Page 28 of 29

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 8:23 pm
by Fulgurator
I find the insults humerous. Anyway, I just think Quiet Voice ought to leave the U.S. and migrate to another country. It's a logical idea. Not sure where her specific roots lie but, for example, Charles Bronson the actor (of Death Wish fame) migrated to America via Lithuania. Americans are now a multicultural, immigrant nation and presumably Q.V. is also of immigrant family heritage.
Reality calls. If Q.V. wants to live somewhere free from black, African or Jewish people she could try Japan maybe. The future of the USA isn't going to change. The only true indigenous peoples there were the Indians.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 9:07 pm
by quietvoice
Fulgurator wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 8:23 pm The future of the USA isn't going to change.
Please lay out how you see the future for "the USA", David.

Fulgurator wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 8:23 pm The only true indigenous peoples there were the Indians.
They were not, as you were advised before in this thread.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 9:40 pm
by Candid
Fulgurator wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 8:23 pm The only true indigenous peoples there were the Indians.
Who's really indigenous to anywhere now? As far as H has tracked my family back we're solid anglo-saxons. He claims royalty in his own past and there was a Famous Person in mine whose name escapes me right now...

As a card-carrying Darwinist I get fascinated by the idea of evolution and see the evidence of it everywhere I look. Where I live I swear I hear every language known to mankind other than bushman on the streets, although when I was in Australia I knew someone who could speak it. Through that we can see massive migrations in our past.

Everything evolves. I see it in animals, plants, language... the struggle for survival, as Darwin put it.

We are evolved apes. Personally I think we've gone too far and are in danger of wiping ourselves out. I gather there's evidence of that having happened a few times in our past.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 10:08 pm
by Fulgurator
"Who's really indigenous to anywhere now?"

Sort of my point. Jews today can't be exactly the same as the Hebrews of Canaan while modern Greeks aren't quite the same as the Spartans or Athenians. Still, Greeks still live in Greece. As to Americans, my point is it's absurd for Quiet Voice to preach she's fully entitled to land once inhabited by Indians and worked by black slaves, while Jews are supposedly occupiers. You won't find English inscriptions in archeology sites beyond a few short centuries. You will find Hebrew inscriptions in Israel that date several hundred years B.C. You will also find Indian culture archeological sites in, say, Arizona. Like it or lump it, Quiet Voice has no moral superiority to tell others where they can, or cannot live. She can't accuse others while she herself is where she is via imperialism or slavery of Chinese or Africans. That's hypocrisy.
As for me, I seem to have French, Irish and Scottish roots. They say the true Britons are the Welsh. Of course, yes, I oppose mass immigration from the Middle East although Jewish communities always integrate fine. They however will now be a minority and the UK heads towards Islam, like France.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 10:47 pm
by Fulgurator
Netenyahu's speech. Massive applause. I quite like him for the simple fact he has a simple view of right and wrong. A sort of Chuck Norris in a suit who kicks terrorist ass. I see America these days as feminised and almost impotent, which is why this guy has a fair few followers. Biden was clearly weak and undecisive while Trump never seems to stand on any fixed position. So, Netenyahu here gets huge applause. While America loses wars, he seems to win.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rKkcstwPd9k

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2024 10:01 pm
by Fulgurator
"Speakers at the rally denounced immigration and multiculturalism as well as the Covid vaccines, while people in the crowd waved British, English and Israeli flags and placards that read: “Not far right, just right."

Wonder if Candid and Quiet Voice know about these protests in London. It's sort of geared towards Quiet Voice's fears about immigrant numbers getting out of control, as well as vaccines and conspiracies. Except here the far-right protesters are pro-Israeli given Israel is a minority state.
I too oppose multiculturalism totally although I don't view that as racism at all. For example, if the Spanish are fed up with English tourists taking over their resorts, I view that as a reasonable concern. It works in multiple ways. I think France has been ruined too by immigration. It used to be a very liberal Latin country but it's now a melting pot of divided nationalities.
By the way, Chuck Norris is very right wing and Viktor Orban of Hungary is a Norris friend.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 7:44 am
by Candid

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:47 pm
by quietvoice
Fulgurator wrote: Sun Jul 28, 2024 10:01 pmWonder if . . . Quiet Voice know about these protests in London.
I wonder. Do you think that I know? Why did I outright laugh at you when you asked if a head of State knew about them?

Of course, I know, and I know that YOU DON"T know why it is happening.

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:37 pm
by quietvoice
Fulgurator wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 10:08 pmQuiet Voice has no moral superiority to tell others where they can, or cannot live.
Can anyone walk into YOUR house and make themselves at home?
No?
What gives you the moral "superiority" to tell them NO?

Re: The case against the New World Order

Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2024 1:06 pm
by quietvoice
quietvoice wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:37 pm
Fulgurator wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 10:08 pmQuiet Voice has no moral superiority to tell others where they can, or cannot live.
Can anyone walk into YOUR house and make themselves at home?
No?
What gives you the moral "superiority" to tell them NO?
What, you can't answer this question, David?
You've been here and gone since that was posted, and you ignored it.