Rand opposes using military for deportations

[Invisible Man]

Go to their website and look in the top left corner, tell me what you see.

https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/

A lot of marketing material does say "World Government Summit" but their official name is "World Governments Summit".

Their old name was "Government Summit" and it was renamed to "World Governments Summit" in 2015.

So it used to be called the World Government (sg) Summit, which name is still there in its web address, and they recently changed it to plural. When Musk attended, it apparently hadn't changed yet. He even says in his remarks, "I know this is called the World Government Summit."

I don't see what difference it makes though. It seems like picking at the wrong detail.

[jmdrake]

Go to their website and look in the top left corner, tell me what you see.

https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/

A lot of marketing material does say "World Government Summit" but their official name is "World Governments Summit".

Their old name was "Government Summit" and it was renamed to "World Governments Summit" in 2015.

So.....all they have to do to prove to you that they aren't globalists is to slap an "S" on the end of the word "Government?" Like an "S" on the chest of Superman?

From their website: (Thank you for linking to it).

Our Mission
To Inspire and Enable the Next Generation of Governments.

Our Vision
To Become the Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments.

How is a "Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments" not "globalist?"

[TheTexan]

So it used to be called the World Government (sg) Summit, which name is still there in its web address, and they recently changed it to plural. When Musk attended, it apparently hadn't changed yet. He even says in his remarks, "I know this is called the World Government Summit."

I don't see what difference it makes though. It seems like picking at the wrong detail.

No they changed it from "Government Summit" to "World Governments Summit".

It was never officially called "World Government Summit".

A lot of their marketing material does say "World Government Summit" but that's not its official name.

[jmdrake]

Reminds me of a comparison I recently made. There are those on the radical left right now that are hysterical about the potential for military going house to house to look for illegal immigrants. In fairness, I put the shoe on the other foot and tried to think of instances where "my side" has been afraid about government going house to house.

We often hyperbolically warn that the left would like to send military to go house to house to take our weapons. Is it an irrational fear? Didn't they actually do that after Hurricane Katrina?

Then there were Covid lockdowns. Was it police, military or both that a few times enforced stay at home lockdowns? IIRC, there were videos of them marching down residential streets, shooting pepper balls at people who didn't stay in their houses.

So, I can take a couple of things from that.

One, it's not an entirely irrational fear that troops (of some kind) could march down streets or go door to door.

Two, it's usually the leftist issues where troops (of some kind) are sent into the population.

Yep.

[TheTexan]

So.....all they have to do to prove to you that they aren't globalists is to slap an "S" on the end of the word "Government?" Like an "S" on the chest of Superman?

From their website: (Thank you for linking to it).

Our Mission
To Inspire and Enable the Next Generation of Governments.

Our Vision
To Become the Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments.

How is a "Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments" not "globalist?"

I generally define Globalism as a constant pressure to politically and culturally integrate, resulting in a globally homogenous population all following the same set of rules.

A "Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments" does not meet the above definition, as it creates no pressure to politically or culturally integrate.

[PAF]

I generally define Globalism as a constant pressure to politically and culturally integrate, resulting in a globally homogenous population all following the same set of rules.

A "Global Platform for Shaping Future Governments" does not meet the above definition, as it creates no pressure to politically or culturally integrate.

Ok, but you never responded to this which meets your criteria:

Debt From Above: The Carbon Credit Coup


GREEN+ has been piloted in a handful of Latin American cities since its founding and is due to launch globally in just a few weeks time. Most of the GREEN+ agreements with “subnational” governments have remained focused on Latin America. Per the program, the subnational agreements have established the “rules and requirements to enable accounting and crediting with GREEN+ policies and measures and/or nested projects, implemented as GHG mitigation activities,” with GREEN+ being described as “the planet’s new subnational government advisory mechanism.”

Key to the program are the services provided by GREEN+ founding member Satellogic, an Argentina-founded company closely aligned with Peter Thiel’s Palantir and Elon Musk’s SpaceX that specializes in sub-meter resolution satellite surveillance. Satellogic, a contractor to the US government and whose founders were also previously contactors for the US’ DHS, NSA and DARPA, will provide surveillance data of the entire world’s “protected areas” to GREEN+’s governing coalition, composed of the NGOs CC35, the Global Footprint Network, The Energy Coalition and other “respected stakeholders.”



MUCHO more here as the article continues:

https://unlimitedhangout.com/2024/04...n-credit-coup/

Next article:

Get Ready for the Republican Carbon Market

We should pick this up in the Get Ready for the Republican Carbon Market thread so as not to derail.

[Invisible Man]

No they changed it from "Government Summit" to "World Governments Summit".

It was never officially called "World Government Summit".

A lot of their marketing material does say "World Government Summit" but that's not its official name.

It isn't now. It used to be. It was in 2023 when Musk spoke there. Why would you think that the name that appeared on their own marketing material was not official? What more does it take to make something official?
https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/events/2023

The more important point you made was that the mere fact that Musk spoke there doesn't incriminate Musk in any way.

[TheTexan]

Ok, but you never responded to this which meets your criteria:

I was getting to it.

As far as I can tell, with very brief research, GREEN+, with its emphasis on "subnational" agreements, can be described as mildly globalist. They want all "subnational protected areas" to follow the same rules. I won't go as far to say that they are a super globalist organization, but they certainly could become one in the future.

And again, with very brief research, I could not find a tangible link between Elon Musk and GREEN+ except for the fact that SpaceX launches their satellites into space. That's just called "doing business", and is not globalism.

I could be wrong on either of the above points, as I did only brief research. Feel free to correct me on either of the above points.

[PAF]

I was getting to it.

As far as I can tell, with very brief research, GREEN+, with its emphasis on "subnational" agreements, can be described as mildly globalist. They want all "subnational protected areas" to follow the same rules. I won't go as far to say that they are a super globalist organization, but they certainly could become one in the future.

And again, with very brief research, I could not find a tangible link between Elon Musk and GREEN+ except for the fact that SpaceX launches their satellites into space. That's just called "doing business", and is not globalism.

I could be wrong on either of the above points, as I did only brief research. Feel free to correct me on either of the above points.

The only thing that I will say, is that I personally try to read/listen as much as I can before responding to a post. That way I don't muck up threads by saying something meaningless about topics that I don't know about. Something that I wish the Left [and todays Right] would do more of

[Matt Collins]

Personally, I don't care if they use stormtroopers to load illegal into railcars, just as long as they are removed.

Then you clearly hate freedom and the Constitution.

[TheTexan]

It isn't now. It used to be. It was in 2023 when Musk spoke there. Why would you think that the name that appeared on their own marketing material was not official? What more does it take to make something official?

For me personally the name they use on the logo of the homepage of their website will typically be the name they prefer to go by.

But it doesn't matter, this is getting into tedium.

The point is, it's not a "World Government" Summit, but rather a "World Summit" of Governments. Two very different things. "World Government Summit" would at first glance imply the former, but the alternate/official/just-as-official-as-the-other name "World Governments Summit", makes it clear that it's the latter.

Capiche?

[PAF]

Personally, I don't care if they use stormtroopers to load illegal into railcars, just as long as they are removed.

Then you clearly hate freedom and the Constitution BILL OF RIGHTS.

Your computer made a typo ;-)

[Invisible Man]

For me personally the name they use on the logo of the homepage of their website will typically be the name they prefer to go by.

But it doesn't matter, this is getting into tedium.

The point is, it's not a "World Government" Summit, but rather a "World Summit" of Governments. Two very different things. "World Government Summit" would at first glance imply the former, but the alternate/official/just-as-official-as-the-other name "World Governments Summit", makes it clear that it's the latter.

Capiche?

In 2023, when Elon was there, it was called "World Government Summit." The word "government" in the singular there probably referred to the concept of "government" as an abstraction (i.e. "government" was the topic of this summit, and it was a world summit about this topic), not referring to a singular entity of a world government.

[TheTexan]

In 2023, when Elon was there, it was called "World Government Summit." The word "government" in the singular there probably referred to the concept of "government" as an abstraction (i.e. "government" was the topic of this summit, and it was a world summit about this topic), not referring to a singular entity of a world government.

You're right

Back in 2023 the homepage logo was "World Government Summit"

https://web.archive.org/web/20230101...ummit.org/home

I wonder if they changed it to "World Governments Summit" because of Elon's remarks on "World Government"?

[sparebulb]

Then you clearly hate freedom and the Constitution.

Yes, I hate the illegals enough to deny them free stuff and existing within my geo-political space.

If they want to remain and become compost, I'm ok with that as well.

[sparebulb]

When did TRI-lateral contracts, enforced by government to boot, as opposed to Private Contract Rights between employer/employee, become popular here on the forum?

My desire to remove illegals by any means isn't really the worst pro-government stance that you see here on the forum.

[Invisible Man]

My desire to remove illegals by any means isn't really the worst pro-government stance that you see here on the forum.

Can you think of a worse one?

[PAF]

Can you think of a worse one?

He just shredded the entire Bill of Rights with one single sentence and by "any means". I can't think of anything worse.

[TheTexan]

It wouldn't even be that hard. Just deport anyone of color that doesn't speak English with an American accent.

Would there be some false positives? Small price to pay to live in a free country

[TheTexan]

Could even deputize Americans to do it. $30 for every illegal over the border.

I'd be a millionaire in days

[Matt Collins]

It wouldn't even be that hard. Just deport anyone of color that doesn't speak English with an American accent.

Would there be some false positives? Small price to pay to live in a free country

This has got to be a joke

[CCTelander]

This has got to be a joke

One hopes.

[PAF]

This has got to be a joke

He's joking, but he's definitely serious.

[RJB]

This has got to be a joke

I thought the open border people were joking. Turns out they were serious idiots and Marxists.

[Matt Collins]

Yes, I hate the illegals enough to deny them free stuff and existing within my geo-political space.

If they want to remain and become compost, I'm ok with that as well.

wow, that's one of the most racist xenophobic things I've seen around here.

No one should get "free" stuff from the government (taxpayers) and ideally people shouldn't tresspass borders and the government should keep the borders secure.... but that's not the same thing as rounding people up and putting them on trains by the military to move them over to the border... geeze

[CCTelander]

[PAF]

I thought the open border people were joking. Turns out they were serious idiots and Marxists.

I'm not falling for that "open borders" propaganda crap brought on by Big Government Advocates. What we actually have is a "closed" border where people are processed into the system and given those really neat and preloaded Government ID Cards.

If it was up to me, the border would be "open", Private Contract Rights between employee/employer would be honored, employers wouldn't be forced to pay Government Mandated Minimum Wage, workers would not have to pay Federal Taxes which only makes fed.gov bigger and stronger, and if people find work, good for them, otherwise walk/travel FREELY without "Papers Please" for someplace else to go, including but not limited back to Mexico as long as it wasn't on the tax payer dime.

As a bonus, I wouldn't have to be threatened by MIC Virtual Walls, Peter Thiel and other federal contractors 24/7 Surveillance systems, eVerify for "permission" to get a job, and Biometric ID in place of "papers please" to prove to Government Goons that I am actually a person who enjoys my Bill of Rights.

Don't bother rebutting this post, otherwise I will consider you a fully-fledged member of the Peter Thiel/Elon Musk Network and the "let's pretend we are libertarian/republican" which is the lowest of the low.

Government created the problem, there ain't no way in he|| I'm looking for a "solution" from them.

[CCTelander]

I'm not falling for that "open borders" propaganda crap brought on by Big Government Advocates. What we actually have is a "closed" border where people are processed into the system and given those really neat and preloaded Government ID Cards.

If it was up to me, the border would be "open", Private Contract Rights between employee/employer would be honored, employers wouldn't be forced to pay Government Mandated Minimum Wage, workers would not have to pay Federal Taxes which only makes fed.gov bigger and stronger, and if people find work, good for them, otherwise walk/travel FREELY without "Papers Please" for someplace else to go, including but not limited back to Mexico as long as it wasn't on the tax payer dime.

As a bonus, I wouldn't have to be threatened by MIC Virtual Walls, Peter Thiel and other federal contractors 24/7 Surveillance systems, eVerify for "permission" to get a job, and Biometric ID in place of "papers please" to prove to Government Goons that I am actually a person who enjoys my Bill of Rights.

Don't bother rebutting this post, otherwise I will consider you a fully-fledged member of the Peter Thiel/Elon Musk Network and the "let's pretend we are libertarian/republican" which is the lowest of the low.

Government created the problem, there ain't no way in he|| I'm looking for a "solution" from them.

In bold. It’s really just that simple. Why so-called “liberty advocates” have so much difficulty with that simple truth, well, it really is discouraging.

[CaptUSA]

I'm not falling for that "open borders" propaganda crap brought on by Big Government Advocates. What we actually have is a "closed" border where people are processed into the system and given those really neat and preloaded Government ID Cards.

If it was up to me, the border would be "open", Private Contract Rights between employee/employer would be honored, employers wouldn't be forced to pay Government Mandated Minimum Wage, workers would not have to pay Federal Taxes which only makes fed.gov bigger and stronger, and if people find work, good for them, otherwise walk/travel FREELY without "Papers Please" for someplace else to go, including but not limited back to Mexico as long as it wasn't on the tax payer dime.

As a bonus, I wouldn't have to be threatened by MIC Virtual Walls, Peter Thiel and other federal contractors 24/7 Surveillance systems, eVerify for "permission" to get a job, and Biometric ID in place of "papers please" to prove to Government Goons that I am actually a person who enjoys my Bill of Rights.

Don't bother rebutting this post, otherwise I will consider you a fully-fledged member of the Peter Thiel/Elon Musk Network and the "let's pretend we are libertarian/republican" which is the lowest of the low.

Government created the problem, there ain't no way in he|| I'm looking for a "solution" from them.

It's a matter of which order you do that in. I think most of us agree that "open" borders would be fine if the welfare state didn't exist. But it does. So in order for your house to stand, you must first build the foundation (remove the artificial incentives). Until you do that, you can't even talk about open borders because the entire structure of society collapses. Which, let's not be coy, is what you actually want.

[RJB]

LOL I don't give a damn what you say that you consider me, Marxist. Because I know that you know it's a lie. It's what you do.

My response is for those reading who still take your clown act seriously.

Don't bother rebutting this post, otherwise I will consider you a fully-fledged member of the Peter Thiel/Elon Musk Network and the "let's pretend we are libertarian/republican" which is the lowest of the low.

To those reading. This is a great example of full on woke, marxist dialectical BS, straight from Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.

Let's start with their border "strategy." Anyone with the weakest understanding of history knows that no society survived weak borders. PAF isn't stupid. He knows exactly what he's doing. And people like him are why things are screwed up.

These people tried to silence you by claiming if you wanted a secured border, you are a racist, a hater, and other crap. Then out of the other side of their mouth, they show their hatred for YOU and said Americans are lazy stupid and unamerican and we need a flood of immigrants. You have seen this many times. Yes dialectical thinking allows them to hold two opposing views simultaneously. They hate you, yet call you a hater. It's a crude tactic. That was Zippy's only card and it worked for a while.


Now we're dealing with Zippy 3.0s They all claim to be anarchists (I am not including real anarchists, who I respect. I am talking about these frauds.) These fake ones "considered" minarchists who wanted border security as neocons. When neocons have classically wanted open borders, like PAF. His pretending to be an anarchists is another part of marxist dialectics. They pretend to be one extreme and say that anyone outside of the extreme is a statist, neocon, etc. It is exactly the strategy of woke activists. If you ask if men in a dress should go in women's spaces, you are "considered" transphobic. If you question white fragility, you are racist. Depending upon their strategy, they claim to love gays, blacks, anarchists, etc, but deep inside you can tell they hate you. This is how they shut down conversations. $#@! 'em. I don't play that game. Nor should YOU!


They have no principles. They use principles as weapons and then discard them. This guy in particular shilled heavily for RFK Jr (now he denies it lol). When I said I admired RFK's honesty but could not vote for him because of his stance against the 2nd Amendment, this guy called me a statist saying that my stance on the second Amendment meant that I believed that my liberties came from government decree. He's spoken against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights many times in the past, when it was convenient. Now in this thread he claims to be its champion? LOL

Being called or considered a neocon, a statist, etc doesn't bother me. People throw around names in their passion. However, when someone is deceptive, using strategies straight out of "Rules for Radicals," screw 'em. They deserve no respect nor do they deserve to be taken seriously.

Am I being a hypocrite calling them Marxists? No. They hold no principles. They "debate" and behave in the manner that I described. They just want to bring it all down. And they have done a very good job at bringing this country down so far. Yes, America was a great country at one time, until we gave a damn what these marxists "CONSIDERED!"