The head of the FBI says Covid probably originated in the US funded Wuhan lab. This Biological attack killed more people than Jews died in the Holocaust. Also, scores more suffered because intense illness. Also, should USA pay reparations for these atrocities?
shareWe might have been dumb enough to give money, but the primary responsibility is with the red chinese.
We should learn from this and stop giving money to china. And really any Third World shit hole.
No, because we shouldn't conflate the cabal, the swamp and the Deep State with "We The People."
However, our current DOJ and FBI is weaponized as a "Police State."
Unless it was done deliberately, of course not, because the Chinese were responsible for following protocols, and responding in a timely and truthful manner should a breach occur. They did none of this, instead attempting a coverup and threatening several top Chinese epidemiologists who tried to raise the alarm. I'm really not sure how this makes the US a "terrorist state", at least in this instance. It would make more sense to accuse the USA of things it actually did do, like arming and supporting Saddam almost right up to his invasion of Kuwait, then claiming he "gassed his own people" as a causi belli, even though we supplied the chemical weapons used against the Kurds, and covered for him afterwards at the UN.
shareWe have our own sets of terrorists like BLM, and Antifa....which are arms of the government. Plus we have the CIA...
We also fund terrorism in other parts of the world...
Yeah, we are a terrorist state. I'd prefer we weren't though. 🤷♂️
This Biological attack killed more people than Jews died in the Holocaust.
The U.S. is an Evil Empire which has overthrown democratically elected leaders while supporting dictators who torture and kill their citizenry.
Our Evil Empire also profits from instigating and intensifying wars by selling billions from their industrial-military-complex.
Please! Feel free to relocate to one of your favorite leftist utopias, or maybe see how well one of you favorite Muslim countries would receive you.
shareI consider relocating to my native Poland, but hesitate to do so because of the United States vibrant video game scene. Poland has nice looking women and that is very appealing to me, as is their cuisine.
shareYo! What's up bro? 🇵🇱 You from the tribe too? Co jest?
It's funny, I'm thinking of doing the same thing. I was born there and visit there every now and then. I can safely say that their society is definitely better than what we have in the U.S. It's so clean there. The food is beyond amazing. The people are all good looking. It's wonderful. And there is no diversity.
I'm still not ready to abandon the U.S. just yet, but things don't look good here. And as the country deteriorates you got to have an exit strategy. I'm pretty sure that within the next 10-15 years I'll be leaving and returning back home.
It’s also Catholic not secular.
shareThat's fine by me. Even though I'm not a believer, I'm still a cultural Catholic. And seeing what has happened to our culture when religion goes away makes me appreciate what we've had. It appears that religion is necessary. If you get rid of it something else just takes its place. Something horrifying like Wokness.
sharePlease leave now!!!!!
shareNah, I'm good.
shareThe irony is that the KKK used to march against Catholics. And Poles were not considered white until recently. The Civil Rights Movement was responsible for helping to change biased immigration laws which kept out Eastern Europeans.
shareThe real irony is you think people take you seriously.
shareThe Poles were coming here around the same time the Irish were coming here. And while the Poles were looked down upon just like the Irish, nobody would have said that they were not White except maybe as a joke.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poles_in_the_United_States?useskin=vector
https://www.eiu.edu/historia/mortimer.pdf
Race in the U.S. has a hierarchy. White Anglo-Saxon Protestants aka: WASPs are on top. Then, other Western Europeans below them.
Irish, Italians, Jews, Greeks, Polish, etc. were never called white. They were referred to by their ethnic group and heavily discriminated. Today, they're referred to as "ethnic whites" to distinguish them from real whites aka: WASPs.
There are also "Hispanic whites" who get an asterisk to distinguish them from "white non Hispanic". Again, they're not considered real whites.
Finally, there are Arabs who said "FU and stop calling us white since you treat us like crap. We want our own separate category!" I believe they have that now.
You can watch All in the Family and West Side Story to see how WASPs think about the Polish. Archie calls Mike dumb Pollack all the time and Tony is referred to as not being really white since he's only Polish.
Also, most Polish are Catholic. Until recently, a despised group. The KKK used to march against them including Trump's father.
https://thecorrespondent.com/5185/how-do-you-become-white-in-america/1466577856645-8260d4a7
https://www.amazon.com/Working-Toward-Whiteness-Americas-Immigrants/dp/0465070744
What did the Civil Rights movement have to do with ending the highly successful limited immigration that was in place for 40 years? While it was the same people pushing both programs, that doesn't mean Hart-Cellar was part of the Civil Rights push.
Those 40 years allowed for the settlement of the non-Germanic Europeans that had flooded the country prior to 1920. The two generation gap helped assimilate those immigrants into an amazingly productive, harmonious, white Christian nation. The same thing will never happen with masses of Han, Sub-cons, towel heads, and Africans. The cultural and biological gulf is too wide.
Can you explain to me why Idris Elba and Richard Ayoade seem to be integrated well in the UK despite both being of non-UK heritage.
shareCan you explain to me why you think the exception to the rule obviates...the rule?
shareI can name many more black and mixed people in the UK in entertainment, culture, politics, public life. Why are they able to integrate?
shareYou also understand that your social positions would make it hard for you to integrate into the UK, right?
Like the problem in the UK, prominently, is Muslims right now in terms of integration. I fail to see how you're any different than them at this point.
We can keep a few blacks around for entertainment purposes.
shareI legitimately see no reason why a Russian or belarussian would integrate better in the UK or USA than a Taiwanese or Korean person now.
shareBecause they look more similar. If they learn the language and the customs they will be almost indistinguishable from other Brits. Not completely, as we talked about it before, there are features that are English and there are features that are Russian, but for the most part they look very similar and would fit right in. With a Taiwanese or a Korean this will never happen. They look too different. They will always stick out. You will always be able to tell that they don't belong.
shareDoesn't matter if they look similar. Belarussian and Russian social values are increasingly anathema to Brits. They would struggle to integrate.
No-one cares that Taiwanese people or Koreans look different. I know my country better than you.
Maixu is a theocrat despite being white. He would not at all adapt in the UK and has social values just as hostile to us as many Muslims have.
Well if they are an anathema to Brits and they are different ethnically then maybe they don't belong in Britain. And don't be so hostile, I never claimed to know the U.K. better than you. You live there so I expect you to know more than I do. But what I'm talking about is not specifically about Britain. It's about any country. I believe that countries should be for a particular group of people who look alike and share a common culture. Who intermarry with each other. Who share the same values. If most Brits think the way you say they do then they don't care about their country. They want to turn it (or at least allow it to be turned) into something else. A country in name only. I think it was Maixiu or SemiAnimus who compared it to a social club. Maybe the same culture, but not the same people.
Maixu is a theocrat despite being white. He would not at all adapt in the UK and has social values just as hostile to us as many Muslims have.
>Well if they are an anathema to Brits and they are different ethnically then maybe they don't belong in Britain.
The ethnic component is not relevant. It's entirely cultural. Russian liberal dissidents would be fine. Russian vatniks would not.
> And don't be so hostile, I never claimed to know the U.K. better than you.
You already know my opinion about being hostile to you. You have already agreed that you can't expect me to be polite to you ever.
>But what I'm talking about is not specifically about Britain. It's about any country. I believe that countries should be for a particular group of people who look alike and share a common culture. Who intermarry with each other. Who share the same values. If most Brits think the way you say they do then they don't care about their country.
Or we define an ethos by values other than skin colour and ethnic heritage.
>He sounds more like a nationalist than a theocrat to me. Do you have any examples of him being a theocrat?
He won't divulge the details of his ideology to me, to be fair, but he wants to revoke women's rights to vote and is incredibly hostile to LGBT people. Have you seen opinion polling on LGBT rights in the UK? He would not integrate.
>Most countries have national religions but are not theocracies. Poland is probably the most religious country in Europe, do you consider it a theocracy?
No.
>And what about ethnic Brits who are nationalists and don't share your values? Who want to see non-Whites thrown out of Britain? Like Steven Laws for example:
>What should be done with people like him?
Nothing. Unless he incites violence. Although current laws in the UK suggest if someone reported his twitter account, he could get arrested. I don't endorse them but some of his comments very much do incite racial hatred.
And he's part of the English Democrats. Are you aware of just how little support they have?
You already know my opinion about being hostile to you. You have already agreed that you can't expect me to be polite to you ever.
He won't divulge the details of his ideology to me, to be fair, but he wants to revoke women's rights to vote and is incredibly hostile to LGBT people.
Have you seen opinion polling on LGBT rights in the UK? He would not integrate.
And he's part of the English Democrats. Are you aware of just how little support they have?
>Sure, I get that. But I think in this instance it takes away from your argument and makes you sound like a child. We are having more of discussion here rather than a heated debate, so it's just unnecessary.
I don't really care to be honest.
>I'm pretty hostile to the LGBTQ community, and I'm not religious. And I have said that we should take away a women's right to vote on a number of occasions, doesn't mean that I was being serious. It was just a hyperbolic way of criticizing women.
>How do you know that he actually wants to literally take away women's right to vote?
He hasn't suggested he does hyperbole like you have. I obviously can't know for sure, but what's the point of engaging with anyone if I just assume they lie about everything.
And if you really are hostile to LGBT people as you present on here, then you will struggle integrating in the UK and would be treated with hostility if you expressed your values publicly. You would be seen as little different to an Islamist.
>So what about the ethnic Brits that don't support LGBTQ rights?
What about them? They're outnumbered heavily.
>And also what does it mean to support LGBTQ rights? Is it just supporting the right for them to marry? Because if yes, then I support LGBTQ rights. But that doesn't mean I want them celebrated and normalized or even visible.
It means supporting gay marriage rights, adoption rights, LGBT education (has popular support in the UK), accepting the right of pride parades to exist, accepting LGBT people in TV shows and films, accepting openly LGBT people in public life.
UK people fully accept LGBT people can be visible if they want. You would not integrate well here at all.
>No, I'm not aware. I don't pay much attention to British politics. I just agree with a lot of the things he says on Twitter, so I follow him.
Almost none. Far-right activists like him are heavily buffered by American followers.
It means supporting gay marriage rights, adoption rights, LGBT education (has popular support in the UK), accepting the right of pride parades to exist, accepting LGBT people in TV shows and films, accepting openly LGBT people in public life.
Did you think that the UK was somehow hostile to LGBT rights until I told you? The UK is arguably the most pro-LGB country on earth (YMMV in regards to trans).
shareI honestly didn't think about it. I suppose I assumed it was kind of like the U.S.
Where half the country is conservative and may or may not accept LGBTQs and the other half are liberals who are very pro-LGBTQ.
To put it simply, in my mind I thought it was like a 65%/35% kind of country, but the way you're making it sound is that it's 95%/5% kind of country.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49445-should-pupils-be-taught-about-gender-identity-in-schools
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/sexual-orientation-and-attitudes-lgbtq-britain
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/
https://yougov.co.uk/society/articles/45983-what-do-lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-brito
Not quite 95/5%, but more 80%/20% and there are no real anti-LGBT pockets like in the USA. It's a bit different when specifically on transpeople.
Once again Maixiu hits it out of the park.
shareCivil Rights movement didn't only affect blacks. It helped other groups who also faced discrimination like East Europeans, Asians and women.
For instance, the #1 group helped by affirmative action is white women.
The peak irony of you being so hostile to immigration when you aren't even native born American yourself.
If black and mixed people born in the USA should be forced to leave, why shouldn't you?
Because I'm White of European descent. The U.S. belongs to me. The U.S. was founded by Europeans for Europeans (that means White btw).
This is explicitly stated in laws such as the Naturalization Act of 1790, which I have pointed out a number of times on this board.
https://thehistoryjunkie.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/NaturalizationAct1790.jpg.webp
So by this logic does this mean the UK should expel all Irish people, given their history here?
shareThe U.K. can do what it likes. I guess the question becomes: How nationalistic should we be? And where do we draw the line? I like to draw the line at Europe. So I'm fine with the Irish living in England and Poles living in Germany. It's fine because we are all White. Having said that, there is an argument to be made that Britain should be for the British, Germany for the Germans, Poland for the Poles, etc. I don't think it would be good if the U.K. was flooded with so many Poles that the U.K. effectively becomes Poland. Why? Because something would be lost. Britain would be lost. The British people would be erased. But if you keep the immigration to some sort of reasonable rate and the people are all White then it is O.K.
shareKeep the immigration to some reasonable rate, but the ethnicity of that bloc coming in doesn't matter if they can integrate and their descendents become culturally british - and they do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0YV6Q4YPk
This guys ancestry is Polish. Is he somehow not British?
It would depend. Are both of his parents ethnically Polish? If so then no, he is not British. If however his parents or grandparents intermarried with Brits then yes, he is partially British and partially Polish. The less Polish, the more British. But all that is technical. The real question is can I tell that he's not ethnically British? The answer is no, I cannot. He doesn't look very Polish, he looks like many other ethnic Brits, and he is culturally British. So for all intents and purposes he is British. Or at least British enough to be considered a Brit by most people.
shareRight, so people can absolutely integrate despite their heritage. And we have many examples of this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Weisz What about this woman?
Yeah but once again we are talking passed each other. The people we are talking about are not only culturally British but look British. Certainly they look European. So if you are ethnically European, and you were born in Britain, and you look similar enough to other British people, and you share the same culture, then fine, I think you're British enough to stay in Britain if there was an immigrant purge. But even still, technically speaking, you can't call yourself English or Anglo-Saxon if your heritage is Polish.
share>Yeah but once again we are talking passed each other. The people we are talking about are not only culturally British but look British.
So? You suggested that people just can't integrate into other cultures when they clearly can, or certainly their offspring can.
>So if you are ethnically European, and you were born in Britain, and you look similar enough to other British people, and you share the same culture, then fine, I think you're British enough to stay in Britain if there was an immigrant purge. But even still, technically speaking, you can't call yourself English or Anglo-Saxon if your heritage is Polish.
Who cares. I doubt she does do that. Only fucking Russians scream about muh aNgLo-SaXoNs (and they use it as a pejorative).
So? You suggested that people just can't integrate into other cultures when they clearly can, or certainly their offspring can.
>No, I said that they can integrate culturally, but that this sill won't make them British. And what it means to be British is more than just sharing the culture it's also about your blood
Not your decision to make.
I am only using Britain as an example here. It could be any hypothetical country.
I was going to say this explicitly in my post but didn't think I needed to. I guess I was wrong. Everything needs to be spelled out for you.
Anyway, good talk. I think think we said all that needs to be said on this topic.
You're in the States now?
shareI have to agree with this statement. The U.S. is a terrorist state. This is not the fault of the people. Our government is captured by psychopaths.
shareIt's only terrorist activity when other countries do it.
We liberate people, sometimes from freedom.