Infidel Dog
-
Posts
5,868 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
28
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Infidel Dog
-
-
7 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:
To Infidel Dog, Sovereignty has no intention of forcing or coercing anyone into doing anything, but rather it allows the reader to come to their own conclusion. It is simply pointing out the fatal flaw with today's governments and provides a solution to fixing them.
Yeah, I heard all that - 'come to the light, honest politicians,' and so on. Meaningless drivel.
Globalism is a scam.
-
4 hours ago, Argus said:
There isn't anything in that video which can be directly attributed to Donald Trump. From all we hear, Trump has almost nothing to do with crafting policy decisions. He doesn't take briefings, doesn't read reports, gets bored easily at meetings, and spends very little time in the actual act of governing. Mike Pence does all that, in conjunction with the Republicans in Congress. And besides, much of that brag sheet is stupid nonsense. Bragging about cutting taxes for corporate America in the middle of a booming economy while you have a massive deficit is not something a conservative would ever do. The "121 month economic boom" predates Trump by about 81 months. And yes, cutting corporate taxes certainly helped, but those tax cuts came from borrowing even more money.
I disagree, of course, but let's say you're correct and all successes before the pandemic were just luck, coincidence or lazy delegating, I'll still back the winning horse until the jockey falls off. You ride the streak. I'd still vote Trump because the things he said he'd do during the campaign got done or are in the process of getting done.
Now as to this idea that Obama is responsible for the economic recovery under Trump...
-
2 hours ago, Argus said:
Why? Honestly, the guy really is an ignorant buffoon
This one below is from last year but the kid still speaks for me and hopefully answers your question as to why I would vote for Trump if I had a vote.
-
1
-
-
Honestly...not a big fan of globalism either.
But I get your point. Although, doesn't it seem like the term "Globalism" isn't working so they thought they'd add the the T to 'sovereignism' then redefine it to mean globalism and in theory make it sound special?
-
You have as much hope of perpetrating this farce on the world as you do of getting anybody who's not nuts reading that 119 pages of gobbledy gook.
And stop calling your globalism sovereigntism. It's contrived, and silly sounding.
-
18 minutes ago, Sovereigntist said:
To Rue, the failure of the UN can be attributed to the very thing which brought about the collapse of the League of Nations, that is, the nationalist fabrication. As long as nationalism continues to exist, then there will never be peace between nations. In order to secure a meaningful government, you must first secure honest politicians. And that is exactly what Sovereignty is hoping to shed light on.
And that's how you're going to save the world, are you? By 'shedding light' through 'honest politicians.'
Pray tell, O' mystic overmind, how do you plan on doing that? Where will you be finding these 'honest politicians?' Will you be volunteering or do you have them hidden away somewhere you can't tell us about right now? What is this "light" you plan on honouring us with? I hope it's something better than this cryptic drek you've been bilging out so far.
I like my national pride and I'm not alone. If you want to take it you're going to need something more than "light." Especially when your light sounds kind of dark. And you're going to do it without police or military, are you? And you think it's a good idea we who won't give up our country, should have guns, do you? Why don't I believe you?
-
13 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:
To Infidel Dog, there was never any mention of an army or police force. You misread the question being answered.
I asked, "How would you enforce rules?" You replied "with existing infrastructure." If my assumption that you meant police and military was incorrect,very well,, how do you plan to keep the unruly sections of the global populace in line without police and military then.
You replied something about keeping state buildings. Surely you can't be serious if you're thinking that would be enough.
You seem to be telling us that there will be no need for coercion. So people will simply give up their sovereignty of nations and beliefs for your global sovereignty out of respect for what you believe is the strength of your superior idea, is that it?
Not going to happen.
You tell us people are already moving towards larger global rule and for a while that may have been true. Today the United Nations is a joke. The EU is one more leaving country away from being a shambles and NAFTA is gonzo. Incrementalism only works until you reach the line nobody will cross and you globalists are pretty much there.
As to this idea "Sovereigntists" will let us keep our guns, I have to ask - what's the difference between a Sovereigntist and a Globalist? Because globalists are gun-grabbers. If you tell me Sovereigntists are not I have to call shenanigans.
-
As somebody who'd vote Trump if he had a vote, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping they choose a VP candidate for Joe like the ones that keep getting mentioned - Sore loser Stacey, 'Where's muh kneepads' Kamala, or Half-Whitmer from Michigan.
-
35 minutes ago, Argus said:
She and Trump could have a fight about which one loves Russia more.
Or less...
It would make for interesting tweets though. She weakens Trump's tweeting weapon. I mean, what's he going to do against Tulsi Gabbard, call her fat?
-
I'll discuss it with you.
So you're going to have your one world government and your fearless leader will be voted in by popular vote, you say. And anybody who doesn't like it can deal with this army and police force you say you want. So do you get this military first? Because you're going to need it to take over.
Remember you're not just proclaiming this global sovereignty. You'll need to dissolve all other nations sovereignty. Then there's the Muslim world. How were you planning on taking what they'll see as Allah's sovereignty. You're talking something like Israel but on a massive scale. Mohammed wouldn't like that.
Not to mention the Chinese. I see why you globalist types want to take the Americans guns though.
The Chinese and the Americans vote for a leader to be decided by popular vote. Who wins?
I don't know. Rots o ruck, I guess.
-
27 minutes ago, Sovereigntist said:
Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government.
No, it's not.
https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Sovereigntism
It has nothing to do with "Global Government." Or at least it didn't used to.
I'll listen though. Where would your Global Government reside? Who would be at the top? How would you enforce rules?
I won't be wading through the 119 pages at your link to discover you're just another progressive socialist globalist who likes to redefine words.
-
As I think I recall MO said something like she'd never want to be near the white house or even that close to politics again. Something like that, anyway.
You know the other one that could work though? And she'd be interested if the Dem power people ever got smart.
Tulsi Gabbard could get popular in a hurry with Dems, Independents and some republicans if the media and the Democrat elite (but I repeat myself) ever did start to support her. She could be the Democrats' secret weapon.
-
The scary thing is the right VP could get Joe Biden elected on the supposition in the OP.
I think Michelle Obama has claimed she's not interested but politicians lie. So imagine Michelle Obama entering the campaign as VP. I can see a 'vote Joe to get your first black female POTUS' campaign going.
I chose Michelle Obama over somebody like say, Stacy Abrahams because MO could actually influence the election.
-
I was a never-trumper during his first campaign. I was on board with the things he said he'd do, I just didn't think he'd do them. Then he got elected. Things got done. Even when they didn't right away, like say, build the wall or drain the swamp he's still at it. I'll support him as long as he continues to get things done. Stuff like his chuckle-worthy tweets are just a perk.
-
4 hours ago, Argus said:
This is simply a part of the mainstream media narrative. Thousands of white people are violently attacked, raped, murdered and beaten by blacks in the US every year. That gets almost no media attention. Even in cases where there was an obvious racial motive the media ignores it wherever possible. But let there be one case where it looks like a white man/men attacked a black person and racism can be either shown or at least implied, and the media jumps on the story like a starving dog on a leg of lamb.The media loves stores of white racism. It's what they live for. No other kind of racism is ever covered or mentioned. But white racism is their obsession, and they will find it wherever they can, even if they have to make it up.
Yes. There's a pattern developing here from Tawana Bradley to Trayvon Martin. Remember how thieving, gun grabbing thug Michael Brown of St. Louis was pushed in the media as some sort of "Gentle Giant' with his hands up pleading with the cop not to shoot. Except he wasn't and he didn't.
Remember this pic from the liars at CNN?
-
7 hours ago, Tdot said:
You and Candace must both feel awfully, stupid, and you both should feel like rabid-racists too for telling lies on this innocent darkskinned negro.
I see. So now your beef is with light-skinned negroes. I take it you have nasty things to say about the other 2 light skinned negroes in the video in the OP too
Tell us then. How dark must their skin colour be before they meet your standard of what makes an acceptable negro? Do you scale have a for it, like the Scoville scale for the hotness in chilli peppers? Wait. That wouldn't work because even when they're mild they're still chilli peppers.
I don't know. This idea of yours that negroes must reach a level of darkness before you deem them to have the right to an opinion sounds bigoted to me - racist even.
Also, I'm a little confused. Arbery seems a little light skinned himself. Why does he get a pass on your idea of light skinned blacks not being 'real negroes?'
But no. I don't feel stupid. I don't get the impression Candace or the two black brothers in the OP video feel stupid either. How about you though? I'm getting the feeling that one of us 4 should and it's not me.
-
Now as to this idea that having an opinion contrary to the editorial push of the MSM makes you a KKK racist this is Candace Owen's opinion:
AHMAUD ARBERY WAS CAUGHT ON CAMERA BREAKING INTO AN UNFINISHED PROPERTY THAT WAS OWNED BY LARRY ENGLISH.
HIS MOTHER HAS CONFIRMED IT IS HIM IN THE VIDEO.
PLEASE STOP WITH THE “JUST A JOGGER” BULLSHIT NARRATIVE.
AVID JOGGERS DON’T WEAR KHAKI SHORTS & STOP TO BREAK INTO HOMES.— CANDACE OWENS (@REALCANDACEO) MAY 9, 2020
This is Candace Owens. Is she a KKK racist in a pointy hood?
-
Well burglary is breaking and entering. Arbery did enter a garage attached to a house under construction. There's video of it. Is that breaking and enter or trespassing. if trespass would it be just trespass or criminal trespass. I don't know. I'm not an expert in Georgia law. I'm also not sure it matters. The real question should be, would the ex-police officer who witnessed the activity be justified in wanting to pursue the perp to make a citizen's arrest. Did he have just cause?
Here's the original incident report describing what Gregory McMichael says he saw, what he concluded and why:
-
I'm not aware of making any such claim.
The word I used was "Burglary."
QuoteThe McMichael's claim a string of breaking and enters in the area but a Police rep, Lt. Cheri Bashlor, states just one automobile burglary in the neighborhood was reported when a 9mm pistol was stolen January 1 from an unlocked truck outside the McMichaels’ home.
So to me the question becomes did the ex-police officer have reason to suspect the unauthorized entry was made for the purpose of committing a crime.
-
Media = Innocent black Jogger, Ahmaud Arbery,gunned down by rednecks in pickup truck for jogging through white neighbourhood.
New Updates = Ex-police officer and son try to make citizen's arrest on Burglar in neighborhood with recent history of burglary. Son attacked. Burglar shot in struggle.
-
6 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:
You don't know that. Nobody has determined where it originated. The first KNOWN case was in France.
No. The first case was December 11 in China. The French case you're talking about was December 27.
14 patients were tested. They had flu like symptoms but tested negative for flu. One was an Algerian immigrant whose son had experienced similar symptoms but had not been hospitalized. He was the only one of the 14 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.
The French team of Deslandes and Cohen published their results in the International Journal of Antimicrobial agents in early May.
They cautioned:
Quoteowing to the retrospective nature of the analyses, medical records were not exhaustive and some relevant information might have been missing. Second, we are not able to rule out false-negative results due to the sensitivity of RT-PCR [15] and a technique of storage that may possibly impair the quality of samples [16].
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920301643
However they believe they took necessary precautions in hopes of avoiding a false negative.
-
1
-
-
I know this. As a possible person of Chinese extraction, terms like "Kung flu" or "Chi-Com" don't bother me but I take that ugly racist slur used as clickbait in the title of this thread as an outrage.
And Trump didn't use it but you did, Godzilla. You should be ashamed of yourself.
-
Whoah...what's in your title to this thread didn't happen.
It's not like it's even up for interpretation. It flat out didn't happen.
I've seen sleazy, clickbait, partisan exaggerations in titles before but WTF? That's an outright flaming, libelous, lie.
There's even a video in the link that shows it's a lie. Why would anybody think he'd get away with a lie like that?
-
Quote
TEHRAN, Iran — An Iranian missile fired during a training exercise in the Gulf of Oman struck a support vessel near its target, killing 19 sailors and wounding 15, Iran’s state media reported on Monday, amid heightened tensions between Tehran and the U.S.
The statement significantly raised the death toll in Sunday’s incident from what was reported just hours earlier, when Iran’s state media said at least one sailor was killed.
The Konarak, a Hendijan-class support ship, which was taking part in the exercise, was too close to a target during an exercise on Sunday when the incident happened, the reports said. The vessel had been putting targets out for other ships to target. The media said the missile struck the vessel accidentally.
Careful now, Iran. Don't want to wipe out your navy before you declare war.
One People, One State, One Purpose
in The Rest of the World
Posted · Edited by Infidel Dog
My problem with the definition is sometimes people seem to be talking about different things when they mention it.
Sometimes they're just talking global economy and sometimes they use it to mean global rule and the faceless cabal that wants to rule it.
A lot of words have multiple definitions but this one seems so fresh that the lines aren't clearly drawn.