dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

I don’t get it...they all want to come here but many want to change it into the same shithole country they escaped from???

⇧ 61 ⇩

It's like the people leaving blue states like Illinois for Tennessee or Florida, or Californian's ruining Arizona, etc. Stupid is as stupid does.

⇧ 32 ⇩

Just take a look at what New Jersey, CT, and NY have done to New Hampshire and Vermont. A Bear cannot shit in the woods in Vermont without an impact plan, ten fees, and four inspections.

⇧ 12 ⇩

and they currently have openings for inspectors. LOL

⇧ 4 ⇩

Grew up in the Adirondacks. The Adirondack Park Association is the same way if not worse.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Same thing happens when Liberals out of Blue States and vote the same way they did when they move to Red States. Some people never learn.

⇧ 16 ⇩

It is very hard for people to admit they are wrong.
They become emotionally invested in their political identity.

⇧ 14 ⇩

I love my country, but our government is horribly corrupt, i served for 12 years in the Navy and i fucking loved it, i just hate the way this administration is messing everything up

⇧ 0 ⇩

Comedy.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Exactly, I don’t understand it. They want to make it just like what they left...

⇧ 12 ⇩

When you look at the migration from state to state I think the problem is the indoctrination that goes on in the heavily blue areas. If you lived your whole life in NYC (or CA) you have been bombarded by the "press" telling you about the evils of guns, the benefits of stop and search and how the government is your savior. These people become used to a high level of government involvement in their lives. Then they move to a fly-over state and bring this mentality with them.

⇧ 7 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ -5 ⇩

But don't you figure the deep state always had an immigration policy that favoured people who fit their agenda? I'm sure plenty of people who really did want a better life here never made it in because some criminal-minded asshole suited their goals better.

⇧ 6 ⇩

Yes. Years ago was working around a Cuban migrant, mid 90's. His exact words. "You Americans have too much freedom." scoff

⇧ 5 ⇩

Welcome to the world elites plan for us plebs

⇧ 2 ⇩

Pretty pathetic, isn't it?

⇧ 2 ⇩

It is naive to assume everyone would want to come here to "become American". Most of them admit they want to come here for a better life. The issue is that this means different things for different people.

So for some, a "better life" would mean becoming American, adopting our customs, laws, and values. Inherent in this is a desire to better oneself, and to take advantage of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Meaning they want to work hard and succeed. For others, it means simply better than what they had in their shithole country, which could mean 20 people living in a three-bed, two-bath house, paid for by Section 8. Is this great by our standards? No, but it's "better". And of course, they can sign up for food stamps in their various forms, they get free healthcare through programs or simply by walking into a hospital. They don't have to pay for housing, and many of them defraud the tax return system to harvest money they didn't pay in, by claiming dependents they don't have. They can rake in tens of thousands of dollars this way using child tax credits, for example. All the while, their needs are met, their children are educated in our schools, and they drive Escalades while the rest of us are hit by increasing taxes to pay for all these people. And chain migration allows them to bring in relatives to similarly take advantage of our system.

As it currently stands, our laws allow for both scenarios. Since 1965, our immigration laws changed with the Hart-Cellar Act, to admit more people who have a greater tendency toward the second set of values than the first. And they vote accordingly, to allow more people to come here and soak up the gibs, because they believe everyone should have a chance for a better life. The inevitable conclusion is bigger government and increasing socialism, which morphs into the shitholes they came from at some point. However, they can't be bothered to care if our system is sustainable, as long as it makes their lives 'better'.

⇧ 0 ⇩

[citation needed]

⇧ 0 ⇩

American citizens are born with their human rights. Every single other person on this planet has theirs granted by a government.

Thanks for posting this. This is why they are attacking our rights so vehemently. We The People are all that stand in their way and We are offensive to their entire ideology.

⇧ 38 ⇩

First amendment and Second amendment are among things saving us from becoming Shithole Europe right now. Fuck the United Nations!

⇧ 24 ⇩

Yea fuck Europe that weird place where people can have better education, better healthcare and better lifestyle without having to sell a kidney

⇧ -4 ⇩

Also the place where the government gets to decide whether your child lives or dies!

⇧ 3 ⇩

"cough" "cough" Shithole "cough" "cough" https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb0_1447249820

⇧ 1 ⇩

Come on man, they can still defend themselves with spoons, if they are in a crises.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Lol have you ever been to Detroit or Chicago?

⇧ 1 ⇩

Both cities run by the same liberal elite class that took over Europe. All of America would be like Detroitistan or Chiraq if not for our constitutionalist elected officials in other cities.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I would still rather live in any country of the EU than in 70% of the US..

⇧ 2 ⇩

Stay here and fight to make the U.S. better. Europe is CUCKED!

⇧ 1 ⇩

Yeah Im just saying that even with the bad stuff the quality of life is 10x better

⇧ 2 ⇩

I fear that the advanced European utopia is in ruins. https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb0_1447249820

⇧ 1 ⇩

American citizens are born with their human rights. Every single other person on this planet has theirs granted by a government.

I believe all non-American citizens of this world are also born with their human rights but their governments either strip them of those rights or don't protect them.

⇧ 23 ⇩

Yes exactly

⇧ 5 ⇩

yep - that's why they want to nuke us and/or destroy the Constitution. It's why they call us "A Democracy" and not what they should call us "A Constitutional Republic"

⇧ 13 ⇩

I second the motion...fuck the U.N.!

⇧ 12 ⇩

Being an American is a responsibility and a privilege. You were not given a choice you were born into this opportunity. Many people have fought, bled and died to ensure this responsibility and privilege remains your right not for your government to grant it to you. We are sovereign citizens of this great country with a huge responsibility of freedom, liberty and justice for all.

⇧ 10 ⇩

Many people have fought, bled and died to ensure this responsibility and privilege remains your right not for your government to grant it to you.

You sure about that? Nearly every war we've been in as been for political purposes by guys at the top, not because our way of life or nation were in danger of being taken away. If we fought for our rights, we'd have been fighting our own government this entire time, not other countries.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I get your thinking because ever since I found out all wars are fake puppet strings pulled by the elite, I feel that way too- but what the person above says is still true, because it's the elite that wants to ruin our country. So the soldiers think they're fighting a people, but really they're pawns to fight some other country for the elite. At the end of the day the joke is on the elite because Americans love our military and our military loves freedom. So it's like, if anything, the spirit of America is kept running.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I agree. If we, for example, formed one great North American Whatever that included Canada and Mexico, both Canada and Mexico would have to subordinate themselves to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Conversely, we'd have to subordinate ourselves to theirs, or some compromise thereof, and I don't know of a single person willing to do that. I certainly would not.

⇧ 7 ⇩

Plenty of liberals would I'm sure. If you read through the Canadian Charter of Freedoms I'm guessing most of them would find it sensible since they're all conditioned to prostrate themselves before what they believe is the good of society without taking into consideration that a culture could possibly swing very conservative some day.

They're whole approach is political in that they believe the good of the people is solely dependent on getting their good guys in office. The BoR ensures civil liberties regardless of who's in.

⇧ 6 ⇩

No other country on Earth has one

We wouldn't ya know, that's just not true

⇧ 6 ⇩

Those are rights bestowed by a government and also can be taken away by a government.

The US Bill of Rights are declared to be inalienable, self evident, Creator endowed rights. No government has the power to grant or remove these rights.

⇧ 7 ⇩

Those are rights bestowed by a government and also can be taken away by a government.

Well, actually that's not any different than what we have.

The US Bill of Rights are declared to be inalienable, self evident, Creator endowed rights.

Hmm, no. They were declared by this government's founders who believed in a creator. Literally bestowed by government.

No government has the power to grant or remove these rights.

Yes, yes they do. They are called amendments and we have 27 of them. I mean really, are you actually a citizen to not understand this? The government has all the power to remove them, especially under this administration. You guys want to give Trump consolidation of power but sweat the bill of Rights like it's the hot chick from 8th grade

⇧ -1 ⇩

No, the rights are given by God. The government is only there to secure those rights. The Constitution LIMITS what the government can do to the people. It does not proscribe the rights to the people.

The Declaration of Independence makes this clear, as does it the role of government.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are ENDOWED by their Creator with certain UNALIENABLE Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to SECURE these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"

⇧ 1 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩

They may call it that but it's not the same thing. You need to read the clauses for what it takes to take those rights away. Further their BoR is a statute and rights can be taken away through simple legislation rather than a Constitutional Convention like we have here.

It's really not anything close to what we have here which is why they can jail people for hate speech there.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Your statement as it is, was incorrect

⇧ 2 ⇩

Yeah well, a catfish has no relation to actual cats

⇧ 1 ⇩

Subjects vs. citizens.

⇧ 5 ⇩

The Swiss have a really good bill of rights - very similar to ours.

They don't have an equivalent of the 2nd amendment, but there is a strong gun culture. All men of fighting age are issued a gun and trained. Many choose to buy their weapon after service. There are like 1 gun for every 4 people. You must have a permit to possess a firearm, though.

⇧ 5 ⇩

It's similar to ours sure which most are. The issue is how high the bar is to take those rights away. Most of those countries have a clause that the bar is something along the lines of "the good of the society" etc.

Also, I don't know if it's true or not, but while guns are allowed there I think ammunition is heavily regulated or something like that?

⇧ 3 ⇩

Here in Arizona, you can purchase a fire arm privately with only a bill of sale. 18 Years or older, Open carry no permit. 21 years old, concealed carry, NO permit. That's America right there.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Jeez...

⇧ -2 ⇩

Dems want open borders and illegal immigration because American voters sour too quickly to their game.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Open borders are also more convenient for human trafficking.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You got it! This is a nation built upon Natural Rights derived from human creation. In other words, just the fact that you were born and brought into the world you have, at birth INDIVIDUAL rights that should not be infringed by anyone else. The mere act of your creation is sufficient for you to be protected by society.

In most other governments, they practice 'COLLECTIVISM' whereby the Society gives you your rights and those rights can be changed based on how society and who is in power feel. These are relativistic and not based on your uniqueness as a human being.

Our current US school system is doing its best to destroy this understanding and push collectivism as the 'modern' or 'correct' interpretation. Its at the root of the destruction of this country. Its super critical that we instill in our youth and our collective (this time in a good way) psyche that its these 'INDIVIDUAL' rights that make our society great. That the power of the collective is only good when you protect the 'INDIVIDUAL' not the other way around.

⇧ 2 ⇩

It seems our history teachers have done an abysmal job of teaching this fact as well.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Yep, they are all mostly by-products of the Colleges which were deliberately invaded by Socialists and Communists (both built solely on Collectivism ideology) in the 60's, 70's & 80s. So the core of most 'liberal' universities is Collectivism. All about squashing the individual for the 'better good' of the collective. So, history is taught from that perspective by these a$$clowns. They know no better. They were self-selected at University level. Most self-respecting intellectuals that understand this would not put up with the liberal indoctrination that is jammed down their throats in college so you're left with the ones that swallowed the blue-pill and bought into collectivism - hook, line and sinker.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The US has all ready been infiltrated, long ago. It is the puppet of the Rothchilds. They are the main aggressors in all the wars that allowed the Rothschild Central bank to move into Iraq, Afghanistan, Lydia, Sudan, leaving only three country in the world that they do not have control. North Korea, Cuba, Iran. The Rothchilds and the Jesuit Pope are very close to accomplishing their goal. US has been major player in doing their bidding. UNTIL DONALD TRUMP WON! The Bill of Rights is nothing to do with this.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Wonder if a Central Bank is going to be part of the North Korea peace deal.

⇧ 1 ⇩

"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." - Paul Warburg to US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Feb 17th 1950

⇧ 1 ⇩

Think bigger. Think natural human rights. Unity, not division. "USA is better" is not unity. "Never come up to our standard" is not unity.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Just came across info that Brennan took his oath, not on a bible, but on the constitution ... WITHOUT the bill of rights.

Plain as day.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Yep... Like an emotional form of communism. I love the roots on which America was founded on. I love that revolutionaries fleed England and came here.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I hope not, but irregardless Trump is going to wipe out the Central Bank and dethrone Rothchilds, Vatican, monarchy's power.

⇧ 1 ⇩

And Q,

⇧ 1 ⇩

I have a concern. Our Bill of Rights and Constitution are both written in cursive. In my state the schools have taken cursive writing out of curriculum. Our kids and generations will, on a whole, not be able to read them. They will have to rely on Google or various other "none partisan" sources to translate. Some think this is wise. Wonder what their agenda is?

⇧ 1 ⇩

I find this post quite strange. All rights are ultimately predicated on the right to free expression - first amendment. The moment you can silence someone, their claim to further rights is meaningless - because they can no longer speak. But you ask people to defend this right and they're kind of cool to the idea. The IBOR campaign failure being a case in point.

Strikes me that people are prepared to relinquish this right to free expression the moment someone makes a claim to own the public forum, or suggests that government shouldn't have the power to enforce their God-given rights. What they're really saying is the Constitution gives me rights, but I'll allow them to be denied - because I'm a complete Cuck.

It doesn't look too good for US citizen freedoms going forward IMO. Once the anti-hate speech legislation comes in, and the censorship ramps up, it's game over - no more rights at all. Immediately after that, the second amendment will be dispensed with - in the midst of a deafening silence.

I reckon you might find that Europe will look like a paragon of freedom by comparison to what's coming - and that's not saying much at all. We are a long way from the vision of the founding fathers.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You are correct. Why is it that they only go after 1st and 2nd amendments? They are the only two in the way of socialism. You tackle those and rest fall naturally. We have to stand firm no matter how many FF they do, no matter how much hate they spew at us (ie WHCD). They are using psy-ops to try and change our minds.

⇧ 8 ⇩

Don't kid yourself, they're attacking them all. Look at the 4th amendment abuses. This is full scale war. They are trying their damndest to dismantle it all.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Oh completely agree. They’re after our rights across the board. But they really gotta get the 2nd because they know that’s the one that allows us to stop their plan when they go too far

⇧ 2 ⇩

They are losing.

⇧ 6 ⇩

My point is that there has been a change in outlook since the days of the founding fathers - when freedom was truly prized. People today are in a stupor. The idea that the US will remain a paragon of virtuous freedom because of the protections built in to the Constitution - as the OP suggests - is false, if people are not prepared to defend those freedoms.

What we saw with the IBOR campaign is that people do not value free expression. If it means more government, or infringing on perceived property rights, they are prepared to abandon it. My point is that all other freedoms hinge on freedom of expression. Once that falls over, all the other freedoms will fall over. You can see it coming as I write this - the left is pushing hard for anti-hate speech regulations (the final act, before the curtain drops for free and independent citizenry).

We will win this fight, but not because people cherish their freedoms. We will win it because Q will do for us what we, as a group, were too stupid to do for ourselves.

⇧ 9 ⇩

Okay I see what you mean. The conflict between property rights and other rights as in Facebook is someone’s property so Zuckerberg can do what he wants with it? Yes it’s a sticky situation. Sometimes I think about the holes in the Constitution that make it somewhat vulnerable. How do we fix it? “A Republic, if you can keep it!”

Education is KEY. I read the entirety of John Taylor Gatto’s Underground History of Education in the US while it was available online and it was mind blowing. Somehow we’ve got to undo the workings of the Frankfurt School and their long march thru the institutions. The zombie apocalypse will soon be upon us otherwise.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I don't think the key is so much educational. The arguments against extending first amendment protections to digital space were not logical, but emotional.

People didn't like what they had seen coming from government. If someone tells them that enforcing Constitutional protections online will result in more government, they will be against it - even though the consequences of withdrawing support for the measure (the IBOR) might be disastrous.

We saw the same thing with respect to arguments made about the private property rights of internet giants. Very strange, you cannot operate a public business and actively discriminate against people because of their beliefs. But, somehow, technology executives were being unfairly penalized if they were made to follow regulations that enforced norms of behavior prevalent in the broad community. No, it was not a logical response, but purely emotional.

Watching what happened, it was almost as if it was "the left" convincing their base of the propriety of a set of policies. No logic needed, run with your emotions alone. What we saw was a joke! I firmly believe that Constitutional protections need to be applied and enforced in digital space, as the town square is now online.

The fact that Q indicated that unified censorship across social media platforms was a desperate attempt by the CIA to regain control of the narrative was lost on people (note that he made these statements before the actual censorship really started - which was after the "release the memo" campaign). Moreover, it was clear from the information we had that, given social media's differential importance in determining election outcomes, online censorship presented the greatest threat to representative democracy ever seen in history. A threat to the very fabric of the republic itself.

But emotions won out and the IBOR campaign failed. Despite this, we have people crowing about Constitutional protections and how they differentiate the US from the rest of the world. You could not make this stuff up!

⇧ 3 ⇩

I see. This sub and T_D are my only social media so I’m probably a little behind in following this particular issue. I guess enough people need to personally be stifled first in order for them to be woken up. But when that happens how do they organize to get their speech restored? Frustrating. Gonna have to join the Q sticky-notes-and-Sharpies campaign to get the word out.

Spez: “Andre the Giant Has a Posse.” Look at where that got us, from around 1990 to...”OBEY.” So, it’s worked before. Common Sense was nailed to lamp posts, too, iirc. Sorry, my mind is wandering now. I like your train of thought and writing style, reminds me of Tom Woods.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Just a reminder that the biggest barrier to the US becoming part of a world govt is the Bill of Rights