answer isn't kick to out the Mexicans from America, its' to kick out the Rothschilds from government.

[§N9sh2bj]

The creation of America was a crime, because it involved genocide and enslavement, and it is hypocrisy when Americans complain about immigration when the country was formed by immigrants who murdered and drove out the indigenous population.

What Travis wrote about is imprinting for the children circulated by the jews, who say "Who cares about the adults, they will die.". Honestly, when you look at today, and when you look at 2,000 years ago, with the murder of jesus by the pharisees, and the time inbetween, it's the same shit and a different day. They are saying 'woe is meee' while they stab you in the back. Someone here writes a better description; you get the point.

I think people keep yearning for some golden time that didn't exist, when the 'jews' whom I define as an ideology, satanic yes, however nothing racial or otherwise, no 'specialness', have been absent from monkey'ing with the situation somewhere. with western culture. The link and text of a prior article, while having a stupid 'white' 'racist' interpretations, the quoted text from the roman is spot on. Where-in, a text from 2,000 years ago, described the background of why the arch on italy had depictions of the carrying off of the 'temple treasures'. The jews then, were over much of the place, from rome to jerusalem.

Define stupid: making the same mistake over and over again and not learning from it.    Jews are not a race. They people with a shared ideology.  Recently the 'witness' of the fake Jew York City bombing, was a light-skinned black man; and someone pointed out, this does not exclude him from being a jew. Mothers are the most consistent carriers of an ideology and imprinting, from breast (cradle) to grave, this is why it seems women are chosen over the men by the priestly-class - the ones most closely working with ol St. Prick - to be the deciding factor if there is only one parent to choose from. While they say publicly if your mom is 'jewish' you can make aliyah, that must depend on the status of a man's maturity, whether he has a good heart-connection, or whether he is after the prison chits and ultimately, working for lucifer and letting go control of himself to lucifer's many disembodied agents. I think the gate-keepers notice, and one won't get very far trying to be honest while moving up in the ranks. Like being an ignorant, mason and only making the 32nd degree. They don't want you: your not criminal enough.

Stop with this 'oh if only it was like it was xxx years ago' nonsense, in terms of somehow the jews weren't around back then to muck things up. 'Oh but the american gentiles did yyy...' which, do I need to remind you in part means gentle, not hostile, not war-like? It's a culture, it's a mindset, it's a way of leading from the heart and prayer and making your decisions based on what the small quiet voice says, the heart, not the ego. If anything it's about letting the ego die on the vine, a horrible possibility in some people's minds, as they have mistaken the ego for themselves. In the parable of jesus dying on the cross - he showed us the way, he let his ego die, and he continued to live after-wards.


The jewish ideology has none of the ideals I outlined above. They were the ones selling white lightening directly to the indians, because the people of the jewish ideology weren't allowed to sell to the colonists, and, who, in full possession of their own body would want to buy from someone of that ideology in any case? It was probably detestable to the colonists, the people who get the blame in the jewish textbooks printed for their biological descendants. Those with the jewish ideology setup cheap distilleries to sell cheap alcohol, like they do today, with all the triply-damaging effects on the 'cave man' dietetic system the 'red man'. How many hundreds of thousands of indian lives, if not millions, were a result of the action of high-proof alcohol on the gut and mind of the red man, in exchange for fur pelts and other high-value items?

Then those tribal indians decided they would attack the colonists; as to the 'red man', jews trading them cheap, degenerating alcohol were the same as any other colonists. In their ignorance, white was white, and they probably had no experience with a dedicated group of men under luciferian possession operating casually amongst their own people - who knows?

[sean r]

mpblud5h]

[Travis]

§N9sh2bj , please, please, please! America was stolen from the natives through murder, ethnic cleansing and enslavement. This is the same as, parts of Africa and Australia. Yes the  white European Christian is responsible for these crimes, and many others. However, my point is, if one can not condemn all crimes even does committed by his 'own people' then he is a hypocrite. The creation of America was a crime, if one says its not they have no basis whatsoever for condemning Israelis creation other than they are against it because its the Jews doing the killing.

Brothers, brothers, brothers, in our current era the Jews are the rulers of the earth and they are responsible for most of the immorality, wars, and major crimes that are being committed. However, ones condemnation of them becomes discredited if they also do not condemn similar acts committed by others. If we are to succeed we must have moral integrity.

Please some one explain to me, how they can on one hand justify the creation of America through genocide but on the other hand condemn the establishment of Israel also through genocide?

[Christopher Marlowe]

Thanks for the summary of the acquisition of the Western US, Ahmed.  Lots of interesting facts without all the BS.

I would like to be fair in framing this debate, which seems to be about the status of Mexican immigrants in the US.  

Two sides generally presented as:
1) The land claimed by the US was stolen from the Native Americans and then stolen from Mexico through an illegal war. That arbitrary line of the US/Mexico border shouldn't determine rights of immigrants to live in CA, TX, etc...

2) The illegal aliens are driving down the standard of living in this country. They work for low wages and are a burden on the social services and criminal justice system.  

IMHO, neither one of these arguments are wrong.
First, in dealing with groups of people, it is important to recognize that all human beings are children of God and should be treated with dignity.  There is a tendency to think of poor, uneducated people as somehow less than human. I believe that most people would cross a border illegally if they could find work and a better life on the other side.

Another important idea to recognize is that, in order to implement ideas, plans that must be made manifest into action.  Omelets are made from broken eggs, and this is offered as an excuse for the harms people suffer (broken eggs) collaterally in order to accomplish an action of magnitude (omelet). It might be callous to dismiss people and their lost rights as mere eggs, but it is also true that, just as eggs cannot be unbroken, some harms cannot be undone.  We cannot go back and restore every land grant. We cannot move the people of the mid-west off their farms to allow Native Americans to hunt buffalo.  (If we could, I would certainly try to join that lucky tribe.)

Another trite expression: "moving forward", seems to iterate the obvious fact that time only goes in one direction.  We cannot undo the past. What are we going to do now?    

If I were in Mexico, I would have to obey the laws of that nation.  I am not a citizen of that country. I cannot vote or take advantage of other citizenship rights in Mexico. I have no control over how things are run in Mexico. It is completely beyond my power.  The people of Mexico are responsible for reforming any inequities or irregularities in that country.  

A Mexican worker can come into this country, work hard for low wages and live in a small room with four others. He manages to SAVE money and sends that home to Mexico. Mexican migrant workers send Billions of dollars back to Mexico every month.

According to this article on VDARE, "Mexico has 28 billionaires, 18 of whom are not listed by Forbes. The unlisted billionaires keep a lower profile and hide or don't report or all their assets. That seems highly likely. It's been  estimated that 40% of Mexican businesses and 70% of Mexican professionals and small business owners cheat on taxes, so that up to 50% of potential tax revenues go uncollected." http://vdare.com/awall/080318_memo.htm

Mexico is a wealthy country with many natural resources. But there is a lot of corruption at ALL levels of government. The result is that Mexicans are a lot poorer than people in the United States. But not for long. Anyone paying attention can see that the people in the US will soon be losing vast sums of imaginary paper wealth in 401Ks. All the states are broke. The Fed is broke.

The US is giving benefits to the poor people of Mexico and impoverishing themselves in the process.  The problem in both countries is that there is a great deal of unfairness in the division of wealth and the tax burden. But it is wrong to think that the US can fix Mexico's problems by ignoring the laws in this country. Mexico's problems are Mexico's. If that country is going to be reformed, the people of Mexico must do it.  The people of the US can't even fix their own problems.  

When the plane goes down, the oxygen masks drop out of the overhead compartment. The flight crew tell us: put on YOUR OWN mask before you try to secure your child's mask.  That is because parents will die from lack of oxygen while trying to secure their child's mask.  Supplying poor Mexicans with government benefits is only bringing our country down with them. The problem is being ignored: Mexico and the US are dying from corruption.

Both the US and Mexico are sovereign nations, each with their own laws. Societies organize into communities, cities, states and nations. The United States is supposed to be a Republican representative democracy.  We are supposed to be a nation of laws. Therefore, we should follow the laws or change them.

If, one day, we recognize a higher ideal and change our minds about artificial borders, then the US can join Mexico and unite our Constitutions by popular vote. But the way things are organized today, this border enforcement (unenforcement) policy is beneficial only to international businesses, and it is destroying the middle class.

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

§N9sh2bj , please, please, please! America was stolen from the natives through murder, ethnic cleansing and enslavement.

Travis you make it seem like the europeans just marched in, rounded up all the natives and genocided them all at once. There were some small cases of that but not on a large scale as u make it seem. Most of the natives that died did so through contracted disease. Others through combative warfare with the colonists and settlers. Some native tribes even fought alongside European settlers in wars against other tribes. It's not as simple as you've portrayed it here. The Europeans were the "bad guys" in this conflict but it's not a black and white issue.

And before the Jewish financed European voyage to the New World the Native tribes were slaughtering each other en masse. The Aztecs were almost constantly at war. When the Aztecs weren't at war and conquering others they were engaging in mass human ritual sacrifices. It is estimated that approximately 20,000 people per year were sacrificed by the Aztec royalty. Captives were taken to the top of pyramids where, upon a ritual flat stone table, they had their chests cut upon and their hearts ripped out. Their carcasses were tossed down the stone pyramid steps for all to see.

This is just human history my friend. Empires built on top of empires, endless wars and conflict. After a tragic slaughter occurs most people just move on and try to rebuild their lives, but the same can't be said for the Jews. When one series of wars and slaughters are finished they simply push for another and another, and now this psycho community is the most powerful group in the entire world. They are never satisfied you see.. not until they get it & us all. The Jew world order is fast approaching and we can see it coming into view... there is really no time to concern ourselves with these ancillary issues that lead nowhere because they happened so long ago, nothing can be done about them, and they aren't relevant to the current situation. Colonialism is wrong in general, but two wrongs don't make a right.

[jai_mann]

Unfortunately, this so called american genocide never occurred. The bulk of native died not by the hand of white Europeans, but by the diseases that came with them, which they did not have control over.

Besides the British Empire's plan to give Native American babies blankets laced with smallpox:

Sir Jeffrey Amherst's letter to Colonel Henry Bouquet on July 16 1763:

"You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians by means of Blanketts, as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your Scheme for Hunting them Down by Dogs could take Effect, but England is at too great a Distance to think of that at present."

Amherst, like the Brits in general, were eager recipients of that much older brand of evil which pulled their strings. And that Sir Amherst's debased machinations originated not by the toll roads of Seven oaks, Kent but in the pages of the pagan text revered by his Talmudic masters: Rothschild.

Discussing plans and actually tracking what they could be held accountable for are two entirely separate things. Can you come to the table with evidence showing who died of disease that was intentionally spread vs. that which was unintentionally spread? And again, this goes back to the legal fictions known as States. You didn't have the commoners who came from the old land plotting this shit out. No, they were trying to escape from the same fuckers who were discussing plans to facilitate disease spread. Diseases such as smallpox were by no means under control within the population coming to the "new world", this fact alone puts the issue into question. People died, but what can be tracked as a matter of malice versus nature. The natives in this land were fucked by those doing business as the US government more than any individuals not working for it.

[jai_mann]

I'll reserve judgement until I see the film.

A line from the movie: "We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us!"

Well that's true.

Many of the Mexicans who rally around Altzan today claim Nahua, Olmec,  Maya, Incan, Toltec and Aztec lineage.

As far as I'm concerned, the American-Mexican War (1846-48) was fought between two groups of invaders on another people's land.

Now whatever the individual circumstances for immigration to the Americas; of which there were many so I'm not going to paint all European foreigners with the same brush.  The facts are that the Marrano Jew run Spanish and Portuguese empires took the South, the Kaabalist-Jew / wealth inspired Anglo-Saxons (look up one of the etymological meanings of the word British), Franks and Danes carved up the North and an untold number of natives got caught in the middle.

The land was rich and the lightly armed natives could be enslaved at gunpoint. Its as banal and ruthless as that.

Again, I'm not some herbal tea drinker who mythologies the natives as magical salt of the Earth types, they were like people anywhere else in the world: some good, some downright vicious but no Native Americans ever had designs on invading anyone.

Dude, you've got to be kidding me. Clearly, you're not familiar with native american history or you would know that there were plenty of their civilizations which were built on invading others, enslaving others, and providing living human sacrafices to their gods. Seriously? You mentioned the Mayans and Aztecs. Aren't you familiar with their history? Why don't you castigate the descendants of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas whom did all of the above for centuries?

1841: President John Tyler, in spite of death threats from Zionist Jews and their acolytes, vetoes the act to renew the charter for the Rothschild Bank of the United States.

Many Mexican people are amongst the most sincere and vocal anti-Zionists in the world today, so my message to White America is not to regard immigrants as hostiles but as one of the strongest anti-Zionist communities you could ever hope to be gifted.

You seriously think these Mexicans are going to be cleaning cars and washing dishes forever? Of course not, the battle for the new wave begins here, get these immigrants on the right side and you'll have subverted the Talmudic agenda right there. Treat them badly and you could well be manipulated into the race war that Zionism craves.

Gung-ho minutemen and yee-ha cowboys are useful idiots for the Talmudists who must be laughing their asses off in Herzelia every time a Zionist Jew controlled patsy like Shawna Forde kills a nine year old Mexican in the name of U.S. patriotism. Remember, that the U.S. Minutemen movement was intimately linked with Glenn Spencer; allegedly an ex-JDL terrorist with known familial ties to Zionist Jewry and Shabbos goy / Zio-contra criminal for the Rothschilds in Nicaragua; John Adams (good pals with Dubya and Ehud Barak).

The long term answer isn't kick to out the Mexicans from America, its' to kick out the Rothschilds from government.

Zionists in 1841? Really? Or were they just Jews(Talmudists)?

If people who were migrating from one piece of land to another (claimed as those DBA "nation-states") then how the fuck do they expect the problems behind them to get solved? The escape from being a peon-slave is gone. Unless people start using currency outside of the systems in their region, they will continue to be at the mercy of the banker rapists. No most of those migrating are not ALLIES to those in the areas they are migrating to. They have been brainwashed with shit to make them violent and feel entitled to the product of others' labor. If you listen to the people at La Raza ( THE RACE) rallies, you would see how foolish your statement is. Massive influxes of other people into new regions is not going to solve a damned thing. It will only complicate things. If people stayed within local regions and dealt with the root of their problems, while communicating with others in other locales who are doing the same, THEN we'll get solutions. There won't be a chance for the power brokers to stage attacks from one local group to another. There won't be any 9/11s. You would have local communities cleaning up their own shit, and possibly getting support from other local communities. Bottom up, clean out the turds on the top.

This notion of "thinking" that so called mexicans are going to be engaged in menial tasks forever, is also laughable. Look what happens when menial tasks are derided in such a manner, you get things like the entire american infrastructure being wiped out because every one is going for a "better" job. Those better jobs are rarely there. It's just advertising bent on selling over priced education packages to create a debt slave. That's a simpleton approach to labeling people who take issue with huge migrations.

"Get them on the right side"? What is the right side? Allowing a cluster fuck of people to gather in new area because they aren't addressing the problems in their own locale? If they created their own new towns off of resources in areas that aren't already built up and overcrowded then I don't see any problem. But people don't do that shit any more. No, they go to other population centers and they don't go off to break the frontier and create from the land. Packing more and more people into city centers, where they have disparate backgrounds is a recipe for chaos. They are better off organizing and cleaning shit up in their own locale, while trying to organize with other locales to create a movement from the bottom up in each region. Shifting people around doesn't address the root problem which made them want to leave in the first place.

These minutemen and cowboys you speak of are people who are tending to their own back yard. They also comprehend the disaster that will occur if a total flood of migration occurs. Do you think animals leave valuable resources when another group comes along? No, they defend it unless it is determined that the fight can not be won.There are resources in mexico but the god damned bankers have been fucking them for the last 100 years. They got a few honest elections, maybe, after the zapata revolution and then the party system was compromised just as in the USA.

You've got your final conclusion right, but it needs to be applied in mexico and every where else too. Solve the problems in your back yard, oh but that's right, commoners would rather flee than turn around and kill the parasites. Europeans fled to America, Mexicans flee to America, and I'm sure there's plenty of other instances of the peasants simply fleeing rather than fighting. And any one who recommends killing those of a violent, parasitic nature (this set is not solely comprised of jews mind you) is labeled as dangerous, or working for the other side...

I see a problem that is just going to keep going on the same path it has gone for centuries...

[Ahmed]

Dude, you've got to be kidding me. Clearly, you're not familiar with native american history or you would know that there were plenty of their civilizations which were built on invading others, enslaving others, and providing living human sacrafices to their gods. Seriously? You mentioned the Mayans and Aztecs. Aren't you familiar with their history? Why don't you castigate the descendants of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas whom did all of the above for centuries?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Native Americans have never invaded anyone in the manner that their lands were invaded post-Columbus. And I'm not endorsing the savagery of some Aztecs and Mayans by condemning the savagery of some Europeans and Jews.

If the descendants of Mayans and Aztecs were still active in the world of criminal imperialism, we would condemn them right here. To some extent, I understand why some White Americans feel as if they're being blamed for the Native American genocide and become a little defensive, but that's not the case at all. Until we move on from the ideological restrictions of what so many have erroneously defined as patriotism; we'll never get down to brass tacks, identify the enemy and work to free ourselves from their grip.  

Zionists in 1841? Really? Or were they just Jews(Talmudists)?

Rothschild were always Zionists (i.e. designs on invading & occupying Palestine) but you make a fair point. Let's call them Talmudic Jews.

If people who were migrating from one piece of land to another (claimed as those DBA "nation-states") then how the fuck do they expect the problems behind them to get solved? The escape from being a peon-slave is gone. Unless people start using currency outside of the systems in their region, they will continue to be at the mercy of the banker rapists.

It may just be a coincidence, but the last major victory over Rothschild (1836) occurred in a migratory climate not dissimilar to today (only it was the other way around) which may suggest that Mexico (or Mexicans) may be the chief instigators accelerating the forward momentum of this vibrant, internationalist anti-Zionism campaign.  

And how, if not without international co-operation at government and grassroots level, do you suppose the Federal Reserve and Rothschild can be removed as the sole economic power in America?  Americans may not like the fact that the dollar is being devalued to the point of extinction but that may well be the impetus for withdrawing funds from the federal reserve, dismantling the usury-credit based Fiat and returning to coinage or some other form of hard currency.

No most of those migrating are not ALLIES to those in the areas they are migrating to.

If you don't make them your allies, someone else will, that someone being our old friend the Zionist Jew. In fact, they've already begun working this angle with the Arizona bill (more on that later): The Mexicans aren't like those Zionist Jews who mass-migrated into Palestine circa 1920; they have no Talmudic affiliations, no cult leaders, no historical criminal record of subversion or troublemaking. Granted, there may some bad apples in that sea of humanity, but the majority IMO are relatively decent people; and the communication barrier is all that hinders mutual co-operation.

Some Mexicans are keen to work on immigration reforms and put proper measures in place, the Zionist Jews, will try and see to it that level headed Whites and rational Mexicans never meet. Learn Spanish.

They have been brainwashed with shit to make them violent and feel entitled to the product of others' labor. If you listen to the people at La Raza ( THE RACE) rallies, you would see how foolish your statement is.

From what I've seen of La Raza, they seem to be the mirror to minutemen; I recall footage of them from the documentary 'End Game', yes; Alex Jones was on the other side. A lot of people were shouting and all that could be heard was the din of slogans and hubristic chants.  

This notion of "thinking" that so called mexicans are going to be engaged in menial tasks forever, is also laughable. Look what happens when menial tasks are derided in such a manner, you get things like the entire american infrastructure being wiped out because every one is going for a "better" job. Those better jobs are rarely there. It's just advertising bent on selling over priced education packages to create a debt slave.

True, though you would hope this paradigm shifts when the Federal Reserve loses its license or the usury based system becomes obselete.

That's a simpleton approach to labeling people who take issue with huge migrations.

Not labelling anyone, just telling you that the race is on to secure goodwill. You can't blast them back over the border; if you do it's race war and the Talmudists win. You can't treat them like dirt because, like I said, eventually they will progress beyond the menial tasks (even if its 5 out of a 100 who get those rare good jobs; that's 5 Mexicans in power who hate 'The Man' with a passion--and they will find receptive ears and office space with the Zionist Jew to get their own back against the race that made them feel so unwelcome).  

"Get them on the right side"? What is the right side?

Anti-Zionism...unless I'm on the wrong forum.

Allowing a cluster fuck of people to gather in new area because they aren't addressing the problems in their own locale? If they created their own new towns off of resources in areas that aren't already built up and overcrowded then I don't see any problem. But people don't do that shit any more. No, they go to other population centers and they don't go off to break the frontier and create from the land. Packing more and more people into city centers, where they have disparate backgrounds is a recipe for chaos. They are better off
organizing and cleaning shit up in their own locale, while trying to organize with other locales to create a movement from the bottom up in each region. Shifting people around doesn't address the root problem which made them want to leave in the first place.

Say I agree with you there in principle, but that's not going to happen, do you really think the politicians some Americans are rallying behind in the hope of curtailing immigration care about anti-Zionism and who exactly do you suppose they're working for?

Lets take a brief look at a leading figure in all this: Jan Brewer and the Arizona bill.

Brewer, Christian by some accounts, was born in Hollywood, California to Perry and Edna Dernkwein. She's allegeldy an Ashkenazi Jew, but if not, then Mrs Brewer's certainly a dupe of some kind.

Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (no prizes for guessing her allegiances) states: "I believe that it has absolutely ignited a movement across this country for comprehensive immigration reform". Darrell Steinberg, the Democrat leader of the California, chimes in and calls for a boycott of Arizona.

You can see where this is heading I hope.

The simple fact is BOTH the Draconian anti-immigration and pro-unregulated immigration reps are serving the same agenda. Do you honestly think the Education reform clauses associated with this bill are limited to ethnic studies? More than half of what you or anyone else on this forum writes about would be classified as hate speech under such laws.

And I hear the government can't get SB 1070 or HB 2281 vetoed, so when a state enacts a bill to repeal the Patriot Act II, or a motion to implement Executive Order 11110 will the ZOG will equally powerless? Come on now; how obvious does it have to be?

Getting back to my earlier point about courting immigrant's goodwill:  Many Jewish groups are openly against the Arizona bill, and it's a clever play by them: when the bill is eventually rejected (which I think it will be) followed by a period of free-for-all mass-immigration, the bill will be replaced with a seemingly watered down version that'll be just as Draconian but nonetheless a "victory" in the minds of those protested the first. Criminal Zionist Jew organisations like the ADL will then make a point of highlighting their support for Latinos at that time. And not only will U.S. patriots have lost the initiative, but Mexican immigrants may have their anti-Zionist sentiments watered down because of perceived support from the Jews who worked both sides in their "hour of need".  

And as for "organising their own locale"? Both America and Mexcio have collectively had 200 years of Zionist occupation with no luck in overcoming the Rothschild Talmudic Kahal, which is now the Leviathan of our time. Of course it's being hammered internationally today, but collective efforts are required if such an abomination is to be sent back into the abyss.

These minutemen and cowboys you speak of are people who are tending to their own back yard. They also comprehend the disaster that will occur if a total flood of migration occurs.

They're caricatures and useful idiots IMO. The Zionist picture of the racist Gingro with his ten gallon hat, pot belly, mirrored shades and rifle is as prevalent an image in Latin America as that of the angry Mexican with ten kids, car jacked up by bricks in the driveway berating the U.S. in Spanish is in White America.

When a people become so disenfranchised with their lot; they forget or ignore the forces directing their grievances in the wrong direction; its how those Talmudic Jews Rothschild manipulated two WORLD wars, so low scale race riots are easy to ignite; as prejudices already exist on both sides with the media playing them up at every given opportunity. The Zionists intend to wring out every bit of propaganda they can out of the political theatre surrounding this issue, are you going to play the part they want you to play?  

The Minutemen's links with Zionism are quite transparent, but some refuse to see it because they buy into the image of a Davy Crocket character protecting the New World from some swarthy other. The truth couldn't be further from it.

Do you think animals leave valuable resources when another group comes along? No, they defend it unless it is determined that the fight can not be won.

I appreciate the analogy but its a tad Darwinian for my tastes. Look, we're all human and deserve a fair go. All this is part of Kaabalist-Jew follower / Masonic grand master Albert Pike's 1871 dogma to have nations (and races) "fight themselves into a state of exhaustion" so they'll be too tired to resist the real threat that is the Talmudic-world government. Divide and rule: oldest trick in the book.

There are resources in mexico but the god damned bankers have been fucking them for the last 100 years. They got a few honest elections, maybe, after the zapata revolution and then the party system was compromised just as in the USA.

Very true. So what're you going to do about it? The Rothschild's have been flogging the Mexican Mule for a century and plucking the American Eagle for 97 years, neither of you have managed to do a damn thing about it. In fact you've been plunged into war upon war and the bankers have been building their throne upon the corpses of your youth. But now, two cultures with 200 years plus of bitter experience at the hands of Zionist Jewry find themselves thrown together, for what purpose?

Like I said, all of us today are fortunate enough to share a common enemy in Zionism and the Talmudic-WORLD government. I emphasis 'world' so as the highlight the intent and reach of the enemy we face.  For some still don't realize the magnitude of the challenge that awaits us, there are no isolated nations anymore: If the enemy uses an international network to execute its criminal activities, then people have no choice but ally themselves with other countries at grassroots level under a unified vanguard that actually stands some chance of resisting the Zionist Kahal.

You've got your final conclusion right, but it needs to be applied in mexico and every where else too. Solve the problems in your back yard, oh but that's right, commoners would rather flee than turn around and kill the parasites. Europeans fled to America, Mexicans flee to America, and I'm sure there's plenty of other instances of the peasants simply fleeing rather than fighting. And any one who recommends killing those of a violent, parasitic nature (this set is not solely comprised of jews mind you) is labeled as dangerous, or working for the other side...

You're right, and by attacking the peasants who're fleeing, you're playing right into the hands of the Talmudists. You can't force them to fight and you're never going to persuade them with xenophobia and shotguns on one side of the border and a Rothschild ZOG on the other. People of different races and creeds can live and work together in the right environment with mutal respect and common deceny.

I see a problem that is just going to keep going on the same path it has gone for centuries...

Lets hope not. The Fiat money scam is the single biggest con in the history of scams; I'm actually surprised that no one has ever declared total war on the usurers and their vampiric economic system. There are only a few directions in which the narrative can go:  1) Sleepwalk into another war to temporarily boost the fiat and exist under the Kaabalist-Talmudic world government as a slave 2) Support a revolutionary movement or benevolent ruler who seeks a return to real economy (e.g. Caliph Umar, Elizabeth I etc) 3) Galvinise  internationalist grassroots support against Zionism and supprt efforts to move away from / undermine fractional reserve banking.

[Ahmed]

Discussing plans and actually tracking what they could be held accountable for are two entirely separate things. Can you come to the table with evidence showing who died of disease that was intentionally spread vs. that which was unintentionally spread?

The evidence, though in some cases circumstantial, would probably hold up in court.

Native Americans and their unorthodox battle tactics frustrated the Brits, so they resorted to biological warfare (i.e. smallpox.). William Trent; British commander at Pontiac: Trent's journal entry on May 24, 1763, reads: "... We gave them (Natives) two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect."

"Colonists during the French and Indian Wars resorted to trading smallpox-contaminated blankets to local tribes with immediate and devastating results. While infected carcasses had long been catapulted into besieged cities, this seems to be the first time a known weakness in the immunity structure of an adversary population was deliberately exploited with a weapons response. "

Robert L. O'Connell, Of Arms and Men: A History of War, Weapons, and Aggression [p. 171]

"In the spring of 1763, during the Indian uprising led by Ottawa Chief Pontiac surrounded (British occupied) Fort Pitt (now Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) calling for its surrender. Captain Simeon Ecuyer, a mercenary and the fort's senior officer, saved the garrison by giving the Delawares a gift—two blankets and a handkerchief. The Indians accepted but still demanded that Ecuyer vacate the stockade. They had no inkling that the blankets and kerchief were more deadly than a platoon of English sharpshooters. Ecuyer had ordered the presents deliberately infected with smallpox spores at the post hospital. By mid July, the Delawares were dying as though they had been raked by a grape cannonade. Fort Pitt remained firmly in English hands."

E. R. G. Robertson, Rotting Face: Smallpox and the American Indian (Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Press, 2001) [ with footnote to Robert M. Utley and Wilcomb E. Washburn, Indian Wars (New York: American Heritage, 1977; Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987) ]

And again, this goes back to the legal fictions known as States. You didn't have the commoners who came from the old land plotting this shit out. No, they were trying to escape from the same fuckers who were discussing plans to facilitate disease spread. Diseases such as smallpox were by no means under control within the population coming to the "new world", this fact alone puts the issue into question. People died, but what can be tracked as a matter of malice versus nature. The natives in this land were fucked by those doing business as the US government more than any individuals not working for it.

Absolutely, which is why a clear distinction was made early on between the crimes of imperial invaders like the Rothschild controlled British Empire; and the multi-faceted, individual circumstances of White civilian immigration to the Americas.

[Ahmed]

Thanks for the summary of the acquisition of the Western US, Ahmed.  Lots of interesting facts without all the BS.

I would like to be fair in framing this debate, which seems to be about the status of Mexican immigrants in the US.  

Two sides generally presented as:
1) The land claimed by the US was stolen from the Native Americans and then stolen from Mexico through an illegal war. That arbitrary line of the US/Mexico border shouldn't determine rights of immigrants to live in CA, TX, etc...

2) The illegal aliens are driving down the standard of living in this country. They work for low wages and are a burden on the social services and criminal justice system.  

IMHO, neither one of these arguments are wrong.
First, in dealing with groups of people, it is important to recognize that all human beings are children of God and should be treated with dignity.  There is a tendency to think of poor, uneducated people as somehow less than human. I believe that most people would cross a border illegally if they could find work and a better life on the other side.

Thanks Christopher Marlowe, I agree with most of what you've said here: it's a dilemma and no side can shoulder all the blame. But the problem can only be effectively addressed once  people begin to treat each other as human beings with aspirations not dissimilar to their own.

[MonkeySeeMonkeyDo]

Guys, you are wasting your time endlessly arguing these moot points. Who cares what happened 400 years ago, it's over and done with.

We know who is behind this anti-white immigration agenda -- the Jews.

90 Jewish organizations have come out viciously against Arizona's immigration act.

If American Jewry really wants to "welcome the stranger" then they should invite all the illegals to move into their neighborhoods. Of course that will never ever happen. These parasites don't practice what they preach as Israel is a racist apartheid state and that apartheid is fully supported by elite American Jewry.

"When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

Here is an interesting interview with Kevin MacDonald:
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=502

[jai_mann]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Native Americans have never invaded anyone in the manner that their lands were invaded post-Columbus. And I'm not endorsing the savagery of some Aztecs and Mayans by condemning the savagery of some Europeans and Jews.

I didn't say any thing about you endorsing the behavior of those groups. This is a complete non-sequitor to my statement. Go re-read what I said. I said why aren't you castigating the descendants of those groups just as you are the descendants of europeans? It's hypocritical. And yes, you're wrong. You're lumping all sets of indigenous people in one land together and claiming that they didn't go invade some other continent. It's a false argument. The entire set of people from europe who came to the Americas were not involved in whole sale slaughter; however, a subset was, and typically these subsets were arms of those doing business as nation-states. In the Americas, the Incan, Aztec, and Mayan cultures ALL spread, engulfed, enslaved, etc. other smaller groups of natives. It's no different from what a portion of europeans did to each other during feudal wars, or when a subset came to the Americas. It's entirely simple minded and superficial to chalk things up the way that you are.

If the descendants of Mayans and Aztecs were still active in the world of criminal imperialism, we would condemn them right here. To some extent, I understand why some White Americans feel as if they're being blamed for the Native American genocide and become a little defensive, but that's not the case at all. Until we move on from the ideological restrictions of what so many have erroneously defined as patriotism; we'll never get down to brass tacks, identify the enemy and work to free ourselves from their grip.  

What do you think the people doing business as the Nation-State of Mexico and every other Nation-State are doing? They subject all people within their artificial borders to certain rules and punishments regardless of whether the people agree consensually to such things. It's no different from those DBA as the Nation-State of the USA, with regards to native descendants and foreign descendants. The latter groups are FORCED to go along with those systems or they are punished/killed. Now there's nothing defensive on my part at all, I'm a MUTT. I have native american running through my blood. The problem is, the average person is incapable of the level of discrimination required to avoid hypocrisy and attributing that which is inaccurate to wide swaths of people.

And how, if not without international co-operation at government and grassroots level, do you suppose the Federal Reserve and Rothschild can be removed as the sole economic power in America?  Americans may not like the fact that the dollar is being devalued to the point of extinction but that may well be the impetus for withdrawing funds from the federal reserve, dismantling the usury-credit based Fiat and returning to coinage or some other form of hard currency.

Relying upon the structures which have been created by masons and talmudic jews is a sure way to get no where. People will have to work from a community level on their issues and removing the structures which allow parasitism and totalitarianship. I don't suppose, but I KNOW, that the influence of the Federal reserve and rothchilds can be reduced and/or eliminated simply at the grass roots level by NOT USING THEIR FIAT CURRENCY. It is the sole thing that empowers them. It is what they use to employ their legions. Let the dollar die. It doesn't bother me, just have a viable solution in the form of a non-centralized, non-manipulable currency ready.

If you don't make them your allies, someone else will, that someone being our old friend the Zionist Jew. In fact, they've already begun working this angle with the Arizona bill (more on that later): The Mexicans aren't like those Zionist Jews who mass-migrated into Palestine circa 1920; they have no Talmudic affiliations, no cult leaders, no historical criminal record of subversion or troublemaking. Granted, there may some bad apples in that sea of humanity, but the majority IMO are relatively decent people; and the communication barrier is all that hinders mutual co-operation.

You can't readily make those who have been brainwashed from childhood into your allies, when they have been brainwashed against you. Case in point, the Jews vs. non-Jews. Why wouldn't most ignoramuses like jews if jews are bribing them or painting themselves as heroes in the media? No those mexicans don't share the jewish culture with jews, but they do share a culture of indoctrination against the gringos. You don't seem to understand how heavily brainwashed they are in that regard. No one is saying the common man from any given land is all bad, but what I have argued, is that the cultural differences will be the object of focus for one local population vs. those populations which migrate into the same geographical territory. Just look at how NYC divided up when immigrants were coming to that region. Add to that then, the destabilizing effects of the manipulation of currency, food, and other necessities by the centralized power over those things by the jews. Diversity is not a strength in such a scenario and it is used against the entire set of humans in a given region, both locals and migrants.

Some Mexicans are keen to work on immigration reforms and put proper measures in place, the Zionist Jews, will try and see to it that level headed Whites and rational Mexicans never meet. Learn Spanish.

I already know spanish, and knowing it isn't going to put food on the table or reduce population tensions as planned chaos is implemented.

Not labelling anyone, just telling you that the race is on to secure goodwill. You can't blast them back over the border; if you do it's race war and the Talmudists win. You can't treat them like dirt because, like I said, eventually they will progress beyond the menial tasks (even if its 5 out of a 100 who get those rare good jobs; that's 5 Mexicans in power who hate 'The Man' with a passion--and they will find receptive ears and office space with the Zionist Jew to get their own back against the race that made them feel so unwelcome).  

I haven't made arguments supporting the removal of these people. I don't respect or acknowledge nation-state boundaries as they represent force and thievery by those DBA nation-states, of regions of land and control over people who don't even consent to be governed. If those migrants were to go to areas that are not already a cluster fuck of other people, and build it up, it wouldn't bother me in the least. It would be the best solution with out inflaming tensions that are being pushed and conditioned in the jewish controlled media. But the nation-states won't let them do that, and the brainwashed peons on either side of imaginary borders want to pretend as if fallow land within an imaginary set of lines is something they have a right to tell other humans they can't use. My attitude in no way is one constituting that of treating others like dirt. You are making too many presumptions upon a dearth of evidence.

Say I agree with you there in principle, but that's not going to happen, do you really think the politicians some Americans are rallying behind in the hope of curtailing immigration care about anti-Zionism and who exactly do you suppose they're working for?

And why are the brainwashed peon's under the nation-state of the USA supporting politicians? It's not because of anti-zionism, it's because they don't want a flood of people in their backyard, and leeches upon the already bankrupt social programs supposedly intended for them. The last I checked I haven't heard of migrants establishing new centers for life in the abundant land available on this continent.

The simple fact is BOTH the Draconian anti-immigration and pro-unregulated immigration reps are serving the same agenda. Do you honestly think the Education reform clauses associated with this bill are limited to ethnic studies? More than half of what you or anyone else on this forum writes about would be classified as hate speech under such laws.

I'm no twit, regarding the use of these people as a tool for manipulating the public; but just because controlled fronts have been set up does not mean that elements of what they may be presenting as solutions aren't logical solutions, but only as long as we do not allow them insert their little hidden agenda in the process. I could care less what they categorize as hate speech. They're a bunch of fucking criminals. If a murderer got angry at me for shooting him that's his fucking problem. If a liar got mad at me for calling him a liar, again his problem. All they have is force to back them up, and I'm willing to defend myself against such force.

And as for "organising their own locale"? Both America and Mexcio have collectively had 200 years of Zionist occupation with no luck in overcoming the Rothschild Talmudic Kahal, which is now the Leviathan of our time. Of course it's being hammered internationally today, but collective efforts are required if such an abomination is to be sent back into the abyss.

The problem is identifying the enemy and acting. I'd say there's been a ground swell in terms of identification, but minimal action to deal with the criminal syndicate. Both America and Mexico are run by Masons, and Masonry is based upon things within Judaism. The nation-states apparatuses need to be removed to eliminate their centralization of control over the populace. But they've done a nice job of indoctrinating the masses from youth into believing that they need these structures to get by in their daily lives.

They're caricatures and useful idiots IMO. The Zionist picture of the racist Gingro with his ten gallon hat, pot belly, mirrored shades and rifle is as prevalent an image in Latin America as that of the angry Mexican with ten kids, car jacked up by bricks in the driveway berating the U.S. in Spanish is in White America.

Well I guess the migrants haven't gotten the picture of the effete male that walks around in most of this land at this point. If some one is a useful idiot for merely protecting their own back yard then I can't see coming to any sort of consensus with you.

When a people become so disenfranchised with their lot; they forget or ignore the forces directing their grievances in the wrong direction; its how those Talmudic Jews Rothschild manipulated two WORLD wars, so low scale race riots are easy to ignite; as prejudices already exist on both sides with the media playing them up at every given opportunity. The Zionists intend to wring out every bit of propaganda they can out of the political theatre surrounding this issue, are you going to play the part they want you to play?  

Well I guess we're fucked then, because the common man is too stupid to see beyond the tip of his nose, and any further discourse on the topic is non-productive since they can not be saved from themselves... I'll play the role I see as best fit for me, not that which YOU see as best fit for me.

The Minutemen's links with Zionism are quite transparent, but some refuse to see it because they buy into the image of a Davy Crocket character protecting the New World from some swarthy other. The truth couldn't be further from it.

I think you've been sucked in by too many stereotypes. You're regurgitating them to no end. The only gringo's who can do right in your eyes are those who allow themselves to be overwhelmed by masses who have been conditioned to think that they are entitled to other people's productivity. You paint those who don't want to see such an influx as bigots; what about those who are of mexican heritage who don't want to see things go to shit as a flood of, essentially refugees, come to their locale? Can you perceive things beyond the image that the main stream media has painted of people living on the northern side of this imaginary border?

I appreciate the analogy but its a tad Darwinian for my tastes. Look, we're all human and deserve a fair go. All this is part of Kaabalist-Jew follower / Masonic grand master Albert Pike's 1871 dogma to have nations (and races) "fight themselves into a state of exhaustion" so they'll be too tired to resist the real threat that is the Talmudic-world government. Divide and rule: oldest trick in the book.

This notion of a fair go is to be enforced by whom? Nature? Or by men who claim the sole monopoly on the use of force to make others do as they see fit? The divide and conquer is there which is exactly why dealing with shit in your own back yard is better than picking up and shifting to a new locale where your NATURAL and CONDITIONED differences are pitted against the locals. I would think that you could see exactly why I was arguing for this dealing with things in your own region.
 

Very true. So what're you going to do about it? The Rothschild's have been flogging the Mexican Mule for a century and plucking the American Eagle for 97 years, neither of you have managed to do a damn thing about it. In fact you've been plunged into war upon war and the bankers have been building their throne upon the corpses of your youth. But now, two cultures with 200 years plus of bitter experience at the hands of Zionist Jewry find themselves thrown together, for what purpose?

The last time I checked, I'm only responsible for myself and those in my family and local community. What makes you think that I have some sort of obligation first and foremost to people who I have never seen in a distant land? Now you are anthropomorphizing these nation-states and conflating them with me, an individual. I already do as I please, regardless of the laws these so called nation-states have set up. I don't pay taxes, I don't have a driver's license, plates, tags, etc. I do a number of other things which are my own business. In other words, I live free of their strings, and god help any brainwashed statist that attempts to force their will upon me.

If people would refrain from anthropomorphizing, a lot of ridiculous arguments could be avoided.

Like I said, all of us today are fortunate enough to share a common enemy in Zionism and the Talmudic-WORLD government. I emphasis 'world' so as the highlight the intent and reach of the enemy we face.  For some still just don't realize the magnitude of the challenge that awaits us, there are no isolated nations anymore: If the enemy uses an international network to execute its criminal activities, then people have no choice but ally themselves with other countries at grassroots level under a unified vanguard that actually stands some chance of resisting the Zionist Kahal.

I don't consider having enemies a fortunate thing. Nations never existed to begin with. They are legal fictions. They exist purely in the minds of man. This is a sad statement regarding the intellectual capacity of man but it's true. If man never existed, the geography, which is part of what those DBA governments claim, would still exist.

You're right, and by attacking the peasants who're fleeing, you're playing right into the hands of the Talmudists. You can't force them to fight and you're never going to persuade them with xenophobia and shotguns on one side of the border and a Rothschild ZOG on the other. People of different races and creeds can live and work together in the right environment with mutal respect and common deceny.

There hasn't ever been a suggestion of attacking any fleeing peasants on my part. WTF do you come up with these non-sequitors? Let's make this real simple: Why don't you quote where I recommend physical violence upon them?

[jai_mann]

Discussing plans and actually tracking what they could be held accountable for are two entirely separate things. Can you come to the table with evidence showing who died of disease that was intentionally spread vs. that which was unintentionally spread?

The evidence, though in some cases circumstantial, would probably hold up in court.

Native Americans and their unorthodox battle tactics frustrated the Brits, so they resorted to biological warfare (i.e. smallpox.). William Trent; British commander at Pontiac: Trent's journal entry on May 24, 1763, reads: "... We gave them (Natives) two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect."

"Colonists during the French and Indian Wars resorted to trading smallpox-contaminated blankets to local tribes with immediate and devastating results. While infected carcasses had long been catapulted into besieged cities, this seems to be the first time a known weakness in the immunity structure of an adversary population was deliberately exploited with a weapons response. "

Robert L. O'Connell, Of Arms and Men: A History of War, Weapons, and Aggression [p. 171]

"In the spring of 1763, during the Indian uprising led by Ottawa Chief Pontiac surrounded (British occupied) Fort Pitt (now Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) calling for its surrender. Captain Simeon Ecuyer, a mercenary and the fort's senior officer, saved the garrison by giving the Delawares a gift—two blankets and a handkerchief. The Indians accepted but still demanded that Ecuyer vacate the stockade. They had no inkling that the blankets and kerchief were more deadly than a platoon of English sharpshooters. Ecuyer had ordered the presents deliberately infected with smallpox spores at the post hospital. By mid July, the Delawares were dying as though they had been raked by a grape cannonade. Fort Pitt remained firmly in English hands."

E. R. G. Robertson, Rotting Face: Smallpox and the American Indian (Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Press, 2001) [ with footnote to Robert M. Utley and Wilcomb E. Washburn, Indian Wars (New York: American Heritage, 1977; Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987) ]

And again, this goes back to the legal fictions known as States. You didn't have the commoners who came from the old land plotting this shit out. No, they were trying to escape from the same fuckers who were discussing plans to facilitate disease spread. Diseases such as smallpox were by no means under control within the population coming to the "new world", this fact alone puts the issue into question. People died, but what can be tracked as a matter of malice versus nature. The natives in this land were fucked by those doing business as the US government more than any individuals not working for it.

Absolutely, which is why a clear distinction was made early on between the crimes of imperial invaders like the Rothschild controlled British Empire; and the multi-faceted, individual circumstances of White civilian immigration to the Americas.

You fail to comprehend my point. Although those things may point to a cause, they in no way can be confirmed as the specific cause of death for any given native back then. The separation of that which occurred as a result of natural processes vs. those induced by murderers is not a possibility today.

[Ahmed]

I said why aren't you castigating the descendants of those groups just as you are the descendants of europeans? It's hypocritical.

If you re-read my posts carefully, you'll see that I not only make a clear distinction between the descendants of Europeans today but also clarify the particular groups I'm referring to during the post-Columbus immigration / invasion.  So based on that very clear and not in the least bit ambiguous distinction, there's absolutely nothing hypocritical about it.

And yes, you're wrong. You're lumping all sets of indigenous people in one land together and claiming that they didn't go invade some other continent. It's a false argument.

OK, so tell me; who did the Native Americans invade?

The entire set of people from europe who came to the Americas were not involved in whole sale slaughter;

Could you quote where I said that they were?

however, a subset was, and typically these subsets were arms of those doing business as nation-states.

That's pretty much what I said in my previous posts, besides the nation states part.

In the Americas, the Incan, Aztec, and Mayan cultures ALL spread, engulfed, enslaved, etc. other smaller groups of natives. It's no different from what a portion of europeans did to each other during feudal wars, or when a subset came to the Americas.

And?

It's entirely simple minded and superficial to chalk things up the way that you are.

With all due respect, sir; I've not engaged in any ad homonym attacks against your position and I'd appreciate it if you would extend that me that same courtesy.

What do you think the people doing business as the Nation-State of Mexico and every other Nation-State are doing? They subject all people within their artificial borders to certain rules and punishments regardless of whether the people agree consensually to such things. It's no different from those DBA as the Nation-State of the USA, with regards to native descendants and foreign descendants. The latter groups are FORCED to go along with those systems or they are punished/killed. Now there's nothing defensive on my part at all, I'm a MUTT. I have native american running through my blood.

If you're against the artifice of borders how can you advocate something like the minutemen?

The problem is, the average person is incapable of the level of discrimination required to avoid hypocrisy and attributing that which is inaccurate to wide swaths of people.

I don't quite understand the point here. If you're saying we should critize the corrupt Zionist appeasing leadership in Mexico then yes, I concur; is that what you're saying?

Relying upon the structures which have been created by masons and talmudic jews is a sure way to get no where.

I think we're all agreed on this.

People will have to work from a community level on their issues and removing the structures which allow parasitism and totalitarianship.

I don't believe it can be done this way. Grassroots internationalism needs popular, organized mobilization IMO and preferably an established, uncorrupted vanguard that can, if needed, defend itself and its partisans.

I don't suppose, but I KNOW, that the influence of the Federal reserve and rothchilds can be reduced and/or eliminated simply at the grass roots level by NOT USING THEIR FIAT CURRENCY. It is the sole thing that empowers them. It is what they use to employ their legions. Let the dollar die. It doesn't bother me, just have a viable solution in the form of a non-centralized, non-manipulable currency ready.

Undermined certainly, eliminated? not at grass roots level.

You can't readily make those who have been brainwashed from childhood into your allies, when they have been brainwashed against you. Case in point, the Jews vs. non-Jews. Why wouldn't most ignoramuses like jews if jews are bribing them or painting themselves as heroes in the media?

Depends on how deep the indoctrination goes and how far they've progressed in terms of raising their own awareness / knowledge level.

No those mexicans don't share the jewish culture with jews, but they do share a culture of indoctrination against the gringos. You don't seem to understand how heavily brainwashed they are in that regard.

Evidently not. Its sad if what you're saying is the reality, the Mexicans I've met were all anti-Zionists, especially after what happened in October 2001 in San Lazaro, and expressed great solidarity with Palestine.

No one is saying the common man from any given land is all bad, but what I have argued, is that the cultural differences will be the object of focus for one local population vs. those populations which migrate into the same geographical territory. Just look at how NYC divided up when immigrants were coming to that region.

I don't agree with that, but understand where you're coming from to some degree.

Add to that then, the destabilizing effects of the manipulation of currency, food, and other necessities by the centralized power over those things by the jews. Diversity is not a strength in such a scenario and it is used against the entire set of humans in a given region, both locals and migrants.

If things begin to resemble 'The Road' in a crisis then the Talmudic Jews will trample all over the Goyim. Lets hope people rise above their base instincts should such a desperate time arrive.

I already know spanish, and knowing it isn't going to put food on the table or reduce population tensions as planned chaos is implemented.

You could reduce population tensions by communicating a shared objective to the people.

I haven't made arguments supporting the removal of these people.

Minutemen "proctecting their own back yard" By back yard I presume you're making reference to the borderland, which contradicts your rejection of nation-state boundaries.

I don't respect or acknowledge nation-state boundaries as they represent force and thievery by those DBA nation-states, of regions of land and control over people who don't even consent to be governed.

See above.

But the nation-states won't let them do that, and the brainwashed peons on either side of imaginary borders want to pretend as if fallow land within an imaginary set of lines is something they have a right to tell other humans they can't use. My attitude in no way is one constituting that of treating others like dirt. You are making too many presumptions upon a dearth of evidence.

When I say 'you' I'm using it in a generic fashion to present the possible scenarios one could enact when approaching the issue of immigration. Its not a direct reference to you as an individual.

And why are the brainwashed peon's under the nation-state of the USA supporting politicians? It's not because of anti-zionism, it's because they don't want a flood of people in their backyard, and leeches upon the already bankrupt social programs supposedly intended for them. The last I checked I haven't heard of migrants establishing new centers for life in the abundant land available on this continent.

The issue of Zionist links within the Minutemen movement, not to mention the theatre surrounding the Arizona bill should be a cause for concern, perhaps not for those who don't know the truth, but certainly for those, like us, who're well aware of how Zionist Jewry plays out an event as a means to an end.

I'm no twit,

No one said you were.

regarding the use of these people as a tool for manipulating the public; but just because controlled fronts have been set up does not mean that elements of what they may be presenting as solutions aren't logical solutions, but only as long as we do not allow them insert their little hidden agenda in the process.

If it's a controlled front, your chance of preventing the insertion of their agenda is slim to none, especially since the entire purpose of the controlled front is the hidden agenda. Besides, someone once said "Relying upon the structures which have been created by masons and talmudic Jews is a sure way to get no where".

I could care less what they categorize as hate speech. They're a bunch of fucking criminals.

Agreed, but by supporting something like the Arizona bill (and I'm not saying you support it because you haven't come out either way on that so far). But cutting the nose to spite the face by supporting legislation or controlled fronts that work against the principals you stand for, is just counterporductive.

The problem is identifying the enemy and acting. I'd say there's been a ground swell in terms of identification, but minimal action to deal with the criminal syndicate. Both America and Mexico are run by Masons, and Masonry is based upon things within Judaism. The nation-states apparatuses need to be removed to eliminate their centralization of control over the populace. But they've done a nice job of indoctrinating the masses from youth into believing that they need these structures to get by in their daily lives.

Good summary.

Well I guess the migrants haven't gotten the picture of the effete male that walks around in most of this land at this point.

I'm sure they will pretty soon.

If some one is a useful idiot for merely protecting their own back yard then I can't see coming to any sort of consensus with you.

Even if they're linked to Zionist Jews?

Well I guess we're fucked then, because the common man is too stupid to see beyond the tip of his nose, and any further discourse on the topic is non-productive since they can not be saved from themselves

Could be, but you never know; degenerates worse than the common man of today have been sobered up in the past.

I'll play the role I see as best fit for me, not that which YOU see as best fit for me.

You can do what you want to do, buddy I'm not here to affect your MO or outlook, we're just two strangers having a conversation that's soon to be over.


 

The only gringo's who can do right in your eyes are those who allow themselves to be overwhelmed by masses who have been conditioned to think that they are entitled to other people's productivity.

Quote me.

You paint those who don't want to see such an influx as bigots

Straw man.

what about those who are of mexican heritage who don't want to see things go to shit as a flood of, essentially refugees, come to their locale? Can you perceive things beyond the image that the main stream media has painted of people living on the northern side of this imaginary border?

If I were to quote myself here, I'd say: "Its a dilemma, no one side can shoulder all the blame..."  

This notion of a fair go is to be enforced by whom? Nature? Or by men who claim the sole monopoly on the use of force to make others do as they see fit?

Since you're asking, I would say its denoted by the ethics of scripture and the manner in which that text has been put into practice in the past.

The divide and conquer is there which is exactly why dealing with shit in your own back yard is better than picking up and shifting to a new locale where your NATURAL and CONDITIONED differences are pitted against the locals

.
There aren't any major natural differences between human beings IMO. Differences emerge thorough external conditioning, interpersonal relationships and familial upbringing.

I would think that you could see exactly why I was arguing for this dealing with things in your own region.

If you recall, I said I agreed with some your points in principle but that there were no viable mechanisms in place to reverse the influx. Whilst the methods employed by the likes of the minutemen (controlled as they are) were not going to help anyone.
 

The last time I checked, I'm only responsible for myself and those in my family and local community. What makes you think that I have some sort of obligation first and foremost to people who I have never seen in a distant land?

I don't recall saying your "obligation first and foremost to people who I have never seen in a distant land" but that no man is an island and no nation, or people, can afford to stand alone against such a vast and ruthless enemy. Like it or not, but we're all in this together.

I don't consider having enemies a fortunate thing.

You know exactly what I mean; consider yourself fortunate that we were able to define and unmask our common enemy. Others fought and died never knowing of or having seen the true face of tyranny.

Nations never existed to begin with. They are legal fictions. They exist purely in the minds of man. This is a sad statement regarding the intellectual capacity of man but it's true. If man never existed, the geography, which is part of what those DBA governments claim, would still exist.

Be that as it may, the people of these nations, fictions though they may be, are real and under threat from Zionism.

There hasn't ever been a suggestion of attacking any fleeing peasants on my part. WTF do you come up with these non-sequitors? Let's make this real simple: Why don't you quote where I recommend physical violence upon them?

You seem to express support for the Minutemen, who, last time I checked, aren't above violence. You made a number of valid points and some that I reject outright, each to their own.

[sean r]

35h8u9ql]

[Wimpy]

Ahmed,

How far back do you want to go into North American History regarding this blame game?  I can make a very strong argument that Europeans were the first inhabitants of Eastern North America, backed with documented archeological artifacts which strongly links it to the European Continent. The time period to which I am referring goes back to 14,000 years ago.  Were these people wiped out by the Asian Immigration via the Alaskan route?  Was it disease?  That we will probably never know but the earliest available evidence of Humans in Eastern North America was of European origin.

I know this is not an excuse for what happened with the more recent European occupation and the near elimination of the indigenous Indian population but, again, how far back does one have to go to stake permanent claim on geography?  Also, if we were to point fingers at the culprits I would say that I am in no way responsible for any of these acts.  No one alive today is.

Whether or not Minutemen are controlled by Zionists is a new theory to me, however, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if true.