In the News Stop Article 13 And 11. Extremely Important

Well what about those?

 

Well the idea is that the rulling powers, like the EU, want to have mix race communities, so they dump all kinds of different ethnicities together, (that more often than not cannot coexsist). This is done to seem more progressive. Although what I'm prettu sure is really happening, is that they are putting these types of people to gether so the more violent group can slaughter the other, for the benefit of the rulling class.
Since if the only people left are uneducated minorities, it's easier to control and use them.

 

That's more of a problem of immigration and assimilation than anything else, especially due to the Syrian Refugee crisis. And it just doesn't have that many good answers. No country has the infrastructure or the resources to handle that many at once. As a whole, I'd advise having tolerance and all, but I get it's hard to take that into account when you hear news stories of UK police turning a blind eye to sex rings because the men responsible were Muslim or when Paris gets attacked by ISIS or that politicians who advocate for tolerance don't have to live with them. People in power probably thought they had better chances taking in as many as they could versus leaving them to wander and loot while trying to get into the country anyway, among also the morale dilemma of leaving millions of civilians to die.

But I highly doubt that those in power would set up the framework for a genocide of their own citizens, who outnumber Muslims by a large margin anyway. Especially since those in power are getting outvoted by right wing parties like in Hungary and Poland.

 

Here's one, don't.
Also the whole crisis might have been started y the eltists, in order to have excuse to pour large number of uneducated and violent refugees into other countries.

________________________________

I can't tolarate vast majority of people that want to kill me for me belifes/ lifestyle.

________________________________

No, that was their plan. You can't honestly say that people in power are THAT naive.

________________________________

Not like it matters if we can have communist traitors as our MEP's deciding what's best for and against us.

 

When you have a conspiracy theory about everything one is bound to be right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Do you mostly mean elitists from the EU? Or like worldwide? Because if you think that the U.S. presence in the Middle East indirectly caused the formation of ISIS and the Syrian civil war, then I see where you are coming from. Though still:

I guess I just don't see how the people that hold power would benefit from this. They have to put aside resources, money, and time for these immigrants (such as using public services), resources and money that could have gone towards other things. And the immigrants don't provide a instant boost to tax revenue or an instant expansion to the economy since they have to find jobs first, which given the nature of the situation (with the large influx at once and the language/cultural barrier) it would be harder for them to do so. It doesn't help either that it's a headache for law enforcement to deal with violent or extremist individuals among them.

So if I think about this way, with governments losing money and power to enforce their laws, I don't see why they would go through all this trouble just to somehow commit genocide on their own citizens. If you look at it from a historical perspective, genocides are committed by majorities (as in a racial/ethnic/religious group) simply due to numbers, and rely on fear mongering and ethnic tensions between different groups. Which if people in power wanted to kill their native-born citizens, they wouldn't want to decease racial tensions by advocating for tolerance and diversity. And again, why would they want to kill their citizens in the first place? They'd have less people to tax off of, and the chaos of immigrants and native born citizens killing each other would massively disrupt the economy and law enforcement, destroying wealth in the process.

 

That's actually is Great Britain and Frane's fault. They basically promised some lands to the colonies, but then never delivered that promie. And later on when the colonies did get independed, the radical islamists overtook everything and that's why we now hve ISIS. Of course that's an abridged version, but it's basically the gist of it.

________________________________

Like the fact that they are told to not deal with these issues and instead focus on censorship of anything slightly "offensive"?

________________________________

That's exactly the reason they're advocating for diversity! Notice, how now adays diversity means no straighnt white men? The diversity is put in place to kill any opposition.

________________________________

BUT, They would have a massive low paid work force. They could handle all high-tech industry outside of the EU and benefit from their uneducated low paid workers in the EU. Also I'm sure once they're done with their little "diversity program", they're going to bring back police force HARD, to restablish control. One the policestate is in place, nobody would be able to say no to high taxes and long work hours, becouse they would be taken away by the police force, for breking any vaguely established laws.

 

I'd just blame the French since France primarily controlled Syria between 1920 and 1946. Though I do recommend reading this article, which goes in-depth: https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...yria-from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/.

Are you referring to the censorship by PiCs? Because I thought they were against immigration too.

What about PiCs then?

When genocides or mass killings happens, productivity and civil order dissolves. And unless if you're an oil rich country like Venezuela or Nigeria that can still generate wealth without citizen productivity, then it's the equivalent of political suicide. Just look at countries like Rwanda. Now the question of if the flooding of low skilled laborers entering countries takes away jobs and depresses wages is a whole different matter than genocide.

Surveillance and freedom of speech is a whole another matter too. While it is tangential to terrorism and all, it's a really complicated topic, depending on which country you're talking about.

 

I'm not sure what are you talking about. I'm talking about police literally being told be their superiors to not engage in stopping the violent crimes done by immigrants, becouse it might make them look racist.

________________________________

What about it?

________________________________

Oil can run out.

 

Do you seriously believe what you’re saying? Do you actually think the EU is trying to commit a genocide of native europeans. I have no response to that other than what the actual fuck.

 

Keep dreaming son.

 

I’ve only heard of that happening in the U.K. with the sex ring. I haven’t heard of any instances of that in Poland, though it’s not hard to believe that they would do that just do not provoke further tensions.

 

Maybe becouse we didn't take in any migrants?

 

They started restricting freedom of speech and press and undermining the independence of the judiciary, such as undermining the Consitutional Tribunal and coercing the media. Or at least according to Freedom house and the Human Rights Watch.
https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2017/poland
https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-reports/assault-press-freedom-poland
https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/10/...rule-law-and-human-rights-under-attack-poland

________________________________

So you were just referencing the U.K. sex ring, or was there another instance in your country where a similar event happened?

________________________________

While that's technically true, but by the time that happens the entire world economy would collapse and many generations of dictators would have already passed. Countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia have oil reserves in the hundreds of billions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Venezuela. They'll live off of it as comfortably as they can because the alternative is democracy, which would threaten their power. That's why this phenomena is called the "Resource Curse," since countries don't depend on the welfare or productivity of their citizens to keep their governments running.

 

I was also referencing Sweden.

 

Do you mean this?

 

YES THEY ARE
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Has a good like ratio

...
The closest thing to gay frogs is the herbicide atrazine changing the sex and behavior of frogs.

But that doesn't mean that the government is purposely trying to make frogs gay. No one is. The people responsible for using atrazine is the agriculture industry. But they don't care if frogs turn gay or not. That's it. They didn't even know about this.

 

While I admit it's probably not the intention of the goverment or the companies. Said companies prably did know that was happening.

 

I mean now they do, but they don’t test pesticides for their effects on frogs or most other wildlife until after the fact :-/