Steve Bannon: American Patriot

[nikcers]

We wouldn't even know who Steve Bannon is if Mitt Romney would of Won. He was planning on building a bunch of tanks and taking them into east Germany to protect them from Russia. It looks like Reince Priebus got the last laugh. MAGA

[presence]

It you could answer the following I would really appreciate it.

1) Do you have proof that Bannon is behind this and not Flynn? If you have proof send it my way. I am interested.

“We're going to war in the South China Sea in five to 10 years, aren't we?

The Trump administration’s chief strategist has already taken control of both policy and process on national security.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/...ump-president/

Bannon — who famously compared himself to Star Wars villain Darth Vader, former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney and Satan — has already exerted a heavy hand over the formulation Trump’s foreign policy agenda, aides say, and is extending his influence ever deeper into the administration’s workings.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/trum...urity-council/

President Donald Trump granted controversial adviser Steve Bannon a regular seat at meetings of the National Security Council on Saturday, in a presidential memorandum that brought the former Breitbart publisher into some of the most sensitive meetings at the highest levels of government.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-isis-strategy

2) Again, besides targeting ISIS (CIA), do you have proof Bannon wants to expand the wars (against Iran or whoever) in the Middle East?

3) Proof?

As Tensions Rise, Steve Bannon and ISIS Get Closer to Their Common Goal: Civilizational War


Murtaza Hussain

February 11 2017, 9:05 a.m.

The Trump administration has taken sweeping, drastic measures that it says are necessary to protect Americans from the threat of terrorism, including its executive order halting immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries. But the radical policies and beliefs of this administration could just as easily end up fueling the narratives of extremist groups fighting the United States. When Trump ran a campaign built on promises to destroy ISIS, how can one explain the fact that supporters of the group in Mosul were reportedly celebrating his Muslim ban?

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/11/...izational-war/

Stephen Bannon has warned that Islam is “the most radical” religion in the world and that the United States is engaged in a struggle for civilization against Islamists.

Recordings show many of the newly-installed Trump figures who made regular appearances on Bannon’s show share the host’s ominous views on Islam and a hard-line stance on legal and illegal immigration that is at odds with decades of U.S. domestic and foreign policy.
USA TODAY

Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who helped craft the "Muslim ban,"

[]
Bannon personally spearheaded the order — and then overrode objections from the Department of Homeland Security that would have softened it somewhat:

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/29/1...-ban-explained

4) Bannon definitely supports the American System, for sure. High Tariffs, National Bank (Not Globalist Controlled) & Internal Improvements. (Hamilton, Clay, Lincoln, etc.) These are all terrible ideas but atleast they semi-passed for Constitutional (the National Bank is definitly not) at the founding of our Confederated-Republic and I would rather debate their merits than debate a globalist who wants to destroy the Constitution and create a global government.

5) True.

ok then


6) Personally, the only place I believe Federal Troops (and government) should be is on the borders of the Union. I would much rather him put the Army on the borders and skip the application process but, if he does support this, I believe this is only a major issue if you can prove #2.

personally choosing between a junta of nationalists vs a junta of globalists

Hey I appreciate the debate. Finally someone with balls.

wait till you've traded crypto for a few few years before making statements about balls

Is Trump's Deliberate Constitutional Crisis the First Stages of Coup?

It's hard to see last week as anything other than the prep work for a massive power grab by people who despise the rule of law.

Justin Rosario Jan 30, 2017

• 2.1K
  SHARES
  
• 2.1K
• 0

Politics
ICE Spent A Week Lying To The Public With Trumplike Disregard For Transparency



Culture
Islamic Studies Professor On Whether Rape and Slavery Are Wrong: It Depends



Politics
Republicans Are On The Run From Liberal Protesters (Sometimes Literally)






It might be comforting to believe that Trump accidentally stumbled into a constitutional crisis his first week in office, but it's far more likely that this is a test. And if we as a country fail it, our system of checks and balances takes one enormous step closer to collapsing.
Trump is a buffoon. We know this. He's incapable of leading the country in any capacity whatsoever. But he's not in charge. White nationalist Steve Bannon is and like most white nationalists, Bannon has no use for the Constitution or the rule of law. To this end, Bannon almost certainly engineered the Muslim ban knowing the courts would immediately move to strike it down. CNN's interpretation is that Trump's administration is comprised of political amateurs who didn't necessarily understand the confusion the illegal executive order would generate but that it a very generous take on what happened last week. A piece by Yonatan Zunger has a much dimmer view of this potential coup but it lists a cabal of bad actors that include Trump and Reince Preibus being active players, which seems unlikely. As I wrote about last week, Donald Trump is Steve Bannon's puppet so that's who we have to look to for answers.
The fact that so many Homeland Security and border patrol officials are ignoring the various court orders blocking the ban is troubling. But the fact that Trump's (Bannon's) administration is not telling them to stand down is dangerous and incredibly telling. This means that Trump (Bannon) is deliberately testing the waters to see how much of the law enforcement apparatus under his control will obey illegal executive decrees. By muddying the waters and sowing the maximum amount of confusion by not making the parameters of the executive order clear, Trump (Bannon) will find out how law enforcement will act under duress. If they're willing to "just follow orders," then we enter the death spiral of our constitutional republic with the end result being the very dictatorship the Constitution explicitly exists to prevent.
Another fact that points to Trump (Bannon) looking to do away with the power of the judiciary is this (Since this writing, the link has been restored but it's still unclear why it was missing in the first place):

It might seem like a minor detail but it speaks volumes about Trump's (Bannon's) contempt for the checks and balances that are supposed to keep him from being a king. By design, judges are not subject to the whims of the Executive Branch and cannot be removed from the bench easily. That leaves Trump (Bannon) no choice but to ignore them. If law enforcement follows his lead, the courts will be rendered powerless.
The Republicans controlling Congress can put a stop to this power grab but aside from Lindsay Graham, John McCain and a scant few others, congressional Republicans are either supporting Trump or oddly indifferent. The basic calculus seems to be that it's better to see if Trump wins so they can curry favor from their new overlord. A lot of people have been comparing the GOP's cowardice to the failure of Germany's Parliament to rein in Hitler because they're following the same pattern for the same reason: They think they can either control or get rid of Trump (Bannon) any time they want.
But if Trump (Bannon) is able to command blind obedience from law enforcement, who will stop him when he disregards the court's orders? Who will stop him when he ignores Congress? Who will stop him at all?
It's been just ten days since Trump (Bannon) took power and we're already on the brink of disaster. Even if this ploy doesn't work out, Trump (Bannon) will continue to set up confrontations with the judiciary, making it easier each time for law enforcement to ignore court orders and normalizing the power grab in the public's mind.
The question now become: How much erosion of our democracy and civil rights will the so-called "patriots" of the right accept in the name of "safety" and white supremacy? Unfortunately, history's already given us that answer.
- This article kills fascists
Please consider becoming a paid member of The Daily Banter and supporting us in holding the Trump administration to account. Your help is needed more than ever, and is greatly appreciated.

TagsDonald TrumpExecutive OrdersReince PriebusSteve BannonWhite NationalismMuslim Ban

[editing]

[TheCount]

Maybe he confiscates the money from Wallstreet?

Wall Street's money isn't theirs. The people will still pay for it.

Also, ooo, nationalizing the financial sector? How delightfully South American. Another example of how the far right is also the far left.

Maybe they run up the debt and default?

Government's money isn't theirs. People still pay for it.

Either way, it could be done without raising taxes even though I wouldn't do it.

You obviously didn't understand my post. There are ways that the American people pay for government spending which do not involve taxes. Inflation, for one.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Either way, it could be done without raising taxes even though I wouldn't do it.

You obviously didn't understand my post. .

Communication is a two way street. Maybe you need to improve your articulation.

Or, maybe people misunderstand you because you voted for Obama and Thomas Dixon and put "supporting member" in your avatar.

[dannno]

3) Bannon flatly believes muslims shouldn't live in the US and none of them are peaceful

I did not see any evidence for this other than some very broad hear-say.

[undergroundrr]

Critical thinking is hard. I'm sorry for pushing you to support your arguments, my apology.

No, critical thinking is required for the OP to distill and type the main points of the video that were so uber-inspiring to him and subject them to subsequent discussion. Asking us to spend 23 minutes with his honeyed voice and Cicero-like oratory while saying "Ain't that great" is the exact opposite.

Captured by the British/European Bankers 1913. We have been a globalist controlled entity ever since.

And you believe a guy who made his wealth at Goldman Sachs is going to fix that?

Does anybody question this guy's assisted rise to power?

Undistinguished navy career -> Goldman Sachs employee -> Hollywood executive -> Installed to replace mysteriously eliminated Andrew Breitbart -> National Security Council.

[Gumba of Liberty]

“We're going to war in the South China Sea in five to 10 years, aren't we?


http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/...ump-president/


http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/trum...urity-council/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-isis-strategy








https://theintercept.com/2017/02/11/...izational-war/




http://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/29/1...-ban-explained







ok then


6) Personally, the only place I believe Federal Troops (and government) should be is on the borders of the Union. I would much rather him put the Army on the borders and skip the application process but, if he does support this, I believe this is only a major issue if you can prove #2.

personally choosing between a junta of nationalists vs a junta of globalists


wait till you've traded crypto for a few few years before making statements about balls










[editing]

1. I need more context for the quote you provided. Where, when and in what context was Bannon speaking of going to war with China?
2. While you have provided a few links, I did not find one quote of Bannon explaining why we should expand the wars in the Middle East (excluding ISIS). If you have such a quote please provide it.
3. You did not prove that Bannon hates all Muslims. Provide a quote from Bannon himself. I'm not looking for secondary hear-say from a newspaper or website.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Wall Street's money isn't theirs. The people will still pay for it.

Also, ooo, nationalizing the financial sector? How delightfully South American. Another example of how the far right is also the far left.


Government's money isn't theirs. People still pay for it.

You obviously didn't understand my post. There are ways that the American people pay for government spending which do not involve taxes. Inflation, for one.

Wall Street extracts wealth from the American People, I'm not making this up. Audit the Fed (Wall Street) and confiscate fraudulently stolen assets. While I wouldn't use the trillions stolen from the Fed to rebuild infrastruture, I would rather fight a nationalist who wants to rebuild the country rather than a globalist who would want us like Venezula.

[Gumba of Liberty]

No, critical thinking is required for the OP to distill and type the main points of the video that were so uber-inspiring to him and subject them to subsequent discussion. Asking us to spend 23 minutes with his honeyed voice and Cicero-like oratory while saying "Ain't that great" is the exact opposite.




And you believe a guy who made his wealth at Goldman Sachs is going to fix that?

Does anybody question this guy's assisted rise to power?

Undistinguished navy career -> Goldman Sachs employee -> Hollywood executive -> Installed to replace mysteriously eliminated Andrew Breitbart -> National Security Council.

I'm sorry I didn't break it down for you (poor baby). I thought grow men with such strong opinions had the capability to listen to the actual words and thoughts of people they disagree with. I didn't realize that everyone on this forum bought the media line on Bannon and, like the democrats, would refuse to even hear the man out. But no, my mistake for not providing you notes

[presence]

3. You did not prove that Bannon hates all Muslims. Provide a quote from Bannon himself. I'm not looking for secondary hear-say from a newspaper or website.

“These are not Jeffersonian democrats,” he said of immigrants to Europe from Muslim majority countries in April of last year. “These are not people with thousands of years of democracy in their DNA coming up here.”[]“I think that most people in the Middle East, at least 50%, believe in being sharia-compliant,” Bannon said in December 2015. “If you're sharia-compliant or want to impose sharia law, the United States is the wrong place for you."


Susan Hennessey, a former lawyer for the National Security Agency, said Bannon appears to misunderstand the basic features of sharia and seems to use the term “sharia-compliant” as shorthand for observant Muslim. “Listening to his words carefully, he is saying observant Muslims don’t belong in the U.S. and isn’t modifying that statement to be about immigrants,” she said. “Plenty of natural-born American citizens are observant Muslims. Those people are every bit as American as Steve Bannon is, and they have real reason to fear his role in the White House.”

“If we didn’t hit the pause button today, is it already locked up that we’re going to be importing at least a couple of million Muslims whatever happens?”

“To be brutally frank, I mean Christianity is dying in Europe, and Islam is on the rise,” he said in an interview in January 2016 with a Breitbart reporter.
In November 2015, Bannon told his listeners it was time to have an “adult conversation” about national security.
“Some of these situations may get a little unpleasant,” Bannon said. “But you know what, we’re in a war. We’re clearly going into, I think, a major shooting war in the Middle East again.”


“Our big belief, one of our central organizing principles at the site, is that we’re at war,” he said.

"It's war. It's war. Every day, we put up: America's at war, America's at war. We're at war,”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...rine/97292068/

"Islam is not a religion of peace. Islam is a religion of submission. Islam means submission,"

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/31/politi...lam/index.html

Bannon's comments largely mirror the worldview expressed by Trump's National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, who has said he considered himself "at war with Islam or a component of Islam" after years of military service. He also referred to the religion as "a cancer."

[]

"The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam," Bush said. "That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."
Bannon called Bush "one of the dumbest presidents in the history of these United States."
"He made the dumbest [comment] being that Islam is a religion of peace," Bannon said.

[]


The road to the establishment of an Islamic Republic in the United States starts slowly and subtly with the loss of the will to win. The road to this unique hell on earth is paved with the best intentions from our major institutions. This political/accommodation/appeasement approach is not simply a function of any one individual’s actions but lies at the heart of our most important cultural and political institutions.

[]

We’re at the very beginning stages of a very brutal and bloody conflict, of which if the people in this room, and people in the church, do not bind together and really form what I feel is an aspect of the church militant, to really be able to not just stand with our beliefs against but to fight for our beliefs this this new barbarity that’s starting, uh that we will literally eradicate everything we’ve been bequeathed over the last 2,000 and 2,500 years.

there’s clearly a fifth column here in the United States – that needs to be dealt with immediately

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/steve...ry?id=45193278

[Gumba of Liberty]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...rine/97292068/



http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/31/politi...lam/index.html


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/steve...ry?id=45193278

I still don't see anything controversial that Bannon has said. He isn't wrong when he says Islam is a religion of submission. Islam means submission (to God, to the Koran, etc). He isn't wrong when he says that half of the Islamic community in the ME wants to live and observe Shira Law (opposed to Constituional Law or Natural Law - these are not libertarians) and their beliefs may be in conflict with American law and principles. He's also not wrong that war in the Middle East could expand. I don't see any quotes where he is advocated for it. You can't blame the guy for believing it could happen anyway. If you have a direct quote of Bannon supporting military intervention, sans ISIS (CIA), I would love to see it. Thanks.

[TheCount]

Wall Street extracts wealth from the American People, I'm not making this up.

That's what I just said.

Audit the Fed (Wall Street) and confiscate fraudulently stolen assets.

The Fed is not Wall Street.

If the Fed is propping up Wall Street, it is doing it by purchasing assets, not giving cash donations.

If you were to audit the Fed, discover improper support, and then remove that support, who precisely do you think is going to most feel the results of that? Wall Street? Are you out of your goddamn mind? No, just like during the financial crisis, it will be the American people who will suffer most.

Back to your so-called plan, let's think about this for a minute: you're going to "steal back" Fed money that has been spent on assets that should be (and would be, the second the news broke) worthless. How much do you think you're going to get by selling those?

Oh, and also... That's still government money and government spending. Spending trillions of Fed money on a wall for retards is not functionally different from spending the same amount propping up Wall Street. Who pays for this magical free money? The American people.

Your concept of a free lunch at the expense of the government is a pipe dream.

[nikcers]

That's what I just said.



Your concept of a free lunch at the expense of the government is a pipe dream.

I'm sorry I didn't break it down for you (poor baby). I thought grow men with such strong opinions had the capability to listen to the actual words and thoughts of people they disagree with. I didn't realize that everyone on this forum bought the media line on a free lunch, like the democrats, would refuse to even hear the man out. But no, my mistake for not providing you notes

[presence]

Cromwell had been responsible for translating

royal supremacy into parliamentary terms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cromwell

I am Thomas Cromwell in the court of the Tudors

- Bannon
[]agent of the despotic King Henry VIII

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...05d_story.html

Henry is known for his radical changes to the English Constitution, ushering in the theory of the divine right of kings to England. Besides asserting the sovereign's supremacy over the Church of England, he greatly expanded royal power during his reign. Charges of treason and heresy were commonly used to quash dissent, and those accused were often executed without a formal trial,

by means of bills of attainder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England


No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3

A difference emerged between the financial health of the king, and that of the country,

[Gumba of Liberty]

That's what I just said.



The Fed is not Wall Street.

If the Fed is propping up Wall Street, it is doing it by purchasing assets, not giving cash donations.

If you were to audit the Fed, discover improper support, and then remove that support, who precisely do you think is going to most feel the results of that? Wall Street? Are you out of your goddamn mind? No, just like during the financial crisis, it will be the American people who will suffer most.

Back to your so-called plan, let's think about this for a minute: you're going to "steal back" Fed money that has been spent on assets that should be (and would be, the second the news broke) worthless. How much do you think you're going to get by selling those?

Oh, and also... That's still government money and government spending. Spending trillions of Fed money on a wall for retards is not functionally different from spending the same amount propping up Wall Street. Who pays for this magical free money? The American people.

Your concept of a free lunch at the expense of the government is a pipe dream.

Your view of Wall Street is blind to the real power players. The Fed is owned by shareholders. These shareholders are Wall Street Banking Families. Audit the Fed. Find out how many trillions of dollars in gold, silver, land, infrstructure and businessess these Banking Families have stolen. Confiscate these funds. Pay off the National Debt. If Bannon wants to use one trillion (of many) repatriated from the Fed to rebuild US Infrastructure i will disagree with him but I will support his efforts to destory the globalist grip on power. With your logic, you would have supported the British overthrow of Mossadeq in 1953 because he was trying to nationalize Iranian Oil Fields and prevent the British from stealing Iranian Oil. Nationalists are ALWAYS > Globalists. Sorry.

[jllundqu]

My comments are based on the video and the video alone. I thought the video was great. Nothing he said was out of step from what Ron Paul or other liberty advocates have been speaking and warning about for years.

I didn't vote for Trump, but jeez at least be able to listen to a speech without hysterics.

Furthermore, I still have not seen/read any material about Bannon that would show him to be the boogeyman every news outlet is claiming he is. If someone would kindly send me some links or info on Bannon (preferably not from Huffpo), I would appreciate it. I genuinely want to know this man's mind. If he's a racist white nationalist, I'd like to know it, but I have not seen anything that would lead me to that conclusion.

[Gumba of Liberty]

I'm sorry I didn't break it down for you (poor baby). I thought grow men with such strong opinions had the capability to listen to the actual words and thoughts of people they disagree with. I didn't realize that everyone on this forum bought the media line on a free lunch, like the democrats, would refuse to even hear the man out. But no, my mistake for not providing you notes

Free lunch? So, if Bannon convinced Trump to 1. Sign Audit the Fed (Great) 2. Order the Justice Department to arrest and hang the bankers (Great) 3. confiscate their assets (Fantastic!) and 4. Return them to the taxpayers (The dream). You're mad that Bannon might use (a percentage of) the money for infrastructure projects? Picky much? The Fed has been stealing from Americans for over 100 years, these banking families have more wealth than the rest of the world. The US is either going to declare war on the bankers and reclaim the republic (American Revolution/Andrew Jackson style) or it will default on the debt, eventually. Either way, bankers or bond-holders will pay for the infrastructure. As a former banker, Bannon gets this (See Generation Zero for more).

[Brian4Liberty]

Like him or not, Bannon is in the crosshairs of the left and the neoconservatives. Smear campaign in full effect.

[presence]

Nationalists are ALWAYS > Globalists. Sorry.

Why when anti immigrant alt-right national socialists come to ronpaulforums they always co-opt Something-Liberty for their screen name?

why not Gumba of Nationalism, Restoration of Nationalism, etc.?

[Gumba of Liberty]

Why when anti immigrant alt-right national socialists come to ronpaulforums they always co-opt Something-Liberty for their screen name?

why not Gumba of Nationalism, Restoration of Nationalism, etc.?

Individualism > Localism > Nationalism > Globalism.

Classic Jeffersonian thinking if you understand it. I will align with nationalists to fight globalists. When the globalist are defeated, I will align with localists to fight nationalists. When the localists are defeated (or, at that point, I could probably just move to a freedom-loving locality), I will fight for complete and absolute individual sovreignty. Remember to play the long game. Your opponents are.

[Superfluous Man]

We can fight the nationalism/individualism debate after we defeat the globalists.

[Superfluous Man]

Also, what does 4th turning mean?

Is that a Mormon idea?

[Gumba of Liberty]

Also, what does 4th turning mean?

Is that a Mormon idea?

https://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Turnin...fourth+turning

[Gumba of Liberty]

My comments are based on the video and the video alone. I thought the video was great. Nothing he said was out of step from what Ron Paul or other liberty advocates have been speaking and warning about for years.

I didn't vote for Trump, but jeez at least be able to listen to a speech without hysterics.

Furthermore, I still have not seen/read any material about Bannon that would show him to be the boogeyman every news outlet is claiming he is. If someone would kindly send me some links or info on Bannon (preferably not from Huffpo), I would appreciate it. I genuinely want to know this man's mind. If he's a racist white nationalist, I'd like to know it, but I have not seen anything that would lead me to that conclusion.

+1

[undergroundrr]

Also, what does 4th turning mean?

Is that a Mormon idea?

Howe and Strauss. Another standard text for the alt-right.

I'll stick with Bastiat and Mises, thanks.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Howe and Strauss. Another standard text for the alt-right.

I'll stick with Bastiat and Mises, thanks.

I'll read both and be better for it.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Howe and Strauss. Another standard text for the alt-right.

I'll stick with Bastiat and Mises, thanks.

Also, I would love it if you could define this "alt-right" for me. Sound like some buzz word thrown out by the MSM to confuse and divide the simpletons. Don't get me wrong, I do believe "right" and "left" are important... when using GPS

[undergroundrr]

I'm sorry I didn't break it down for you (poor baby). I thought grow men with such strong opinions had the capability to listen to the actual words and thoughts of people they disagree with. I didn't realize that everyone on this forum bought the media line on Bannon and, like the democrats, would refuse to even hear the man out. But no, my mistake for not providing you notes

Sorry, drive-by Youtube bombing is one of my pet peeves. People who can't think for themselves throw lengthy diatribes by Molyneux, Bannon, whoever in your face and challenge you to watch it, never willing to state for themselves the ideas contained therein.

So I'll give you a Bannon video I brought up in another thread. It's 6 minutes shorter than yours -



And I'm glad to break it down for you if you don't have time to watch.

The new guy on the Principals Committee of the National Security Council HATES Iran.

Check out the blood-thirsty, slavering Islamo-hatred of Stephen Bannon and his Jihad Watch idol Robert Spencer in July 2016: "[Iran] is by far a greater enemy than the caliphate of ISIS, which is a mad, butchering murderous cult... [Iran a]re so out front by saying they're our mortal enemy, they're going to destroy us. It's in everything they talk about. They don't try to hide it. Why do we seem as a country and a nation incapable of accepting that and addressing it?... There are no [Iranian] moderates. The moderate guys are kinda crazy. The hardcore are really crazy."

Listen on as his guest goes on to say that Iran would be a total pushover in a military confrontation. Listen on as trump's right-hand man Bannon expresses his concern that US Military and Intelligence are systemically enabling Iran by not taking them seriously. Listen on as they scoff at US businesses who want to trade with Iran - "Are people looking the other way because of economic interests that they have in these sorts of relationships with people who are the sworn enemy of the United States of America?"

The guy's not even a free marketer.

Bannon is fundamentally against privacy and property rights.

Let's start with privacy. The man's main business interest since leaving Sachs has been Cambridge Analytica, a subsidiary of uber-DoD contractor and M-I Complex propagandist SCL Group. Cambridge Analytica, according to their CEO, has "somewhere close to four to five thousand data points on every individual... So we model the personality of every adult across the United States, some 230 million people.". Have you ever heard Bannon say anything bad about the NSA? If so, please find me a link, because I've been desperately trying to prove myself wrong about this.

Anti-globalists' first crusade is always immigration. Bannon is their hero on this issue. Anti-immigration policies are fundamentally Marxist. Yes, I can throw out the old "USSR had closed borders" chestnut, but why not just go back to Marx himself?

...with classical liberal, neo-classical, Chicago school, Austrian, and even some Keynesian economists agreeing that relatively unfettered labor mobility maximizes economic growth. John Stuart Mill even went so far as to say that migration was “one of the primary sources of progress.” Adam Smith opposed mercantilist restrictions not just on capital, but on labor as well. Ludwig von Mises, the guru of the Austrian school, advocated a system of free trade where capital and labor would be employed wherever conditions are most favorable for production.

The one prominent exception was Karl Marx. Although he doesn’t seem to have treated this subject in a systematic way, his comments here and there suggest that he was no fan of immigration. For example, he regarded England’s decision to absorb the “surplus” Irishmen being driven out of their country during the Great Famine not as a benefit but a ploy by the English bourgeoisie to “force down wages and lower the material and moral position of the English working class.” The popular, modern-day restrictionist canard that immigration from the Third World to rich countries is tantamount to “importing poverty” has its genesis in Marxist thought. Indeed, far from being embarrassed by this lineage, restrictionists tout it. Consider this quote by Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, the premier restrictionist outfit in the country: “Employer organizations spend enormous resources lobbying the government to import a ‘reserve army of labor,’ to use Marx’s phrase, so that they can hold down their labor costs and avoid unionization.”

It is ironic that half of the public in the free world, including America, the land of immigrants, sides not with free-market economists like Adam Smith and Ludwig von Mises—but with Marx, the father of socialism.

http://reason.org/news/show/immigrat...y-open-borders

Anti-immigration policies are a direct violation of your property rights. If I TRULY own my property, I should be able to invite my Iranian citizen friend to fly from Tehran and hang out at my house any time I want. If his country prohibits that, then they suck and are anti-liberty. If MY country prohibits that, then it's the American government that controls and owns my property, not me. Similarly, if I own a business, I should be able to hire ANYBODY I WANT WHENEVER I WANT FOR ANY POSITION I WANT AND ANY PAY I WANT, INCLUDING AN UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT. I think this is worth shouting.

Never try to imply anti-immigration rhetoric is pro-liberty. Fess up to what you really are.

I don't need to watch some political speech by Bannon. There are hours upon hours of his radio shows out there. He's stated his views clearly. And certain issues he hasn't commented on are conspicuous in their absence.

[undergroundrr]

Also, I would love it if you could define this "alt-right" for me. Sound like some buzz word thrown out by the MSM to confuse and divide the simpletons. Don't get me wrong, I do believe "right" and "left" are important... when using GPS

Good to hear you reject the left-right paradigm. It's a start.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Sorry, drive-by Youtube bombing is one of my pet peeves. People who can't think for themselves throw lengthy diatribes by Molyneux, Bannon, whoever in your face and challenge you to watch it, never willing to state for themselves the ideas contained therein.

So I'll give you a Bannon video I brought up in another thread. It's 6 minutes shorter than yours -



And I'm glad to break it down for you if you don't have time to watch.



The guy's not even a free marketer.

Bannon is fundamentally against privacy and property rights.

Let's start with privacy. The man's main business interest since leaving Sachs has been Cambridge Analytica, a subsidiary of uber-DoD contractor and M-I Complex propagandist SCL Group. Cambridge Analytica, according to their CEO, has "somewhere close to four to five thousand data points on every individual... So we model the personality of every adult across the United States, some 230 million people.". Have you ever heard Bannon say anything bad about the NSA? If so, please find me a link, because I've been desperately trying to prove myself wrong about this.

Anti-globalists' first crusade is always immigration. Bannon is their hero on this issue. Anti-immigration policies are fundamentally Marxist. Yes, I can throw out the old "USSR had closed borders" chestnut, but why not just go back to Marx himself.



Anti-immigration policies are a direct violation of the property rights. If I TRULY own my property, I should be able to invite my Iranian citizen friend to fly from Tehran and hang out at my house any time I want. If his country prohibits that, then they suck and are anti-liberty. If MY country prohibits that, then it's the American government that controls and owns my property, not me. Similarly, if I own a business, I should be able to hire ANYBODY I WANT WHENEVER I WANT FOR ANY POSITION I WANT AND ANY PAY I WANT, INCLUDING AN UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT. I think this is worth shouting.

Never try to imply anti-immigration rhetoric is pro-liberty. Fess up to what you really are.

I don't need to watch some political speech by Bannon. There are hours upon hours of his radio shows out there. He's stated his views clearly. And certain issues he hasn't commented on are conspicuous in their absence.

Of course you don't. I'll respond to the rest later.