It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Reason Some Americans Hate's not because they are "illegal"

page: 43
<< 40  41  42    44  45 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 04:07 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 04:42 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

That's what I know this is about.

Well if you KNOW what this is must have solid verifiable facts to prove that...let's see them.

Oh course you don't...because it is just a way for you to dismiss the entire topic.

But I'll let you in on a little secret...I'm not angry because I don't have "everything I ever wanted"...I am actually very content with my life.

I'm so content...I wish others could enjoy my type of successes in life...which is why I want to see more have that opportunity. So what does that tell me about people that don't want to give that opportunity to people???

Should a drunk driver kill someone in a car wreck, would you blame the person he killed for being in his way? Judging by your posts in this thread, I tend to believe you would.

Nope...people are responsible for their actions...that's why you don't see me complaining about "illegals" being deported if they are caught. That doesn't mean I agree with it...but I won't complain about the consequences of their actions. But I will still advocate for that law to change, because I believe it is wrong.

I hold everyone to personal American citizens that can't find a job...this is on your own shoulders...not the "illegals".

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Well if you KNOW what this is must have solid verifiable facts to prove that...let's see them.

Oh course you don't...because it is just a way for you to dismiss the entire topic.

Dismiss the entire topic? Is that what I am doing? You mean I am sitting here posting profusely, trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone who refuses to return the favor because I am dismissive?


Nope...people are responsible for their actions...that's why you don't see me complaining about "illegals" being deported if they are caught. That doesn't mean I agree with it...but I won't complain about the consequences of their actions. But I will still advocate for that law to change, because I believe it is wrong.

See, here's the crazy thing... I voted for Obama last election. I held out a little hope for him, and none for McCain. He disappointed me to no end. Ergo, I want him gone from the White House and would never in a million years vote for him again. He has sued states for doing what his administration has both miserably failed to do and have at times been dismissal about doing; he has chosen to tighten the bonds between private industry and government by the unprecedented bailouts of AIG, GM, Chrysler, and a long list of banks; he has broken his promise during the campaign to make all bills publicly accessible for a time period before any official votes took place; he has not yet pulled out of Iraq completely, and has also engaged Afghanistan; he has tried to take governmental control of an entire industry (health care) without improving anything for the average person and instead subjecting those who cannot afford the high cost of insurance to criminal penalties; he has spent billions in our tax dollars, much more than Bush (who was a legendary spendthrift in his own right) ever thought of; and he has not ended the recession/depression, despite all the hype and double-speak he could muster.

But... all that aside, this immigration thing is perhaps the best thing he has done, save for two details:
  • He did it unilaterally without Congressional input, totally against the spirit of separation of powers contained in the US Constitution he swore to uphold and defend.

  • He is not stopping the core problem (unchecked illegal immigration) that caused the situation in the first place.

Now you come on here with this hyped-up propaganda about Americans are to blame for illegals wading across a ditch in defiance of the law because they are "lazy"... and yes, it irks me to hear some of the hardest-working people on the planet put down like that. I know the younger generation has more than its share of self-entitled lazy members, but to make a blanket statement like that is just plain bigoted and prejudicial!

Then, when confronted with facts about the additional crimes illegal aliens tend to commit (fraud, identity theft, etc.) you fall back on some lame tirade about how the actions of some shouldn't be used against all... when that is exactly what you do from the OP forward to Americans!

When confronted with the logic of illegal labor driving down wages due to the legal issues, you want specific wordings instead of self-evident results. And you want them so badly, you even insinuate that illegal actions are not illegal, or that people can accomplish the legally impossible.

When confronted with facts, you spin; when confronted with reality, you misdirect; when confronted with logic, you twist; and when confronted finally with exasperation, you scream "racist!".

Just like you will do with this post. Go ahead. It doesn't anger me; I am pretty content with my life as well. But it does anger the population of Americans you just insulted, and it is those Americans who will be going to the polls this November to pass final judgement on Barrack Obama. They will remember this.

I only hope you don't get Romney elected... all we need is an Obama clone wearing a Republican badge.


edit on 6/21/2012 by TheRedneck because: forgot Obamacare

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 09:43 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
who ever said i was hell bent on killing anyone ??
haven't yet, why would i need to ??

border patrol has been around for decades, this is nothing new.
the hightened demand upon their services however, is rather new and they are severely under-staffed, in jeopardy every day via the policies of this Administration and should not have to "ask" for help.

your idea of innocent people and mine obviously differ.
and no, i see no need to kill innocent people but that isn't what this topic is about is it ??

is it really necessary for you to distract rather participate in your own thread?

care to point out where i claimed that i "place no value on human life?"
[in any post at any time on these boards]

am still wondering if or when you'll answer any of the questions i posed.
i would suppose they are far too revealing for you to be honest or responsive for that matter.

IF there are those who view me as an invader, i haven't met them and doubt i ever will.
IF you are referring to native indians, careful, many of them is family.
IF you are just blowing smoke cause you have nothing better, carry on.

ppl have been plotting against me and my family all the days of my life, what's new ??
who's advocating murder ???
i mentioned exercising rights, you can call it what you want but it is what it is.
and pssssst: it is the DUTY of Americans to defend this nation, not a choice.

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 09:51 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

I would say I have pretty direct first hand experience.

So how many illegals have you killed??? You said you aren't all let's hear it.
hmmmm, really ??
a born and bred American (your words), who isn't old enough to remember the last amnesty just 26yrs ago, who has no clue what a sanctuary city is and refuses to reveal your parentage or their possible struggle (some would guess they are still illegal), yet, you somehow have 1st hand experience with the "plight of the illegal immigrants" ??
ok, how ?? are you perhaps one of their employers ??

i'm not all talk, what do you want to know ??
i've already said i haven't killed anyone but i have shot a female intruder who was not an illegal.
what's your point here ??

edit on 21-6-2012 by Honor93 because: fix format

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:17 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

You said "illegals" should be deported after they are treated.
I said that isn't doctors and nurses job...
you said it is there American duty to do so...
I asked how a citizen verifies legal status...
you said ICE employees are citizens...
then I said "doctors and nurses aren't ICE employees".
you would be mistaken. someone else started that conversation, not i.
actually, i never said (bold above) or any such thing and i challenge you to prove otherwise.
i simply corrected your "they don't have time" comment and it went from there.

now, of the things i did say (underlined above), which are wrong ?? none.
so, what's the problem here ??

You see how that have to logically follow a conversation and have the reading comprehension to understand it.
yes SO, you would be wise to follow your own observation

as i said previously, ICE officers are not on every corner and can be summoned as needed.
no need to make it more difficult than it already is.

those answers would be provided in legislation which we are not drafting.
Also, it is not the topic of this thread and why do you need to be reminded of that?

i already gave you the biggest secret, if you don't recognize it, that's not my problem.

IF i had such an ability, why would i want to share it here or with someone i do not know ??

Ummmm....yeah....Constitutional Ammendments are the law of the land
ummm ... NO !! ... and if this weren't soooo horribly funny, i'd almost cry

you say you're an American, eh ??
you sure have a LOT to learn.

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:23 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
i don't get "chain emails" from either side of the fence.
snopes has been wrong almost as much as they have been right.
i could get better odds from the roulette wheels in vegas.

didn't question if it was true, the point still applied to the topic.
even if you don't agree, why harp on it ?? what's the point ??

i didn't buy into any story, i used it as an example, nothing more.
so, you'd eliminate all textbooks because they exercise hypotheticals?
geez man, can you stay on topic ??

dude, you're really reaching for straws now, don't trip and hurt yourself

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:40 PM
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
don't be coy, i am an American of Irish descent and ...
an American of German descent and ...
an American of Native Indian descent and ...
an American of Mexican descent and ...
an American of Scottish descent and ...
an American of others yet to be discovered

look, i am an American, first and foremost.
is it wrong to expect such of the next guy ??

truth be told, i doubt you could find 1 human in this country (citizen or not) who is 1/2 and 1/2 of any nationality, so to me, it becomes a question of loyalty and by natural behaviors, one will identify their greatest loyalty first.

ya know what else ??
ALL of the legal immigrants i've encountered (many) present themselves as Americans only,
i wonder why that is ??

even the PC version bites ... why isn't it ... American Mexican or American Italian or American Aussie or American Chinese or whatever ... why is the "American" second ??

so, you're not much of a 'mystery' man are ya ??

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:29 PM
We don't fear competition and we don't hate immigrants, what we can't stand is illegals coming here milking the system having babies that allow them to stay and milk the system even more. It must be nice to ignore the laws and not pay taxes.

If we need more works (not just cheap labor), they should raise how many work permits they allow each year or start allowing more people from all over the world to come here the legal way.

What pisses us off the most is seeing the federal government failing to do its job.

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:33 PM

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by jjf3rd77

The only problem with your theory is that ALL illegal immigrants are criminals because they are here breaking the law and not going through the LEGAL process!!!!! That makes them criminals!

That isn't a problem with my theory...that is the point of my theory.

You and others have this need to paint them as vile criminals.

It's a fact that "illegals" have completely taken over certain types of work...they have done so because they are "better" workers. They work harder, they work longer, and they will do it for less money. I don't like that they get paid crap for hard work...not because I think it drives down wages...but because I think they are being taken advantage of.

But guess what...they are extremely grateful for that wage...even though no American citizen would do the same type of work for that wage...they are happy for it.

I'm not sure where you got "racism" out of my OP...I never said it was about is about determination vs is about hard work vs entitlement.

Americans are being out worked by "illegals"....and that is why you and other are trying to demonize them....because the fact that they out work you scares you.

A simple truth is an illegal immigrant is illegal and therefore a criminal. If I go out and break laws I am a criminal. I can say I was just trying to provide a better live for my family by doing illegal acts but it still does not change the fact that I did it illegally. Your argument seems to me more a it doesn't matter what laws are broken as long as the intention was a just one. So then you would not mind if someone come to your home to steal your stuff as long as it was going to feed their kids?

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:44 PM
Oh my God, 43 pages of OS defending illegals. After all the facts, all the well thought out, articulate and respectable replies to his thread he hasn't budged an inch. I've got to hand it to the ones remaining in the discussion. I admire your tenacity. I gave up pages ago.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 01:44 AM
"The unabated influx of immigrants to our land, which has the effect of overwhelming our distinct cultural and religious identity and reducing my people to an insignificant minority in their own country, amounts to a policy of cultural genocide" - The Dalai Lama, Winner of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize, speaking in Geneva on March 10, 1997

Multiculturalism has Failed in Europe

The "because they are illegal" argument does not hold water because it is not as if anyone here has a vote in the matter. With a stroke of a pen they can all be legal but does that suddenly make it okay in your minds?

"Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It is up to you as teachers to make all of these sick children well -- by creating the international child of the future." Dr. Chester M. Pierce, Professor of Education at Harvard, addressing the Association for Childhood Education International in April,1972

Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), Marxist intellectual and politician, “believed that it was necessary first to delegitimize the dominant belief systems of the predominant groups and to create a “counter-hegemony” (i.e., a new system of values for the subordinate groups) before the marginalized could be empowered. Moreover, because hegemonic values permeate all spheres of civil society — schools, churches, the media, voluntary associations — civil society itself, he argued, is the great battleground in the struggle for hegemony, the “war of position.” From this point, too, followed a corollary for which Gramsci should be known (and which is echoed in the feminist slogan) — that all life is “political.” Thus, private life, the work place, religion, philosophy, art, and literature, and civil society, in general, are contested battlegrounds in the struggle to achieve societal transformation.” This, according to Fonte, “is the very core of the Gramscian-Hegelian world view — group-based morality, or the idea that what is moral is what serves the interests of “oppressed” or “marginalized” ethnic, racial, and gender groups.”

Some of the 45 Declared Goals of Communism:
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. the language of the KGB—or ‘psychological warfare.’ What it basically means is, to change the perception of reality, of every American, to such an extent that despite of the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country...

...Most of the people who graduated in the sixties (drop-outs or half-baked intellectuals) are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and the educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. They are contaminated; they are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind[s], even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. In other words, these people... the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To rid society of these people, you need another twenty or fifteen years to educate a new generation of patriotically-minded and common sense people, who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States society.”

~ Yuri Beznemov, former KGB agent on Ideological Subversion

The KGB ACTUALLY calls the left leaning, self-righteous, pathologically altruistic, moral high grounders: USEFUL IDIOTS
edit on 22-6-2012 by Wotaneyed because: fIXED FONT

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 02:39 AM
reply to post by Wotaneyed

I didn't have room in my previous post to comment on the posted video (Not that anyone is going to see it after 43 pages). She mixes Jews and Zionist up as one and I don't hold that view. In fact, I don't care if you call them Illuminati, reptilians, communists or capitalists. It appears has as if there is a higher concentration of theses people under the Jewish label but as a group they seem to have been manipulated for a grand agenda just like everyone else. I also disagree that it is only for "white nations". The primary focus has been in "white nations" but all of the developed "democratic" nations are having immigration issues and dealing with rogue governments that promote it.

It's saddening at how easily the citizenry can be emotionally programmed to destroy their own sovereignty. Government's create what is is relevant, repulsive, or virtuous in the minds of a large percentage of the people they preside over.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 05:00 AM
Yes, most work their butts off for little pay and long hours, and most do live in small homes with tons of people in it. Yes, most work 2 to 3 jobs, get little sleep. I'm one of a few who have said this to those I know, that I envy Mexicans (they were the majority in my old home town for most are illegal there) because they can work 2 or 3 jobs, get 3 hours of sleep, and work their butts off and I moan about having to work a simple 8 hour shift. Least I'm honest.

But they ARE here illegally. Il-legal. Not legal. If something is not legal, it is breaking the law, it is criminal.

Stealing. That is illegal. Breaking the law. Criminal.
Cheating on exams. Illegal. Breaking school law. Criminal in that way.
Beating someone up. Illegal. Criminal.
Being in a Country without permission. Illegal. Criminal.

Hard workers or not; the thief is going to get in trouble with the law for breaking the law. The exam cheater is going to lose out and fail for breaking the law of the school. The abuser who beat up someone is going to be fined or jailed for breaking the law. The person in a Country without having the proper docs and such is going to be deported etc for breaking the law.

It is all one in the same. It doesn't matter how hard a person works. How kind they are. How much they sacrifice. If they do something illegal; against the law, they are going to have to answer for that. End of story.

Being an illegal alien is ILLEGAL. That's that. I don't see what is so hard to understand, OutKast.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 05:53 AM
I the past, there was a pathway to assimilation, you came in through Ellis island, got processed, was able to get a job legitimately, had to learn English over time to do it. Now, people come in and basically have to hide from the law, not much time for English classes, not easy to work legitimately, so its harder as a result to assimilate. Also with the country falling on hard times I do believe people are hostile to the competition. It is kind of disheartening when teens cant find a job because those jobs historically filled by teens are now filled by immigrants who have come here illegally. And construction workers are out of work by the thousands because their wages have been undercut by workers largely from Latin America who because of their desperation, will work for lower wages. That is one thing most Americans have no concept of, is the crushing poverty these people come from to come here. I really don't think a lot of them want to be here, they have the choice of watching their children starve or trying to make it here so they can send money back home. And business owners and the ruling class on both sides of the border take advantage of that poverty. I feel for them, but the unfortunate truth is that they are devaluing labor prices because of the loosening of the labor market, which is driving the standard of living down here. This is also largely due to the extinction of unions in the US (I wonder if most people realize that there was almost NO middle class before unionization in this country?) The sad fact is both the immigrants and the American citizens are the losers, while the top one percent benefits greatly. If we were to create a better pathway to citizenship, you would see the level of assimilation increase, more people learning English, better wages and as a result a more level playing field in the job market between immegrants and citizens, But this is EXACTLY what the elites dont want, and they own both the democratic and republican parties, so you will hear some shouting about it but it will stay the same. The "illegal immigration" problem is not a problem if you are a member of the ruling class. Its a benefit. A labor force of workers with no rights. Why would the one percent want to get rid of that?
edit on 22-6-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:11 AM

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

If you don't know the definition of public vs need more help than I can give you in a thread.

There can be restricted public land...but by is still public land. The government...yes by definition...does not own any PRIVATE LAND.

Oh how I wish you could give me the help I need in this thread. Thanks for being so concerned with my well being.

You assume that because property that a government owns is "public" property that the entire world owns it and should have access to it. The truth is that it is public because the collective legal people of the US own it, and in effect it is allowed to keep other people out, just like they would be able to do on their private property.

I'll admit that you are right that this isn't private land, my point is that the government has the right to keep outsiders off of there property. You still haven't answered, if you feel you as an individual are allowed to keep people off of your property, why shouldn't the government be allowed to do the same.

They are welcome to their services just as any "citizen" is.

Or do you think foreigners can't ride Amtrak???

So you think the rest of the world should get the profits of publicly owned stock. So if the US government sells its GM stock, everyone in the world should get its share of the money. Wow that makes sense.

Yes foreigners can ride Amtrak, if they are here legally, but they don't own it. Given this I suppose your in favor allowing people on Amtrak even if they don't have ID? I dont think your boy Obama would approve of that.

I'm ok with them coming here and working like every other immigrant has in history.

You are hanging onto this argument that because I support our country going back to it's roots where we openly welcomed anyone who wanted to come here to work hard, that it means I should support them is such an illogical argument...I'm actually scared that your brain works that way.

Did you expect citizens in the past to welcome immigrants into their homes and feed them??? If not...why do you expect me to? you expect those that support "legal" immigration to house and feed those "legal" immigrants??? If not...why do you expect me to?

I'm sure you know this, but back then it was our governments policy to let those people in, therefore it was LEGAL for them to be here. It has never been the policy of this or any other government in the world to not allow themselves to protect there own borders.

I'm scared your brain works in a way where you can't understand the difference between our country legally welcoming people and you wanting us to encourage people to illegally break into the country and then forgive them for doing so.

Also, our government allowed people to freely come until they thought there wasn't enough room for them. Then they restricted the process. Rather they were right or wrong, they had the right to do this. Do you honestly think that if a billion people would have showed up to Ellis island that we would have taken them all? So to claim to that the US has no right to enforce its border laws is somehow going back to our roots is a joke.

Do I expect people to house legal immigrants? No. The difference is they are here legally. Advocates of legal immigration don't make arguments like you that says "these people deserve a chance on our land even if it means breaking the law because they are harder working than us".

Once you say that the law doesn't matter and people shouldn't be hampered by where they are born and only the quality of work matters, why all of the sudden are private property laws exempt? People work harder than you, they're entitled to more than you.

Because you currently own your property and can do what you want with it, under your own reasoning as to why the US doesn't have the right to keep people out or theyre being immoral, you also dont have the right to keep people out or you are being immoral.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:50 AM

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Yes you are saying to provide for them...but nice back peddle.

Do you think homeless people should be arrested for dumpster diving or for panhandling at a traffic light? If you don't...then maybe you should let them in your house...because they are breaking the law and you don't care.

I'm not back peddling your misunderstanding me. I'm not saying you should provide for them. I'm saying under your argument those people are more deserving of your stuff than you are. You admit that right now they are currently harder working than you, so they should have more than you.

I'm not asking you to give them charity, I'm saying they have EARNED your stuff by working harder than you, and by you not giving it to them your being immoral under your own reasoning.

So the homeless argument doesn't really apply, because I never said that homeless person is better than me and I shouldn't be privileged over them just because the situation I was born into.

The situation I was born in helped me get to where I am today...but I still had to work for it.

Maybe I should correct myself...I am currently lazier than most immigrants...but I worked hard in the past.

And I simply want them to have the opportunity to work hard for themselves to become successful as well. I have never advocated a hand out or that they should be given anything.

See when you originally talked about how lazy Americans were it seemed less offensive because you were including yourself by saying immigrants also work harder than you. But now whose backpeddling. Your right! Most Americans are lazy, but not you, your the exception, a super hard worker that deserves everything you own!

Wanting them to be successful as well is fine, I want the same. But advocating that the US doesn't have the right to keep anyone out because of that is ludicrous.

Ummm...yeah...why wouldn't I? They are people just like everyone else...why would I treat them any differently than anyone else?

So you know the criminal history of every person you see at a park???

You are really really reaching....please tell me how you know the criminal history of a person you see in a public park...I am very interested.

Because it would get over crowded. And Im not saying that I know the criminal background of every legal person at the park, but if there is a dangerous criminal at least the authorities would have a way to know it, whereas with illegals there would be no way of knowing.

Only citizens?

So you don't even think legal immigrants should be allowed into public parks??? are an elitist aren't you???

Ok I meant legal resident, is that the correct term? Anyone who is here legally, rather it be a tourist, immigrant, etc. Yes legal immigrants should be allowed to use public parks.

Instead of answering the point I made you chose to nitpick on words but thats fine, I'll admit that it could have been confusing.

Can your argument get any dumber???

Tell me...are tours of these public parks allowed? Can tourists from a different country come and access this park? If you are ok with that...why don't you allow them into your house???

Um, sure tourists are allowed, there here legally. Its like this. If I own land and I post it, but I give someone permission to be on the land, the they are allowed to use it. Just like public land, if you are here legally, the you have permission to use it.

Just calling an argument dumb that you can't answer won't make it go away. You don't want people on your land without permission, so what right have you to tell the collective of the people in the US that they should have to let people on their land without permission.

I'll repeat this again, every single argument you made as to why it was ok for people to break the law to be on public land in the US applies equally to private land. You have not given one reason as to why this isn't the case.

Again I repeat, if the US doesn't have the right to keep people off of their land, why do you have the right?

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:59 AM
reply to post by Grambler

Because you currently own your property and can do what you want with it ...

Tsk, tsk. You're not paying attention.

The federal govt and its myriad of agencies and NGOs, your state officials and its myriad of agencies and NGOs, right down to your local government with its millions of petty bureaucrats and NGOs, not to mention your nosy neighbors, all can and do tell you what you can do (or can't do) with your property. They all get their directives from the UN and its myriad of agencies and NGOs at the top.

Sorry to break the news, but your Rule of Law has been toast for a long time now and nobody's doing much of a push to get it back and those who try are vilified as dirtbags and druggies. The rest of us just talk about "how it used to be" and "how it should be". De'nial isn't just a river in Egypt. But we could learn a lot from the Egyptians.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:08 AM
reply to post by frazzle

Fair point and I agree. Im just saying in this situation if Outkast is making demands with what be done with public property, they should also try to do so with their private property.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:11 AM
reply to post by Grambler

My point is that there is no such thing as private property. There is also no such thing as public property.

As long as those in positions of power can dictate what may or may not be done on any patch of dirt, those in power own it all ~ including any life forms that may be occupying that patch of dirt.

new topics

top topics

<< 40  41  42    44  45 >>

log in