THE bipartisan Senate immigration plan introduced yesterday would grant amnesty to most of the more than 11 million illegal immigrants in this country and ease the legal immigration process for millions. “Comprehensive immigration reform” is once again synonymous with the obliteration of our culture and identity by political traitors. The number of H-1B visas for high-skilled workers would also be increased. According to NumbersUSA:

The bill could result in an additional 15 million green cards being issued in the first 10 years above and beyond the 1.1 million green cards that are currently issued each year. That would result in more than a 50% increase in legal immigration over the first decade after the bill’s passage.

Any illegal aliens who have been in the country since December 31, 2011 can apply for provisional status. Spouses and children are also eligible. From NumbersUSA:

Illegal aliens that are adjusted to RPI [provisional] status will be allowed to apply for a green card through the merit-based program after 10 years if certain “triggers” are met, however, illegal aliens that qualify for the DREAM Act can receive instant citizenship after 5 years and illegal aliens that work a required number of hours in agriculture can receive a green card in 5 years.

— Comments —

Buck writes:

This issue is no different in kind from the issue of abortion. Very simple. Does life begin at conception, and if so, when is homicide illegal? All the rest is ‘bs.’

With this issue there is one simple question. Are you for or against the maintenance of a white European majority in this country?

There are those who devoutly wish and work for the end of the white majority. There are those who want to maintain and strengthen it, even though (in spite of this entry’s title) America no longer exists. We would at least prefer to maintain the few remaining attributes of the withering historical white European culture.

One side readily admits it’s truth, the other can never do so. Liberals will not admit to their desire to see the marginalization of the white European majority in the United States, and the ultimate decline of the shrinking ten percent of the world’s population that is still white. They can’t admit the truth. Admitting the truth would choke off their oxygen and they would die. That’s not going to happen.

Alex writes:

Buck gravely underestimates the extent of the catastrophe that has already happened. Liberals now set the rules for the most important thing in society: what can and what cannot be said publicly, and they keep tightening the former and expanding the latter.

Not only can and do liberals freely answer “against” to the question, “Are you for or against the maintenance of a white European majority in this country?” without it choking off their oxygen and killing them, but they’ve made it the only answer that can be given publicly. Anyone who publicly says he is for the maintenance of a white European majority in America will be crucified as a racist. And liberals don’t even need to send secret police to knock on peoples’ doors in the dead of night to enforce compliance. No, it’s much worse – they have brainwashed people to really believe only a racist can say that.

There’s a fight going on right now against amnesty for illegals. Have you heard anyone opposing it publicly say that amnesty and mass immigration must be stopped because America must be maintained as a white European majority country? Can you even imagine any of the public figures on your side of the fight to say that?

Wake up and look around. Liberals can say and do whatever they want with complete impunity, and it’s us who will choke and die if we publicly say what we think. We, in the U.S. and here in Canada, have been forced out of public life and into the underground to post impotent pseudonymous comments on blogs, while they, by setting the rules for what can be said, have eliminated the very possibility of effective opposition to them.

Laura writes:

I agree. Liberals admit to what they want all the time.

Buck writes:

I’m curious as to where my question is being asked and answered, occasionally or broadly? Which “public figures,” beginning with figure one; President Obama, or his cabinet members, any elected officials, or anyone in leadership at any of our major institutions, when asked, “Are you for or against the maintenance of a white European majority in this country?” are answering yes or no. I don’t find any. You will find ample predictions. I’ve written repeatedly about that.

In spite of my deemed “grave underestimation of the extent of the catastrophe,” I think that Alex and I might agree, at length, if we took the time.

People, public figures or not, generally don’t go around saying that they want to see the end of the white race, not personally nor as an official matter of public policy. They lie and couch everything in modern liberal terms of tolerance and diversity. Just as women who have abortions and those who perform them, don’t call the killing of an innocent life murder. They just do it. Modern liberals act with intent to change forever the demographics and to erase forever the existence of the former dominate white European population and culture from what used to be America. They want that white civilizational standard ended.

Have we, for some reason, in a strange way returned to square one in this conversation?

Alex writes: “Can you even imagine any of the public figures on your side of the fight to say that?” My side? Which side do I appear to be on? I say the words without choking: “I want to maintain the white European majority in this country.” I say it openly and I explain myself. I ask others to explain themselves. Maybe they don’t choke, but they do pause to clear their throats.

I’d like to note that I wrote, “When is homicide murder?”, not “When is homicide illegal?” The profound nature of the “guilty mind” is paramount; it’s semantically critical, not simply legal jargon. The edit completely changed my meaning.

 Laura writes:

I did change your wording in that phrase to get at what I thought was your meaning.

Due to serious time constraints today, I cannot address your main point.

Alissa writes:

They lie and couch everything in modern liberal terms of tolerance and diversity.

That’s a great point that should be repeated again and again. Liberalism is like a combination of female/feminine psychology with reductionist, technocratic masculine weapons. A great thing average men learned in the past about average women is this: look at what they do, not at what they say. The same principle should apply to dedicated modern enlightened liberals. Don’t look at what their words, watch their actions.

Please follow and like us: