Category: Racism

Posted on

Open Borders. Are you a True Believer?

I know that those who are still watching those media insurgency channels like CNN and MSNBC are convinced that nationalism is bad, borders are the problem, and that there is no difference between immigration and illegal immigration because a person can’t be illegal. That’s fine if you want to believe what you want to believe. Last I heard, it’s a free country for most of us.

I’m waiting for the day when these people will protest some of the actual problems in the world like human trafficking, female genital mutilation, terror, extreme gang violence. I also wonder when they will arm themselves with some facts about racism and xenophobia, etc. and get their argument right. Because those things do exist and they are a problem.

The good news, for those of us who don’t want America destroyed from within, is that these people are the minority. You wouldn’t know it if you passively “watch the news” and consider yourself informed. They are bashing President Trump, his policies, and our great nation and if you lose perspective and your grip on reality you may get the feeling that most American citizens believe all the racist, fascist, xenophobe accusations.

I could attempt to explain how liberal socialist policies are racist based on how the lives of minorities are so brutally, negatively affected in places where liberal policies have been in place for decades. Take a look at places like Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, and the shining shitty on the hill, San Francisco. But, I think most people understand.

I want to address the people who are somehow convinced that nationalism is a terrible thing. It makes me wonder – when these people go to a sporting event, do they root for the visiting team?

Have they thought about it and decided that they truly know what nationalism is and that they have a well thought out reason to be against it? I say no. I think it starts with their refusal to acknowledge that an immigrant can be an illegal immigrant. They act like anybody who wants border security and wants the laws of our nation enforced hates immigrants. That’s a ridiculous leap to make, but leap they do.

If you want unlimited immigration, you want the border to be wide open. I’ll make this as simple as I can.

1. You are in favor of an open border. You live in a house or an apartment. Do you lock your doors and windows at night when you go to sleep? Why or why not?

2. To take it a step further, if you leave your doors and windows unlocked, do you leave them opened or closed? Why or why not?

Wait. There’s more.

3. If you leave your doors unlocked and opened and your windows unlocked and opened, do you put a sign on your lawn that lets everybody know they are free to come into your house through any door or any window?

We live in a country where some people who want to leave all the windows and doors open on our country’s border and make sure the world knows they can jump the line ahead of all the other immigrants who are waiting to enter legally.

Why do they want this? Who knows? Ask them, but good luck getting an actual answer. I’m guessing they want to bring in people who are more likely to vote a certain way and they view these people as tools in the toolkit of political power.

I’m disgusted by anybody who does this or supports the idea. I say that only because I have never had someone who supports the idea tell me why they support it. They just do. My guess is that they are buying the propaganda and are following the liberal crowd.

But, my mind is opened on this. If somebody who supports this policy is willing to engage in a civil discussion where we are both armed with factual facts, I would love to have that conversation. I’d love to record it on video or audio and make it available to the world.

RS

Posted on

Welcome Back, Fascism. Have Some Pie.

The First Amendment. Some may call it a run-on sentence. I view it as very good glimpse into what this country stands for and an indicator of what the framers of our Constitution experienced elsewhere in the world that led to what is now The United States of America.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It’s concise and gets right to the point, but leaves much to interpretation. Lawsuits have been filed and courts have ruled on first amendment issues. I’m no legal expert or constitutional scholar, but I have a few things I’d like to say on some first amendment issues that have come up in recent years. Everybody gets all upset and there’s wall-to-wall news coverage about whether somebody should have to bake a cake for somebody, who can go int which restrooms, whether NFL players should kneel during the national anthem, etc.

Then there are other issues that the mainstream media loves to either ignore almost entirely or cover for weeks on end – riots. In recent years, there has been extended coverage of riots in Ferguson, Missouri in August 2014 and Charlotte, NC in September 2016 after a citizen was killed by police and the situations were charged with allegations of racism. Watching these events reminded me of things I vaguely remember from growing up in the 1960’s and 1970’s and many events from the Civil Rights movement that I’m too young to remember.

I could write about whether or not the news coverage was slanted in this direction or that direction, but I think that’s a mute point. These days, all news coverage is slanted on one direction or another. You are watching narratives designed to lead you to form opinions as part of your belief system. It’s up to you resist this brainwashing, for the lack of a more correct term for it.

Slanted or not, extensive news coverage of these events was warranted and many important discussions were had as a result. These discussions led people with all different opinions to exercise their right to free speech. Most of it was constructive, some of it was destructive and revealed the ugly face of racism, hatred, and bigotry.

These things have returned to our daily lives over the past decade or two. They were never gone, I believe they were suppressed because they have not been dealt with and maybe can’t truly be dealt with in a way that will remove them from the planet. There are still people full of hate and ideologies designed to divide us into groups and get those groups to fight with each other. Sadly, this may never end.

None of that is why I am writing this post. I want to talk about the entire reason this website exists, the suppression of free speech. There is a reason the website is called RemainSilent.Online and the associated Twitter account is @RemainSilentNO.

I have seen other riots in recent year that were covered very differently and this is the problem I want to address. If you rely on the mainstream media, you will remember these events as protests or peaceful protests, but if you look objectively at the facts, you will arrive at the conclusion that these were riots designed to infringe on free speech. The best example is the UC Berkeley riots in February 2017.

To their credit, the mainstream media reported the UC Berkeley riots as riots and as protests that broke out into violence at the time they were occurring. To their discredit, they didn’t spend much time on that coverage. Not nearly as much time as the race riots mentioned earlier. These riots weren’t about race. They were about free speech. The riots themselves actively suppressed free speech.

We could argue about whether race or the suppression of free speech deserves more coverage until the end of time. I submit to you that they are simply both important enough that if one deserves wall-to-wall coverage, so does the other. In both cases, the story comes and goes and racism and fascism continue their assault on our republic and it’s not being discussed nearly enough.

The mainstream media contributed to the suppression of free speech by suppressing these news stories. They covered the events in short bursts and they didn’t show the most violent videos or burning buildings and people being bloodied in attacks of bigotry by Antifa. Seriously, if you believe in the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, what better time to exercise that right?

People being attacked with bike locks. Burning buildings. Because of words you don’t like? No. It’s even worse than that. Violence was used to prevent the words from being spoken. They decided ahead of time that someone who they disagree with shouldn’t be allowed to express his beliefs, that his right to free speech mean nothing, and that preemptive violence was the answer. In America. At a university known historically and celebrated as the haven of free speech.

Police officers stood by and watched because they were ordered to stand down. Don’t believe me. Look it up yourself. You won’t find it on the mainstream media. If you want the truth, you have to go get it. Nobody is going to shove it in your face. That’s the world you live in now. You’ve been told. Now you know. You’re welcome.

The media, whose freedom if the press is protected in the very same First Amendment that supposedly protects the free speech of the ideas Milo Yiannopoulos was going to express. By providing small amounts of coverage (when compared to coverage of other less newsworthy items), the media suppressed the coverage of the suppression of free speech. So, along with the police, the media stood down. Interesting? I wonder why.

I hope this makes you wonder how honest the media is and why they spend more time on news that fits an ideological narrative instead of news that is based on unbiased fact.

RS

Posted on

Border Zero Tolerance Policy

This seems like the obvious thing to do when there are laws that tell you how to enforce a policy. I’m happy to see it finally happening. We can’t have a country where you only follow the laws you agree with.

There are those that will scream racism and many other disagreements with this policy.

Wait for it.

Let me make this extremely clear. Some of their points are valid. There are undocumented people who are here, have families, and you can make an argument that many of these people should be allowed to stay in our country as it is now their home. Our laws are not perfect. That is no excuse for those whose job is enforcement who have chosen not to do their jobs.

Congress, get to work. Secure this nation. Address DACA. Address DREAMers. Stop toying with the lives of living, breathing human beings.

Congress. Do. Your. Job.

These valid points need to be addressed by Congress and written into the law.

Then, those who enforce would enforce those new laws.

I applaud the Department of Justice finally supporting the rule of law. The people who are doing unbelievably thankless work on border security should now be allowed to more effectively do their jobs.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/arizona/articles/2018-04-06/sessions-orders-zero-tolerance-policy-for-border-crossers