PDA

View Full Version : The Jack Booted Thugs of the Open Borders Movement-Brown Berets MeCha




Chosen
03-10-2009, 12:01 PM
Si se puede! Is the mantra of both B Hussein Obama and the entire Open Borders Community. This movement, most especially from Mexico is basically run by ethnic national socialist racism. This manifests itself by a belief in the mythical Mexican (Aztec) homeland of Aztlan which encompasses the entire southwest up thru Oregon.

Part of this movement is fueled bya belief in Brown Pride and the opne borders message is violently employed by racists organization like the Brown Berets. They are beholden to an organization called Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan or MeCha for short. This organization is in turn funded by Nation Council of La Raza. Both gorups were given backroom access to help formulate the last amensty bill by Ted Kennedy and George W Bush.

MeCha's membership which includes Racist Mayor of Los Angelas, Villalogrosa has several college campus groups! Here is an excerpt from their racist "constitution" for membership:

"General membership shall consist of any student who accepts, believes and works for the goals and objectives of MEChA, including the liberation of AZTLAN, meaning self-determination of our people in this occupied state and the physical liberation of our land."

That perfectly demonstrates the ethnic nationalist socialist purpose of this organization, who is at the forefront of the open borders/illegal immigration movement.

Here is an example of MeCha tolerance:
La Raza (http://www.americanpatrol.com/MECHA/MigraPigPaper-950500.html)

Here are the Brown Berets touting their own collectivist purpose and militarized identity. They are present at EVERY open borders event. Notice they also consider their leaders "commandantes." This is the enforcement wing of the open borders movement. And in this video they are bragging.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69wFvlZBB0o

Brown Supremacists attack freeman making video during an ethnic nationalist socialist event, praising the "race" of latinos and espousing a belief in open borders. As all authoritarian collectivists do, they try and limit free speech, even on public property:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9-ZsTpp6xg

The Terry Anderson show talks about illegal aliens who burn flags at a Veterans Cemetary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TisGp1CU3-g

La Raza
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kffjz-1vcgA

Freedom 4 all
03-10-2009, 12:06 PM
LOL, how many anti-immigrant threads would you say you make per day? Per hour? Seriously ese, why do you hate Mexicans so much?

BenIsForRon
03-10-2009, 12:07 PM
Oh, so Obama's secret agenda is to try and restore the homeland of the Aztecs... I would have never guessed.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 12:17 PM
LOL, how many anti-immigrant threads would you say you make per day? Per hour? Seriously ese, why do you hate Mexicans so much?

Perhaps he and others are opposed to a foreign invasion.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/SPP.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6Xs8bposCc

dannno
03-10-2009, 12:21 PM
I'm opposed to a foreign invasion, but hating Mexicans isn't going to stop it.

We need to repeal NAFTA and help Mexico restore their constitution so that the indegenous can have their lands back and have more control over their resources so they can be prosperous. Right now they cannot be prosperous due to the intricacies of the international banking system and multinational corporations.

In the 10 years after NAFTA passed, the poverty rate in Mexico doubled. That is why we have a big influx of immigrants. It is because of NAFTA, which we essentially forced Mexico to sign onto, and we forced them to change their constitution. It certainly was not their citizens who gave up their sovereignty, because they rose up and fought, but the US backed the Mexican military and the Zapatistas lost.

Chosen is very mixed up as to the cause of the current situation.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 12:27 PM
We need to repeal NAFTA

Good luck with that.
How about we get out of the UN too?
Maybe end our cooperation in Agenda 21.


Sorry but I don't see it happening. :confused: :mad:

Feenix566
03-10-2009, 12:29 PM
I think it's a shame that some people use the American flag to represent a message of hate.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 12:45 PM
Someone please show me just where on this forum the OP has suggested, or otherwise proclaimed that he hates Mexicans? I just love the way people jump to conclusions. All he has done is shown you the hate displayed from the other side and you twist it up into a pretzel and accuse Chosen of being the hater. Shameful.

dannno
03-10-2009, 12:48 PM
Good luck with that.
How about we get out of the UN too?
Maybe end our cooperation in Agenda 21.


Sorry but I don't see it happening. :confused: :mad:

OK, but you see rounding up millions of illegals including families in prison and sending them back across the border as viable??

Not only is that sickening, but it is only going to make the problem worse. Mexico is our neighbor. Send back the ones who commit crimes, great. Stop subsidizing them with welfare, again great.

This movement isn't about shipping all the illegals back across the border, it is about restoring our freedom and sovereignty. We can do all of that and help out Mexico in the process. Or we can start a stupid race war like Chosen seems to want to do. Think about it.

dannno
03-10-2009, 12:49 PM
Someone please show me just where on this forum the OP has suggested, or otherwise proclaimed that he hates Mexicans? I just love the way people jump to conclusions. All he has done is shown you the hate displayed from the other side and you twist it up into a pretzel and accuse Chosen of being the hater. Shameful.

Look up his posting history. He is a hate spewer.

One of his threads from the other day that went on for a few pages, somebody quoted some of his worst hate speech. Don't have time to search for it at the moment.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 12:53 PM
OK, but you see rounding up millions of illegals including families in prison and sending them back across the border as viable??

Not only is that sickening, but it is only going to make the problem worse. Mexico is our neighbor. Send back the ones who commit crimes, great. Stop subsidizing them with welfare, again great.

This movement isn't about shipping illegals back across the border, it is about restoring our freedom and sovereignty. We can do all of that and help out Mexico in the process. Or we can start a stupid race war like Chosen seems to want to do. Think about it.

Chosen is just trying to bring awareness to the fact that there is a war out there, Danno, whether you choose to admit it or not, and it's getting worse.

I don't think anyone wants to see millions of illegals rounded up. At least I don't. I think rather, that if our lame ass gov't would just enforce existing illegal immigration laws, they'd leave through attrition. Which is actually starting to happen anyway because our economy is tanking, so it's somewhat harder for them to get work and social services now.

dannno
03-10-2009, 01:00 PM
Chosen is just trying to bring awareness to the fact that there is a war out there, Danno, whether you choose to admit it or not, and it's getting worse.

I don't think anyone wants to see millions of illegals rounded up. At least I don't. I think rather, that if our lame ass gov't would just enforce existing illegal immigration laws, they'd leave through attrition. Which is actually starting to happen anyway because our economy is tanking, so it's somewhat harder for them to get work and social services now.

No, he has plenty of hate speech out there.

I'm all for awareness, I know there's a problem, but blaming the Mexicans is not going to solve the problem. If he wants to talk about the open border community, great, I have no problem with 80-90% of his individual postings, but where I have a big problem with Chosen is that he lumps in all illegal aliens with the open borders community, and then blames illegal immigration on all Mexicans, because of their poor attitude and lifestyle. Not only is he wrong about their attitude and lifestyle, but he pretends not to be a collectivist while lumping everybody from these groups into a single group and then blames them all.

He is also wrong because the real problem is our foreign and domestic policy related to Mexico and immigration and welfare. The US is the country that directly caused the massive influx of immigration from Mexico.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 01:08 PM
OK, but you see rounding up millions of illegals including families in prison and sending them back across the border as viable??

Not only is that sickening, but it is only going to make the problem worse. Mexico is our neighbor. Send back the ones who commit crimes, great. Stop subsidizing them with welfare, again great.

This movement isn't about shipping all the illegals back across the border, it is about restoring our freedom and sovereignty. We can do all of that and help out Mexico in the process. Or we can start a stupid race war like Chosen seems to want to do. Think about it.

Nope, I don't see that happening either. But that was the premise of REX84 and the FEMA camps.
It was also the premise of the KBR contracts to upgrade facilities. But there has never been any "real" attempt to secure the border of to limit the influx of illegals.

That is window dressing. They have a couple of high profile media targeted raids, to show that they are doing something. When in fact they have no intention of securing the borders.

The plan of NAFTA, CAFTA , SPP is to integrate the continent.
They are moving ahead with plans regardless of what anyone thinks or likes.

dannno
03-10-2009, 01:19 PM
The plan of NAFTA, CAFTA , SPP is to integrate the continent.
They are moving ahead with plans regardless of what anyone thinks or likes.

Ya, see that is my concern. Who cares about illegals when the international elite are looking to make them all legal anyway? Why not fight that? Let's fight the NAU and International Trade agreements, fight to stop giving socialism to illegals and end the war on drugs?


I mean, this Chosen guy is totally unnecessary and a giant scab of humanity.


"I, as well as my "friends," would gladly lend a hand to sink the entirety of this scourge on humanity into the abyss. If it meant that I had to exchange my life to ensure that Mexico gains nothing from the United States, I would gladly do this." - Chosen

Feenix566
03-10-2009, 01:25 PM
Someone please show me just where on this forum the OP has suggested, or otherwise proclaimed that he hates Mexicans? I just love the way people jump to conclusions. All he has done is shown you the hate displayed from the other side and you twist it up into a pretzel and accuse Chosen of being the hater. Shameful.

Okay


Si se puede! Is the mantra of both B Hussein Obama and the entire Open Borders Community. This movement, most especially from Mexico is basically run by ethnic national socialist racism.

First, he refers to Obama as "B Hussein Obama". There is only one reason for which he could be doing this: to attempt to associate Obama with Saddam Hussein. Of course, such an association is ridiculous. If Chosen were to make it overtly, he would be laughed off of any but the most right-wing forum. So he doesn't make the association overtly. He tries to conceal his intent and pretend as though he's not intending to make this association.

I have no doubt at all that if Chosen reads this post, he will respond to the accusation by saying that Hussein is Obama's middle name and there's nothing wrong with calling someone by their middle name. This is, of course, complete horse shit. No one called Bush G. Walker Bush. No one called McCain by his middle name. No one calls Ron Paul by his middle name. None of us even know what Ron Paul's middle name is. Calling someone by their middle name is totally abnormal, and simply isn't done without a reason.

Now that we've gotten through the first half of the first sentence of Chosen's post, let's move on to the rest of the sentence and the second sentence. He goes on to associate Obama (who's already been associated with Saddam Hussein) with the Open Borders movement. Then he goes on to associate the Open Borders movement with Mexican nationalists, socialists, and racists.

He even goes so far as to use the word "ethnic". Why do you suppose he would use this word? It's not typical for an intellectual debater to use the word "ethnic", except when talking about issues related to racism. That fact seems to contradict your assertion that Chosen is not motivated by racism.

So, getting back on topic, Chosen has just subvertly associated the Open Borders movement with nationalism, socialism, and racism. These three ideologies have very negative connotations in modern discourse. Why do you suppose Chosen would choose to make this association?

On its face, an Open Borders policy has absolutely nothing to do with any of these ideologies. Nationalism is the tendancy to identify an individual according to their nation of birth rather than the content of their character. An Open Border policy is the exact opposite of nationalism. Socialism is the forced reditribution of wealth by a central decision-making authority. Again, no connection to the idea of open borders. Racism is the practice of judging a person by their ethnic backgrouns. Again, an open borders policy goes directly against this ideology.

So, since the open borders idea has nothing to do with any of these ideologies, why has Chosen chosen to associate it with them?

Probably because he doesn't want you to think about the idea of having open borders. He just wants you to associate it with bad things, and therefore think of it in a negative light. He doesn't want to discuss the merits and/or drawbacks of an open borders policy in an open debate. He probably hasn't even thought about those things, because those things aren't what motivate him.

So what does motivate him? The most ironic part of all of this is that Chosen is motivated by nationalism and racism, two ideologies of hate he has just tried to associate with the open borders policy in order to discredit it.

That's just the first two sentences. I could go on, but I won't. I've made my point. Chosen is making dishonest arguments for his case, because he doesn't want to have an honest debate. He knows that in any honest debate, he would be forced to peel away the layers of his beliefs and reveal their core, which is racism.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 01:29 PM
Ya, see that is my concern. Who cares about illegals when the international elite are looking to make them all legal anyway? Why not fight that? Let's fight the NAU and International Trade agreements, fight to stop giving socialism to illegals and end the war on drugs?




Because you are NOT going to stop them.

The sooner people get it trough their heads that the Illusion of a representative govt is only an illusion., and that we are living under a foreign occupation, the better.

Being aware of foreign invasion is the first step in resistance.
I actually see the Mexicans as pawns in the game, but the pawns do get in the way of the more important pieces.

dannno
03-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Because you are NOT going to stop them.

The sooner people get it trough their heads that the Illusion of a representative govt is only an illusion., and that we are living under a foreign occupation, the better.

Being aware of foreign invasion is the first step in resistance.
I actually see the Mexicans as pawns in the game, but the pawns do get in the way of the more important pieces.

I completely agree that we are essentially, if not literally living under a foreign occupation.. but that foreign occupation isn't Mexico, it's fucking rich European elitist bankers. Why do you want to put a group of innocent people in the middle of this? It seems like that is part of their plan to sew seeds of confusion. It is just muddying the waters and distracting us from the real issue of WHO is occupying our government.

This is just another Problem -> Reaction -> Solution.

I already showed you how the elite created the problem with NAFTA.. then they exacerbated it by providing benefits lots and lots of jobs with a rapidly rising economy through credit expansion on the other side of the fence.

Don't fall for the elite's tricks. Stick to your principles and KNOW YOUR ENEMY.

dannno
03-10-2009, 01:38 PM
Yes I know my enemies
Theyre the teachers who taught me to fight me
Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission
Ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams
All of which are american dreams

-Rage Against the Machine

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 01:42 PM
I completely agree that we are essentially, if not literally living under a foreign occupation.. but that foreign occupation isn't Mexico, it's fucking rich European elitist bankers. Why do you want to put a group of innocent people in the middle of this? It seems like that is part of their plan to sew seeds of confusion. It is just muddying the waters and distracting us from the real issue of WHO is occupying our government.

This is just another Problem -> Reaction -> Solution.

I already showed you how the elite created the problem with NAFTA.. then they exacerbated it by providing benefits lots and lots of jobs with a rapidly rising economy through credit expansion on the other side of the fence.

Don't fall for the elite's tricks. Stick to your principles and KNOW YOUR ENEMY.

I agree. That is why I call the Mexicans ( and others ) Pawns in the game. I suspect they are the "shock troops" Many in our armed forces will follow orders that Americans would not.
I think Chosen is trying to raise awareness of the problem. It is largely ignored.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 02:14 PM
Okay



First, he refers to Obama as "B Hussein Obama". There is only one reason for which he could be doing this: to attempt to associate Obama with Saddam Hussein. Of course, such an association is ridiculous. If Chosen were to make it overtly, he would be laughed off of any but the most right-wing forum. So he doesn't make the association overtly. He tries to conceal his intent and pretend as though he's not intending to make this association.

I have no doubt at all that if Chosen reads this post, he will respond to the accusation by saying that Hussein is Obama's middle name and there's nothing wrong with calling someone by their middle name. This is, of course, complete horse shit. No one called Bush G. Walker Bush. No one called McCain by his middle name. No one calls Ron Paul by his middle name. None of us even know what Ron Paul's middle name is. Calling someone by their middle name is totally abnormal, and simply isn't done without a reason.

Now that we've gotten through the first half of the first sentence of Chosen's post, let's move on to the rest of the sentence and the second sentence. He goes on to associate Obama (who's already been associated with Saddam Hussein) with the Open Borders movement. Then he goes on to associate the Open Borders movement with Mexican nationalists, socialists, and racists.

He even goes so far as to use the word "ethnic". Why do you suppose he would use this word? It's not typical for an intellectual debater to use the word "ethnic", except when talking about issues related to racism. That fact seems to contradict your assertion that Chosen is not motivated by racism.

So, getting back on topic, Chosen has just subvertly associated the Open Borders movement with nationalism, socialism, and racism. These three ideologies have very negative connotations in modern discourse. Why do you suppose Chosen would choose to make this association?

On its face, an Open Borders policy has absolutely nothing to do with any of these ideologies. Nationalism is the tendancy to identify an individual according to their nation of birth rather than the content of their character. An Open Border policy is the exact opposite of nationalism. Socialism is the forced reditribution of wealth by a central decision-making authority. Again, no connection to the idea of open borders. Racism is the practice of judging a person by their ethnic backgrouns. Again, an open borders policy goes directly against this ideology.

So, since the open borders idea has nothing to do with any of these ideologies, why has Chosen chosen to associate it with them?

Probably because he doesn't want you to think about the idea of having open borders. He just wants you to associate it with bad things, and therefore think of it in a negative light. He doesn't want to discuss the merits and/or drawbacks of an open borders policy in an open debate. He probably hasn't even thought about those things, because those things aren't what motivate him.

So what does motivate him? The most ironic part of all of this is that Chosen is motivated by nationalism and racism, two ideologies of hate he has just tried to associate with the open borders policy in order to discredit it.

That's just the first two sentences. I could go on, but I won't. I've made my point. Chosen is making dishonest arguments for his case, because he doesn't want to have an honest debate. He knows that in any honest debate, he would be forced to peel away the layers of his beliefs and reveal their core, which is racism.


It is preposterous to claim that Chosen is a racist because he used Obama's middle name. Just because he has an islamic name doesn't mean Chosen is a racist for pointing that out in his argument. Obama is a globalist, who likely wants the merge, and who wanted the latino vote.


On its face, an Open Borders policy has absolutely nothing to do with any of these ideologies. Nationalism is the tendancy to identify an individual according to their nation of birth rather than the content of their character. An Open Border policy is the exact opposite of nationalism. Socialism is the forced reditribution of wealth by a central decision-making authority. Again, no connection to the idea of open borders. Racism is the practice of judging a person by their ethnic backgrouns. Again, an open borders policy goes directly against this ideology.

You're missing the point here. Nationalism is what the pro-illegals display when they flaunt the flags of their countries of origin. Their intention is to balkanize, so it has everything to do with open borders. And socialism is what they are used to, since every country south of our border is socialistic, naturally they will want the same here. And your definition of racism is just wrong:

Main Entry:rac*ism
Pronunciation:*r*-*si-z*m
Function:noun

: a belief that some races are by nature superior to others; also : discrimination based on such belief
–rac*ist \-sist\ noun

Using the word "ethnic" does not a racist make. Chosen makes a pretty good argument against the pro-illegal movement in this country. I dont agree with his entire stance, but at worst, all he does is stereotype. I remain unconvinced that he is a racist. A nationalist perhaps, but not a racist.

Feenix566
03-10-2009, 02:20 PM
Their intention is to balkanize, so it has everything to do with open borders.

Are you serious? Please tell me you're kidding. Do you know what balkanization means? I mean, come on...


all he does is stereotype. I remain unconvinced that he is a racist. A nationalist perhaps, but not a racist.

Stereotyping is what racists do. That's what makes you a racist. That's what racists are.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 02:27 PM
Balkanization is a geopolitical term originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller regions or states that are often hostile or non-cooperative with each other.

Now read about Atzlan, MECha, and La Raza


[http://www.mayorno.com/WhoIsMecha.html

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 02:33 PM
Are you serious? Please tell me you're kidding. Do you know what balkanization means? I mean, come on...



Stereotyping is what racists do. That's what makes you a racist. That's what racists are.

Did you not read the definition of racism that I posted? Please don't tell me you are one of those people who has merged the meanings of stereotyping, prejudice and racism into one definition. They are three distinct words with their own definitions. It is unfair to paint someone with a racist brush when they don't fit the definition of racism. I think this is a very dangerous practice.

dannno
03-10-2009, 02:50 PM
It is preposterous to claim that Chosen is a racist because he used Obama's middle name.

Ya, plus we already know he's racist from his statements against Mexicans.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 03:04 PM
Ya, plus we already know he's racist from his statements against Mexicans.

Really, Just did some looking for my self. Might be a good exercise for others.

We Support Our Troops
http://www.aztlan.net/brown_berets_slc_unit.jpg

http://www.aztlan.net/
caution,odd scripts running on that site

dannno
03-10-2009, 03:04 PM
Did you not read the definition of racism that I posted? Please don't tell me you are one of those people who has merged the meanings of stereotyping, prejudice and racism into one definition. They are three distinct words with their own definitions. It is unfair to paint someone with a racist brush when they don't fit the definition of racism. I think this is a very dangerous practice.

If one believes that a particular race is inherently different from another, then isn't one "better" than the other in some form? Hold that thought.

Now, I will admit that black people may tend to be more athletic than people other races, but it is not an inherent trait. That doesn't make me racist because that is entirely different from saying that all black people are really good at sports so we should ship them to Nike island or something. Chosen is literally saying that all Mexicans are inherently socialist due to their traditionally maternal tendencies within the family unit. I have studied Chicana/La Raza shit in college and it has nothing to do with force or coercion. Do you want to know a secret? Mexicans are actually Native Americans and many of been able to carry over some of their very distinct and beautiful views regarding man's relationship with nature and with each other. Much has been lost due to the Spanish influence, but you would be surprised how much is still left. I encourage you to study La Raza material for yourself, you won't like all of it and neither did I, but there is a lot of really good stuff there about sustainable communities and existing peacefully. There are a lot of good people involved in the movement, and certainly bad people as well. Just like anything else. Now, I don't agree with any of their views if they are associated with violence, but since they are in fact Native Americans I respect their desire to regain the ability to live off of the land that they inhabited for thousands of years. I think it is our right to stop them, but it's also their right (as a human, not under the Constitution or anything) to fight for their land back, and we don't need to insult them or say that they are inherently bad people for wanting to do so. People think they just want handouts, and some of them receive handouts, but those are just individuals receiving those handouts, it has nothing to do with their mentality.

Anyway, Chosen is a real piece of work, and he is in fact very racist. I believe those terms overlap more than you think, but I agree that someone can be one without being the other.

dannno
03-10-2009, 03:06 PM
Really, Just did some looking for my self. Might be a good exercise for others.

We Support Our Troops
http://www.aztlan.net/brown_berets_slc_unit.jpg

http://www.aztlan.net/
caution,odd scripts running on that site

What do they have to do with all illegal immigrants?!?! :confused:

There are white militias, of course Mexicans are going to have militias.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 03:15 PM
What do they have to do with all illegal immigrants?!?! :confused:

There are white militias, of course Mexicans are going to have militias.

Just for awareness.
They claim 1/3 of the united states is theirs, They are also expecting a civil war.
I am far to the north and out of that area. They are a reality that must be considered.

paulitics
03-10-2009, 04:11 PM
If one believes that a particular race is inherently different from another, then isn't one "better" than the other in some form? Hold that thought.

Now, I will admit that black people may tend to be more athletic than people other races, but it is not an inherent trait. That doesn't make me racist because that is entirely different from saying that all black people are really good at sports so we should ship them to Nike island or something. Chosen is literally saying that all Mexicans are inherently socialist due to their traditionally maternal tendencies within the family unit. I have studied Chicana/La Raza shit in college and it has nothing to do with force or coercion. Do you want to know a secret? Mexicans are actually Native Americans and many of been able to carry over some of their very distinct and beautiful views regarding man's relationship with nature and with each other. Much has been lost due to the Spanish influence, but you would be surprised how much is still left. I encourage you to study La Raza material for yourself, you won't like all of it and neither did I, but there is a lot of really good stuff there about sustainable communities and existing peacefully. There are a lot of good people involved in the movement, and certainly bad people as well. Just like anything else. Now, I don't agree with any of their views if they are associated with violence, but since they are in fact Native Americans I respect their desire to regain the ability to live off of the land that they inhabited for thousands of years. I think it is our right to stop them, but it's also their right (as a human, not under the Constitution or anything) to fight for their land back, and we don't need to insult them or say that they are inherently bad people for wanting to do so. People think they just want handouts, and some of them receive handouts, but those are just individuals receiving those handouts, it has nothing to do with their mentality.

Anyway, Chosen is a real piece of work, and he is in fact very racist. I believe those terms overlap more than you think, but I agree that someone can be one without being the other.

Does it make one racist for acknowledging Asians may be "generally and inherently "good at math? Is it sexist to think women are good with children, and men are good with fixing things? Are we even allowed to use humor anymore in this country, or is free speech only protected if you are a comedian like Chris Rock who makes a living off sterotyping blacks,whites, asians. You see, I don't want to lose that ability to be honest with each other, for humor or academic purposes, I think it should supercede political correctness. I have never been offended by what Chris ROck says. Perhaps Louis Farrakhan (can't think of who else
) if he says something about all whites being evil and damned to hell, etc. There is a huge difference between being racist and generalising, or stereotyping. I know the difference, and I believe overall there are very few racists among us, although the media would like us to think otherwise by broadening the definition of racism to the absurd. Chris Rock, Howard Stern, Eddie Murphy etc, has never offended me about race, although yes they have all been guilty of stereotyping.

I think we are way too uptight, to where nothing can be said anymore even for academic purposes. I remember the book on the bell curve IQ. Now, I did not read the whole thing, but it seemed as though there were discalimers throughout the whole thing about how it was generalising based on data, and for the purpose of study, to find out what groups have a higher or lower IQ and how income, education ties in with it. The book was NOT about race, but it would have been incomplete and nonsense to leave out race.
Of course, the authors who did an exhaustive study, were accused of being racists...even their own race were not found to have the highest IQ. There was no tangible evidence to prove they are the slight bit racist. Again, the authors who criticise Aipac are now predictably maligned as nothing but racist, because the book attakcs Aipec...not the Jewish people.
It just seems petty and overly poltically correct to accuse of racism until overt racism is propagated. This is only in response to what you said above, I have no idea about the original OP, and have not read or concerned myself with his other posts.

LibertyEagle
03-10-2009, 04:21 PM
Ya, plus we already know he's racist from his statements against Mexicans.

Personally, I adore Mexicans --- IN MEXICO, or here legally. If they legally immigrate, they are no longer Mexicans --- they are Americans.

I swear, those of you who have fallen for this multicultural BS, don't really get it. It's being used to rip us to shreds.

paulitics
03-10-2009, 04:36 PM
Personally, I adore Mexicans --- IN MEXICO, or here legally. If they legally immigrate, they are no longer Mexicans --- they are Americans.



Agreed. I live in a heavy populated illegal Mexican area, and find them to be very polite and family oriented (oh wait, did I stereotype..polical correctness police are coming). Anyway,I am trying to learn Spanish now to adapt. lol. I would like them to legally migrate, learn English, learn the constitution, and assimilate. However, I despise the idea of the NAU that follows the same blueprint as the EU. I despise the agenda, and the Macheovelian way they are trying to implement it. No, I want to keep America free, laws and free market intact, although this is quickly being eroded away.

dannno
03-10-2009, 04:44 PM
Does it make one racist for acknowledging Asians may be "generally and inherently "good at math?

That statement doesn't make sense. Generally and inherently are not the same, in a sense they are opposites. Asians are generally good at math from what I have seen and experienced, not inherently.



Is it sexist to think women are good with children, and men are good with fixing things?

It is sexist to think that women are only good at raising children and men are bad at it, and all women suck at fixing things. Yes. But not generally, because generally speaking you would probably be correct.




Are we even allowed to use humor anymore in this country, or is free speech only protected if you are a comedian like Chris Rock who makes a living off sterotyping blacks,whites, asians.

Dude, I'm not "PC" or whatever.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 05:22 PM
If one believes that a particular race is inherently different from another, then isn't one "better" than the other in some form? Hold that thought.

Now, I will admit that black people may tend to be more athletic than people other races, but it is not an inherent trait. That doesn't make me racist because that is entirely different from saying that all black people are really good at sports so we should ship them to Nike island or something. Chosen is literally saying that all Mexicans are inherently socialist due to their traditionally maternal tendencies within the family unit. I have studied Chicana/La Raza shit in college and it has nothing to do with force or coercion. Do you want to know a secret? Mexicans are actually Native Americans and many of been able to carry over some of their very distinct and beautiful views regarding man's relationship with nature and with each other. Much has been lost due to the Spanish influence, but you would be surprised how much is still left. I encourage you to study La Raza material for yourself, you won't like all of it and neither did I, but there is a lot of really good stuff there about sustainable communities and existing peacefully. There are a lot of good people involved in the movement, and certainly bad people as well. Just like anything else. Now, I don't agree with any of their views if they are associated with violence, but since they are in fact Native Americans I respect their desire to regain the ability to live off of the land that they inhabited for thousands of years. I think it is our right to stop them, but it's also their right (as a human, not under the Constitution or anything) to fight for their land back, and we don't need to insult them or say that they are inherently bad people for wanting to do so. People think they just want handouts, and some of them receive handouts, but those are just individuals receiving those handouts, it has nothing to do with their mentality.

Anyway, Chosen is a real piece of work, and he is in fact very racist. I believe those terms overlap more than you think, but I agree that someone can be one without being the other.

Are you purposefully ignoring the fact that Mexicans are a mix of spaniard blood and aztec blood? They were conquered by the spaniards, long before whites came into the picture. We didn't conquer them, we fought them for land and then purchased a lot of it via the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. They (the pro-illegal groups) should be pissed at the Spaniards and their own gov't for losing the war and accepting the sale. Like most collectivist groups, their anger is misplaced and their goals are misguided.

dannno
03-10-2009, 05:46 PM
Are you purposefully ignoring the fact that Mexicans are a mix of spaniard blood and aztec blood? They were conquered by the spaniards, long before whites came into the picture. We didn't conquer them, we fought them for land and then purchased a lot of it via the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. They (the pro-illegal groups) should be pissed at the Spaniards and their own gov't for losing the war and accepting the sale. Like most collectivist groups, their anger is misplaced and their goals are misguided.

I agree, Mexicans should be pissed at the Spaniards. I personally don't understand why so many are proud of their Catholic heritage, but that's their choice I guess.

However I think where the misconception lies is that all Mexicans are a mix of Spaniard/Aztec when in fact there were millions of people belonging to indigenous tribes other than the Aztecs including many that were inhabitants of North America who all lived in Mexico just a couple of decades ago before NAFTA. You see, before the Spanish came Native American tribes frequently traversed north and south between present day Mexico and present day U.S., and many of them ended up in Mexico, I don't know how so many ended up there to be honest.

Most Mexicans are in fact Native American, or at least very predominantly Native American.

I think some illustrations will help.

Spaniard:

http://www.legendsofamerica.com/photos-CO-Misc/spaniard.jpg


Native American:

http://www.nativeamericanchurch.net/images/subpage%20images/native_american_jesus_and_c.jpg


Mexican:

http://www.bajainsider.com/baja-business/images/mx-farm-worker-1932.jpg

http://www.cft.org/special/cal_hist/oxnard03.jpg



Now, there are a lot of Mexicans with lighter skin, however as I have mentioned I lived in areas with migrant labor camps around and all of the Mexicans I saw looked Native American and not so much Spanish.. The La Raza and Chicano movements are actually focused on this concept that Mexicans are predominantly Native American with Native American heritage, and that the whole spanish blood mixing thing is pretty much a myth considering the vast majority of Mexicans have little to know Spanish blood.

paulitics
03-10-2009, 06:04 PM
That statement doesn't make sense. Generally and inherently are not the same, in a sense they are opposites. Asians are generally good at math from what I have seen and experienced, not inherently.

I said may be in general terms inherently. I was giving a hypothetical, but do not have an opinion since I have done no research other than general observation. These topics generally don't interest me. My question was, if a researcher were to find that there may be some general correlation, does this make the research not true, or the research racist? It sounds like you are saying it is scientifically impossible, thus no research would be valid. You likely know more than me, and thus are right. My opinion is that it is not racist for someone to do the research on this topic.




It is sexist to think that women are only good at raising children and men are bad at it, and all women suck at fixing things. Yes. But not generally, because generally speaking you would probably be correct.

I was speaking in general terms. However, I don't think it is sexist to think that women may have biological maternal instincts that men don't. I don't think it is sexist to think the amygdala (the emotional center) in the brain is different among men and women if the research says it is so. For instance this information is useful in determining that homosexuality may be determined at birth, not by choice because of similarities between the female's brain and homosexual male's brain. You are going to have to include many scientists who discover this research to be true as sexist. To have a conversation about it, without accusations of sexism is necessary to advance knowledge.



Dude, I'm not "PC" or whatever.

I believe the difference between racism and PC is shown in a person's tendancy to think one race is inferior, and some level of hatred or intolerance is evident. By your definitions my grandparents would be racist. This is YOUR OPINION by your broad definitions, but I know them 100,000,000 times bettter and they are not racist.

By your definitions, you would have to include many researchers who inches close to these topics who may despise this same topics for fear of being called a racist.

I know myself I would be damn well sure someone was a racist before implying someone is. My opinion is that the one who always jumps to conclusions that a racist remark has been made, generally creates racist tensions, and (although probably unintentional) actually exascerbates the situation and puts down the group thought to be targeted., In other words a mountain is made out of a molehill, and division is created where before there may not have been any there. Yes I do think these precise definitions are silly and sort of P.C, with the inherent, general stuff, as people interechange them all the time, and they are not going to speak or write precisely. I understand what you meant, and again I would presume you are right about there being no inherent differences, and social pressures being the determinant.


So, I guess we can just agree to disagree and you call it racist and I call it P.C. This is why I usually stay out of these topics, yet I happened to break my own rule. This is not even in defense of O.P the person, just in defense of those who are defending the O.P's topic as valid.

Deborah K
03-10-2009, 06:12 PM
Those are great pictures.

Look, the fact of the matter is, NO ONE is "indiginous" considering that we all migrated originally from the cradle of civilization. Some came via the Bering Strait, others came via the Atlantic Ocean.

We humans, throughout history, ALL of us, including Mexicans and Native Americans, have dabbled in the business of conquering other people and lands. It seems to be a human condition. Since borders and nationalities have been established, the only way to dis-establish them is through globalization, i.e. a one world gov't., one currency, one religion. That isn't a choice I like.

I would rather have it the way it is, but ideally I wish we all could travel back and forth freely as long as we follow the laws of the land in which we are visiting.

pcosmar
03-10-2009, 06:25 PM
Now, there are a lot of Mexicans with lighter skin, however as I have mentioned I lived in areas with migrant labor camps around and all of the Mexicans I saw looked Native American and not so much Spanish.. The La Raza and Chicano movements are actually focused on this concept that Mexicans are predominantly Native American with Native American heritage, and that the whole spanish blood mixing thing is pretty much a myth considering the vast majority of Mexicans have little to know Spanish blood.

And all of that is completely irrelevant.

Let me make this clear. I am not a racist. As far a common usage goes, I am of mixed race.
I do not recognize races. As far as I am concerned there is only one race, Human.
I do however recognize political and national differences in the world.
If we are to have a country that is based on individualism, ( as it used to be) then we need to recognize and resist the forces of collectivism that are attacking us.

I see this an nothing else than a Marxist invasion, and they (by their own admission ) want to take a portion of our nation, by subversion or by force.

Zuras
03-11-2009, 12:07 AM
Danno, please don't ever post in anything related to mexico or mexicans again, particularly as it relates to genes. Actually, don't ever talk about genetics again. As you have no idea WTF you are talking about. I actually have looked at the haplogroupings for mexicans, and they are predominantely spanish gnetically, though with a significant amerindian influence. The two studies I've seen put their spanish/caucasian genes at about 55-60%. All of them showed over 50%. Now post me some saggy titted nat-geo "babes" so I can rest assured that all non-white women have saggy tits. I'm sure they are on your hard drive, somehwere.

Zolah
03-11-2009, 12:38 AM
Someone please show me just where on this forum the OP has suggested, or otherwise proclaimed that he hates Mexicans? I just love the way people jump to conclusions. All he has done is shown you the hate displayed from the other side and you twist it up into a pretzel and accuse Chosen of being the hater. Shameful.

Here's what I posted in a thread Chosen made (it was about 50 'Illegal Immigration' threads ago, so about 2 days ago..)


How many threads do you need about illegal immigration...we get it, you're against it, half a dozen threads in a day about it is a bit OTT and this alone raises questions, as does quotes from yourself such as...

"In my very humble opinion all people in Mexico are guilty."

and..

"I, as well as my "friends," would gladly lend a hand to sink the entirety of this scourge on humanity into the abyss."

Bearing in mind these are not contextualised right now, but those quotes don't look good in any context..I've only skimmed some of your posts but even so noticed an overwhelming zealotry that has already obscured any objectivity, in my opinion, I also saw you had a couple valid things to say about illegal immigration but the small amount of important things you may have said may go unnoticed completely due to, well, stuff like the quotes I posted ^.

Immigration isn't an issue with much importance for me, but importantly the difference here seems to be that I believe the illegal immigration problem is first and foremost a consequence of the American welfare state - then lax border control, whereas you seem to be plainly blaming the people of Mexico as a collective, which is quite bizarre, unlike anything I've ever come across.

Somewhat sorry for hijacking the thread but I was quite alarmed by the half dozen or so threads you've made on pretty much the same subject, how many do you need :\

And the language he often uses is what may be called "un-politcally correct", also known as generally being an asshole towards a collective of people as he sees them.

Zuras
03-11-2009, 12:49 AM
Here's what I posted in a thread Chosen made (it was about 50 'Illegal Immigration' threads ago, so about 2 days ago..)

.

Actually, a lot of the posters here have a lot of "peave issues". If I lived in the SW United States and saw my state being sucked dry by the vampire of illegal immigration, it might be high on my list of concerns. Perhaps concerning me even more so than "Glean bek is t3h weetard" or "whe be u faborite floundering fadder?!" and a variety of claptrap that gets far more click-through traffic.

Chosen
03-11-2009, 09:30 AM
Danno, please don't ever post in anything ...This would be my stance.

Chosen
03-11-2009, 09:34 AM
Here's what I posted in a thread Chosen made (it was about 50 'Illegal Immigration' threads ago, so about 2 days ago..)



And the language he often uses is what may be called "un-politcally correct", also known as generally being an asshole towards a collective of people as he sees them.Why don't you keep your vanity to yourself. Who cares what you said in another thread, it was irrelevant then. Anytime something exposes illegal aliens from Mexico and their ideals, you panic. Why? Because illegal aliens promise chaos and you think you can exploit this and establish some sort of mythological utopia.

The OP relates to an ethnic nationalist socialist hate group called the Brown Berets. The only believe in folks who are like them. They believe in a mythical land called "aztlan," similar almost exactly to the same formation of principles nazia used. All nationalist socialists form some mythical ties to a homeland. For the Germans in the 30's it was sudatenland, now amoung the mexicans it is pursuit of aztlan.

constituent
03-11-2009, 09:44 AM
The OP relates to an ethnic nationalist socialist hate group called the Brown Berets. The only believe in folks who are like them. They believe in a mythical land called "aztlan," similar almost exactly to the same formation of principles nazia used. All nationalist socialists form some mythical ties to a homeland. For the Germans in the 30's it was sudatenland, now amoung the mexicans it is pursuit of aztlan.

...and others still call it "America."

misterx
03-11-2009, 11:48 AM
Fill America with Mexicans and what do you get? Mexico. I don't think anyone here hates Mexicans, I for one am just partial to my own culture and traditions. When I want to experience Mexican culture, I will travel to Mexico. It's a nice place to visit, but I would prefer to live in America.

dannno
03-11-2009, 11:53 AM
I said may be in general terms inherently. I was giving a hypothetical, but do not have an opinion since I have done no research other than general observation. These topics generally don't interest me. My question was, if a researcher were to find that there may be some general correlation, does this make the research not true, or the research racist?

No, you still don't understand that the terms general correlation and inherently are incompatible. Your sentence didn't make sense. Learn what inherently means in a dictionary or something.

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:01 PM
I was speaking in general terms. However, I don't think it is sexist to think that women may have biological maternal instincts that men don't. I don't think it is sexist to think the amygdala (the emotional center) in the brain is different among men and women if the research says it is so.


No, it isn't sexist to think that women have biological maternal instincts. It is sexist to think that all women are great mothers and men are incapable of taking care of a child.

Are you beginning to understand what the word inherently means yet? Are you beginning to understand why Chosen is a racist?

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:06 PM
Personally, I adore Mexicans --- IN MEXICO, or here legally. If they legally immigrate, they are no longer Mexicans --- they are Americans.

I swear, those of you who have fallen for this multicultural BS, don't really get it. It's being used to rip us to shreds.

I haven't fallen for the "multi-cultural BS", what I have done is found out that it was the United States that caused the mass migration of Mexicans by destroying Mexico's soveirgnty and forcing them to change their constitution. Ron Paul is very well regarded because he treats the DISEASE and not the symptom in dealing with political problems. In other words, he doesn't use protectionist measures to deal with the inherent nature of the dollar status as the world's reserve currency, he correctly goes straight to attempting to fix our monetary system and printing money, which is the disease. Jobs going overseas is a symptom. Illegal immigration is a symptom of a disease. I want to attack the disease, which is welfare and other government services given freely to illegal aliens as well as giving the people of Mexico their constitution back.

misterx
03-11-2009, 12:13 PM
I think what he meant was that most Asians are genetically predisposed to outperform at math. It made perfect sense to me, and from the research I've seen it would be a true statement. Of course general and inherently don't mean the same thing. If they did, there would have been no need to use both words. I think he added, "in general", as a PC qualifier, so as not to give the impression that ALL asians are born smarter than ALL non-asians. I have to ask though, why are we arguing semantics anyway? Is it really relevant to the discussion at hand, or is it just a strawman?

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:24 PM
Danno, please don't ever post in anything related to mexico or mexicans again, particularly as it relates to genes. Actually, don't ever talk about genetics again. As you have no idea WTF you are talking about. I actually have looked at the haplogroupings for mexicans, and they are predominantely spanish gnetically, though with a significant amerindian influence. The two studies I've seen put their spanish/caucasian genes at about 55-60%. All of them showed over 50%.


You obviously didn't read my posts. If you did, you would know that I was not referring to the general population of Mexico. I was referring to people who are illegally immigrating here. They are predominantly Native American because agrarian indigenous tribes that have been inhabiting the lands for centuries were kicked off of their lands and THEY make up the vast majority of illegal immigrants in this country. In fact, that was the entire point of all of my collective (not to be confused with collectivist) posts. So you missed the entire point. Nice try, though.

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:26 PM
I think what he meant was that most Asians are genetically predisposed to outperform at math. It made perfect sense to me, and from the research I've seen it would be a true statement. Of course general and inherently don't mean the same thing. If they did, there would have been no need to use both words. I think he added, "in general", as a PC qualifier, so as not to give the impression that ALL asians are born smarter than ALL non-asians. I have to ask though, why are we arguing semantics anyway? Is it really relevant to the discussion at hand, or is it just a strawman?

I know exactly what he is saying, that is irrelevant. I never said he was racist or sexist whether he held those beliefs or not. In fact I tend to regard the things he listed as likely to being true. Some people are genetically pre-dispositioned to be better at ________.

What I am saying is that Chosen is racist.

pcosmar
03-11-2009, 12:31 PM
Why does this keep getting turned into a racist discussion, instead of the Marxist Invasion that it is.

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:42 PM
Those are great pictures.

Look, the fact of the matter is, NO ONE is "indiginous" considering that we all migrated originally from the cradle of civilization. Some came via the Bering Strait, others came via the Atlantic Ocean.

We humans, throughout history, ALL of us, including Mexicans and Native Americans, have dabbled in the business of conquering other people and lands. It seems to be a human condition. Since borders and nationalities have been established, the only way to dis-establish them is through globalization, i.e. a one world gov't., one currency, one religion. That isn't a choice I like.

I would rather have it the way it is, but ideally I wish we all could travel back and forth freely as long as we follow the laws of the land in which we are visiting.

I agree with all of that, that is why I don't support the militaristic side of their movement. But I also don't support kicking people off of their land. I mean, I've heard arguments like, "well, they bought it fair and square". Ya. Right. Like how we would go up to a particular Native American who held some sort of authority and proposition them to buy their land with a bunch of beads or personal wealth when it didn't belong to him but the rest of the people who lived on the land? I mean, can you imagine if somebody from China came up to your neighbor who happens to be the head of neighborhood watch and he gave them $50,000 for your house and property, along with $50k for each of the rest of the houses on the block and the Chinese guy came and kicked you and your neighbors out saying he bought it fair and square? (not being racist about Chinese people, just the fact that they have a lot of our FRNs)


Personally I would love to be able to spend more time in Baja, maybe even live there.. and I wouldn't mind if Mexicans traveled here, but first we need to restore sovereignty to the Mexican people, end the war on drugs and stop providing socialism to non-citizens.

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:44 PM
Why does this keep getting turned into a racist discussion, instead of the Marxist Invasion that it is.

The marxist invasion is coming from within our government, not from individual illegal aliens.

You could argue that illegal aliens are a tool for the marxist invasion, but the aliens themselves are not the invasion. They are here because of NAFTA. It was all part of the plan. The point is we need to stop blaming illegals, stop demonizing them, and instead demonize some of the ideas that some of the groups have as well as our government and how they have treated Mexico's sovereignty as well as our own sovereignty.

I don't disagree that some illegals and groups who support them have bad ideas, and I WOULD applaud Chosen for telling us all about them if he wasn't such a friggin racist and collectivist.

dannno
03-11-2009, 12:48 PM
Why does this keep getting turned into a racist discussion, instead of the Marxist Invasion that it is.

So, basically, the answer is because Chosen is a racist nut who should be using more tact in discussing these things, but I'm afraid he is incapable.

Zuras
03-11-2009, 02:14 PM
You obviously didn't read my posts. If you did, you would know that I was not referring to the general population of Mexico. I was referring to people who are illegally immigrating here. They are predominantly Native American because agrarian indigenous tribes that have been inhabiting the lands for centuries were kicked off of their lands and THEY make up the vast majority of illegal immigrants in this country. In fact, that was the entire point of all of my collective (not to be confused with collectivist) posts. So you missed the entire point. Nice try, though.

I thought I told you not to open your ignorant mouth again? One of these studies of which I've read was done on mexicans immigrants from Starr county, Texas. That study showed 57% caucasian haplogroups. Do something useful and go back to fiinding those those saggy tits.