Daniel1911

Partick, I think you accurately point out that current day Americans, including but not limited to African Americans, Asians, Hispanics and other "races," (all of whom had ancestors involved in actions taken against Native Americans in that era) cannot be expected to allow a suicidal invasion to occur now because it happened to the prior residents of this geographic area (the current US). It is worth adding that we do in fact allow 10s of thousands of immigrants into the US per year. The particular issue with the Syrians is of course a matter of trust - these folks come from a region with well-known animosity toward our country and not without substantial justification. Thus the question is do we allow people in who may want to destroy us. I think many prudent minds are having second thoughts about this while the collectivists, including our collectivist-in-chief, are not (or perhaps not having any thoughts beyond the collective). If the Native Americans could live that era over again, if they had any idea what would happen to them, would they do even more to keep the "immigrants" out. Hell yes, they would. I think there are some strong parallels between their position then and ours now.

With regard to Dsayers video: the cognitive dissonance I experienced was with the video narrator's likening the u.s. government's imperial behavior (largely in the absence of the approval of it's propagandized, manipulated and uninformed citizenry) with the purposeful and direct brutality of islamic fascists. In order to show that u.s. actions were worse, I think you'd have to argue that the islamic fascists' actions were also conducted by a government that equally manipulated and misinformed its citizens, but that argument wasn't made. Alternatively, one could argue that u.s. citizens acting of their own accord and without government assistance committed these bombing raids and other nasty things; perhaps those arguments could have been compellingly made, but they weren't. The video looks like a classic straw-man case to me. One of the things I think we have to come to a better realization of is that "we" in the u.s. are not the u.s. government/military, so saying that "we" bombed this or that country entails a very complex argument about how "we," the citizens, could have possibly stopped it. "We" can merely vote and of course engage in the political process; this does not allow us to have a say in military actions in any direct way. "We" were involved in these actions only by indirect and increasingly questionable means as our government wanders farther into fascism. There seems to be an increasing distance between what US citizens want and what the US gov't does. The video does bring this fact to the surface and hopefully helps to cause us to question our government, and that is a good thing for sure.

Regarding the video posted by J.D. Stembal: it is compelling and there are many observations made in the video that I have noted to myself at one point or another but didn't quite know how to make sense of. I particularly noted Sarkozy's comments about how something must be done about the "white race." The point of the video is clear that some worldwide power wants to get rid of white people, but it didn't really say why. Who would benefit from this and how could they pull it off across the world? The only thing I can think of is that white people may be the primary resistance to global world government. I am not purposely being obtuse, just trying to understand the "end game."