Alan C. Posted September 19, 2015 Posted September 19, 2015 Hungary's minister for foreign affairs and trade claims 35M migrants heading for Europe
Guest Gee Posted September 19, 2015 Posted September 19, 2015 This http://fff.org/2014/04/23/what-about-the-u-s-annexation-of-mexico/is how I understand the story. And I quote from your source...... So, U.S. officials concocted a nefarious scheme to make their annexation of Mexico appear more palatable. The scheme called for making it look like the Mexican government had started a war with the United States. Then U.S. officials could innocently exclaim, “We’ve been attacked! We’re innocent! We were just minding our own business! We must now, reluctantly, go to war to defend ourselves from this dastardly attack.” From LewRockwell.com “The presence of United States troops on the edge of the disputed territory furthest from the Mexican settlements, was not sufficient to provoke hostilities. We were sent to provoke a fight, but it was essential that Mexico should commence it. I was very doubtful whether Congress would declare war; but if Mexico should attack our troops, the Executive [President Polk] could announce, ‘Whereas war exist by the acts of, etc.’ and prosecute the contest with vigor.” Polk’s gambit worked; he did provoke the Mexican army. In his war message to Congress he then declared that “Mexico has passed the boundary of the United States, has invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil. . . . As war exists . . . by the act of Mexico herself, we are called upon by every consideration of duty and patriotism to vindicate with decision the honor, the rights, and the interests of our country.” This con game of provoking a war by showing up on another nation’s border, heavily armed with weapons aimed at the hoped-for belligerent, would be repeated many times in subsequent generations, right up to today’s provocation of a war in Syria. Mexican troops crossed into US territory. Mexican troops killed US troops on US territory. Mexico commenced hostilities. Did the US bait them? Sure. Did the US initiate hostilities? Nope. All they had to do was not take the bait, but they chose to. They CHOSE to. Protip for the Mexican state! If you can't run with the big dogs, don't piss up the tall trees. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Getting back on topic........ The average IQ of a Syrian is 79, not 83. R. Lynn, G. Meisenberg. National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations. Intelligence 38 (2010) 353–360. Given that population IQ is described by a Gaussian distribution. Given the Syrian IQ mean is 79. Assuming the standard deviation of the distribution is 15. Thus the IQ probability density distribution is completely described by the mean and deviation. N(79, 15). Given the average IQ of an engineer at university is about 125. So then assuming the IQ required to be capable of becoming an engineer in Germany is north of 120. So the probability of a Syrian having an IQ > 120 is P (IQ > 120) = 0.003 (take that as more than or equal too, no symbol) Therefore the expectation number of Syrians immigrating to Germany is <E> = n*P(IQ > 120). Where n = 800,000 immigrants <E> = 800000*0.003 = 2400 So in 800000 Syrian immigrants there are expected to be 2400 of sufficient cognitive ability to be able to become engineers. This of course is not to say 2400 will be engineers, simply that 2400 would be expected to be possessed of sufficient IQ so as if raised German and all else equal, they would able to pass through an engineering degree. Assuming of this high IQ group 100% were of working age. Assuming of this high IQ group 50% when to university. Assuming 50% went into STEM. Assuming 100% passed. Assuming 70% did not work in STEM fields (as per native populations). There would then be 2400*0.5*0.5*(1- 0.7) = 180 180 Syrians capable to competing in the German market as averagely capable engineers out of 800000. 2
Lars93 Posted September 19, 2015 Author Posted September 19, 2015 http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6527/migrants-rape-germany Thanks, feminists! 1
Guest Gee Posted September 20, 2015 Posted September 20, 2015 I have very few solid answers to any of the above ... do you? What are one or two specific actions that each of you will now take as a result of Stef's video on this "crisis" and who specifically will these actions directly impact? I'd love to hear some objectively positive and optimism inspiring action that others in the FDR community are engaging with. This is all rather grim, but it can't last and it can be reversed. Suppose we characterise these actions as socialism we might draw upon history and observe that socialism always fails and so conclude that this present attempt at socialism will certainly fail as has every previous attempt. I recall some pretty interesting stuff going on. Why not create a thread asking this question? It might serve as a central repository of information, might facilitate productive collaboration, there might be something that peeks your interest?
Lars93 Posted September 21, 2015 Author Posted September 21, 2015 Hello eeik, since I started this therad and you addressed nobody in particular except Stefan, I felt free to respond. First off I got a two questions, which call-in show do you refer too? secondly, Deeper still, is the fact that this quote was injected into the public consciousness via this show possibly a programmatic way to help encourage the educated west to stop reproducing and enable a broader and unseen plan to deconstruct the west? Is the fact that mass mind-control has been so smoothly injected into modernity evidence of an unstoppable cosmic force inherent in the nature of all things, beings, and perceived reality? Are we, in the west, simply fascinated and bio-chemically stimulated by a good story because Walt Disney taught us all to be and now wish to experience the emotional roller coaster of watching what unfolds for these "poor poor migrants" at the expense of the remnants of our own systematically collapsing cultures? Will the realization of the 500 million be perhaps the one true path to the dawn of the new "age of reason"? taking the arbitrary number of 500,000,000 and proclaiming that this is the ideal amount of people to maintain on earth not founded on evidence, for there having to be a fixed number of humans on earth and the desireable amount being 500k. To me anti-natalism seems to stem from the same foundation that non-philosophys like nihilism and communism originate from, so the burden of proof is very high on the anti-natalists part. What prupose to the remainder of life on earth is there when there is no higher consciousness? Why would you promote a harmful idea only relatively intelligent people are susceptible to?
steadyb Posted September 21, 2015 Posted September 21, 2015 I have just seen this breaking around and about and certainly made me chuckle. It looks like the guy tripped by the Hungarian camera lady is a militant al nusra member! Poor SJWs! They can´t seem to catch a break ATM!
eeik Posted September 24, 2015 Posted September 24, 2015 Hey Graham ... thanks for the suggestion, let's take it here and I'll try to respond and recap the responses over time in some way... What are we actually doing about it all? Why not create a thread asking this question? It might serve as a central repository of information, might facilitate productive collaboration, there might be something that peeks your interest?
FreedomPhilosophy Posted September 28, 2015 Posted September 28, 2015 And I quote from your source...... From LewRockwell.com Mexican troops crossed into US territory. You quote very selectively from my source and miss this bit: So with the aim of starting a war with Mexico but making it look like Mexico started the war, President Polk sent U.S. troops to Texas, intentionally situating them on the Rio Grande and knowing full well that Mexico considered that to be Mexican territory.
mlsv2f Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Never really hear about this in the news, but I think many people are starting to leave Sweden/Europe because of this. Where will this stop? http://swedenreport.org/2015/06/02/goodbye-sweden/ http://www.thelocal.se/20140410/record-number-of-people-leave-
Guest Gee Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 You quote very selectively from my source and miss this bit: So with the aim of starting a war with Mexico but making it look like Mexico started the war, President Polk sent U.S. troops to Texas, intentionally situating them on the Rio Grande and knowing full well that Mexico considered that to be Mexican territory. I believe, as was my intention, that I successfully evidenced the hyperbolic nature of your source. Your addition does not serve to detract from this. If you can not understand that the Nuecus strip, despite being Texas by treaty, was contested by both Mexico and Texas then I hold no hope for the outcome of this discourse. Moreover, if you do understand, but assert that it is valid for Mexico but not the U.S. to initiate hostilities as a function of this contention and the events that surround it then you are holding the U.S. to a higher standard than Mexico. This would then imply your are holding Americans to a higher standard than Mexicans and of course this then implies that you must be a racist.
AccuTron Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Never really hear about this in the news, but I think many people are starting to leave Sweden/Europe because of this. Where will this stop? http://swedenreport.org/2015/06/02/goodbye-sweden/ http://www.thelocal.se/20140410/record-number-of-people-leave- Thanks for links. One is not available I think, but I perused the rest of the site plenty enough to get the message.
FreedomPhilosophy Posted October 2, 2015 Posted October 2, 2015 I believe, as was my intention, that I successfully evidenced the hyperbolic nature of your source. Your addition does not serve to detract from this. If you can not understand that the Nuecus strip, despite being Texas by treaty, was contested by both Mexico and Texas then I hold no hope for the outcome of this discourse. The so called "Treaties" of Velasco where no such thing, as they were not ratified by the Mexican government because they were signed under duress. Indeed they were only called treaties after these events. The Rio Grande region that the US military entered was populated by Mexicans. Texas was part of Mexico before Texas became a republic, so the Mexicans claim to the contested land was superior (accepting of course that states can legitimately own a territory). Therefore it could quite rightly be regarded as a US invasion.
Guest Gee Posted October 5, 2015 Posted October 5, 2015 The so called "Treaties" of Velasco where no such thing, as they were not ratified by the Mexican government because they were signed under duress. Indeed they were only called treaties after these events. The Rio Grande region that the US military entered was populated by Mexicans. Texas was part of Mexico before Texas became a republic, so the Mexicans claim to the contested land was superior (accepting of course that states can legitimately own a territory). Therefore it could quite rightly be regarded as a US invasion. Ok then. If the treaty's signed between Texas and Mexico were invalid then a state of war must have existed between Mexico and Texas and so any and all hostilitys initiated by Texas were done so in the prosecution of said war.
laowai Posted October 6, 2015 Posted October 6, 2015 Why has this argument been derailed so badly? This is a serious issue! We just had another islam related shooting here in Australia the other day! Even though I am a guy; I can completely relate to the host in this documentary. I stupidly try to think we can all live together happily, and I still want to believe it. But I am frustrated when I come up against intolerance all the time when I have done nothing to insight such intolerance. I just want to live a peaceful happy life, is that too much to ask? If there is a correlation between migrants and violent extremism why don't we just admit it and stop deluding ourselves. The amount of tax payers money the west will have to spend to stop our immigrant populations becoming radicalized will lead us to go bankrupt. Life in Australia used to be so simple and carefree, why has it suddenly become so complicated?. I look at the USSR and the one common feature I see in their downfall is the lack of cultural cohesion within the parent culture due to large minority groups. The USSR is a classic example of what happens when minorities segregate and control large parcels of their own land- eventually they just split off and lead to the downfall of the parent civilization. I wish multiculturalism could work, and I will always give migrants the benefit of the doubt and treat them with respect and dignity, but unfortunately facts don't lie.
Recommended Posts