MartinX
Well-Known Member
- 345
- 1 184
Takie tam z ciapakowa... Ponoć sprofanował koran ...
Ostatnia edycja:
-
Forum Libertarian ma swój regulamin.
tomislav
libnet- kowidiańska tuba w twojej piwnicy!
- 4 777
- 13 006
Żadne zaklęcia lewaków ani niektórych konformistów z libnetu, nie zmienią w sprawie muzułmanów niczego.
Pierdolenie typu: znam kilkunastu takich i mają w dupie koran, to śmiechu warte popiskiwanie albo trollo-agentura. Idę o spory zakład, że w odpowiednich warunkach, ci mający niby w koziej dupie koran, zmienią się niemal natychmiast w gorliwych wyznawców allaha - z obawy o własne życie. Wystarczy jedno skinienie religijnego ojca-zjeba, a tego rodzaju swołocz od razu zewrze szeregi.
Pierdolenie typu: znam kilkunastu takich i mają w dupie koran, to śmiechu warte popiskiwanie albo trollo-agentura. Idę o spory zakład, że w odpowiednich warunkach, ci mający niby w koziej dupie koran, zmienią się niemal natychmiast w gorliwych wyznawców allaha - z obawy o własne życie. Wystarczy jedno skinienie religijnego ojca-zjeba, a tego rodzaju swołocz od razu zewrze szeregi.
Ostatnia edycja:
vast
Well-Known Member
- 2 745
- 5 808
Bardziej racjonalne jest ocenianie muzułmanów przez pryzmat "tych poznanych" niż mówienie, że "tobie znani muzułmanie" odjebią ci łeb przy pierwszej okazji i to pomimo tego, że ich personalnie nie znasz i irracjonalne zakładasz, że masz większe pojęcie o nich niż ten, który ich uprzednio poznał.
tomislav
libnet- kowidiańska tuba w twojej piwnicy!
- 4 777
- 13 006
Filmik już kurna usunęli.
Nie Amel, bycie wyznawcą tak popierdolonej religii IMO dyskwalifikuje człowieka. By ją wyznawać, trzeba być lemingiem. Skrajnym.
Nie znam żadnego muzułmanina i nigdy nie chcę mieć z tego rodzaju ludźmi NIC do czynienia. Dla mnie to zaraza tak samo jak komuchy. Zresztą, muzułmanie to komuchy pełną gębą - u nich występuje skrajna de-indywidualizacja.
Nie Amel, bycie wyznawcą tak popierdolonej religii IMO dyskwalifikuje człowieka. By ją wyznawać, trzeba być lemingiem. Skrajnym.
Nie znam żadnego muzułmanina i nigdy nie chcę mieć z tego rodzaju ludźmi NIC do czynienia. Dla mnie to zaraza tak samo jak komuchy. Zresztą, muzułmanie to komuchy pełną gębą - u nich występuje skrajna de-indywidualizacja.
tomislav
libnet- kowidiańska tuba w twojej piwnicy!
- 4 777
- 13 006
Mnie nie interesują muzułmanie pro-forma, w cudzysłowie, tylko faktyczni wyznawcy gotowi zajebać na miazgę każdego, kto naszczał na koran.
Ostatnia edycja:
vast
Well-Known Member
- 2 745
- 5 808
Gwoli ścisłości - wygląda na to, że sytuacja miała miejsce 20 sierpnia, ale dopiero wczoraj wbiła tam policja aby zatrzymać sprawców...
Tutaj news sprzed miesiąca:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-camp-Germany-resident-tore-pages-Koran.html
I tutaj news z dzisiaj, po niemiecku niestety. Jak ktoś nie szprechen, to na translator i tłumaczyć na angielski. Bo polski to bieda.
http://www.mdr.de/thueringen/sued-thueringen/suhl-polizeieinsatz100.html
Dzisiaj nad ranem był wjazd. Pewnie skonfiskowali telefony i jakiś polismen ujawnił filmik
Tutaj news sprzed miesiąca:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-camp-Germany-resident-tore-pages-Koran.html
I tutaj news z dzisiaj, po niemiecku niestety. Jak ktoś nie szprechen, to na translator i tłumaczyć na angielski. Bo polski to bieda.
http://www.mdr.de/thueringen/sued-thueringen/suhl-polizeieinsatz100.html
Dzisiaj nad ranem był wjazd. Pewnie skonfiskowali telefony i jakiś polismen ujawnił filmik
Wujaszek Ilicz
Well-Known Member
- 231
- 706
w zwiazku z zasada: w internecie nic nie ginie prosze aby ktos wstawil to ponownie gdy znajdzie.
tutaj: tylko audio
tutaj: tylko audio
Staszek Alcatraz
Tak jak Pan Janusz powiedział
- 2 794
- 8 467
Śledzę te wiadomości o imigrantach, ale nie przypominam sobie żadnych z sierpnia o zlinczowaniu człowieka w ośrodku dla uchodźców. Zmowa milczenia?
mikioli
Well-Known Member
- 2 770
- 5 382
Znajdź podobny filmik z naszego kręgu kulturowego...
Ostatnia edycja:
mikioli
Well-Known Member
- 2 770
- 5 382
Nie ma znaczenia gdzie, ale tego można było się domyśleć jak kamera wyszła out-side...
MartinX
Well-Known Member
- 345
- 1 184
Ostrzegam! w tle lewackie ścierwo! Aaaa i refugees Welcome!
- Admin
- #475
- 6 985
- 15 153
Cantwell się wypowiedział (pokreślenia moje):
Open Borders, or Market Immigration?
With Donald Trump at the forefront of the Republican presidential primary, and “refugees” pouring into Europe in record breaking numbers, immigration is a hot topic as of late. Reactions range from advocating giant walls be built, to amnesty, subsidy, citizenship, and voting rights. Whenever that great a chasm exists, there must be great controversy, and wherever such controversy exists, I must wade.
For a libertarian, the answer may at first seem quite obvious, open borders. Governments have this nasty habit of building walls to keep people in, far more than to keep them out. Arbitrary geopolitical boundaries seem quite senseless, when drawn by criminal enterprises calling themselves nation States. Governments obtain everything they have from coercive violence, and thus have no legitimate claim to control what are commonly considered public spaces. We will decide for ourselves who comes onto our property, thank you very much.
A practical and strategic problem then presents itself. If one is working toward building a more libertarian society, the importation of millions of communists, socialists, and religious fanatics – many of whom think the State should impose the will of their deity on the society – does not advance their purposes. Increased burdens on welfare rolls mean higher taxes. Increased crime means a greater police presence. Depressed wages means more people looking to government for solutions. Changing demographics in the age of political correctness means racial tension.
But the (good) libertarian will tend to put principle first, no doubt. If welfare rolls are burdened, abolish welfare. If a police presence is repressive, restrain or privatize the police. If wages are low, hire people. If racial tensions flare, abolish anti-discrimination laws. Met with the political realization that none of these things are going to happen, he may choose to allow the suffering and self righteously blame the State, or he may try to find a more practical solution to a problem that is happening immediately.
But let’s rewind a bit and analyze why people migrate in the first place. Growing up under the boot of the modern State, this can be difficult, but try to picture a free market world. People tend to be grouped together in various places throughout the globe. They have varying cultures, practices, and ethnic backgrounds much like they do now. Those cultures and practices lead to certain outcomes, some of which are more prosperous than others.
In one particular area, wages are very high. Even the lowest skilled worker is able to feed a family by working only 40 hours a week. In a market economy, this is a market signal that workers are in high demand in that area. With that signal sent, workers migrate to the area to fill the void. Wages fall until it no longer makes economic sense to travel to the area. Wages then stabilize. This is what healthy immigration looks like. Migration only occurs to meet a legitimate market demand, and once the demand is met, it ceases. There is no massive shift in demographics, the migrants integrate with the culture of the society, and everybody is happy.
But what if wages are very high, and (real) unemployment in the area is at 15%? This phenomenon can only occur under the boot of the State. This happens because of minimum wage laws, welfare subsidies, and other perverse economic incentives. Migrants respond to the market signal of high wages. They migrate, and some find jobs, and others do not. Those who do not find jobs end up on welfare rolls. Wages do not fall, and the market signal telling migrants to keep coming remains broadcasted to the world. More and more migrants come, the job market is saturated, they end up on the welfare rolls, and or involved in crime, and still the signal is broadcast to the world “Come here! Come here! Come here!” The welfare and crime burden increase in perpetuity. To meet the increased burden on public resources, money is printed. Money being printed causes prices to increase, but the steady supply of willing workers means wages do not rise with the prices of scarcer resources. Everybody in the society becomes increasingly miserable, and in their ignorance of economics they do not blame the minimum wage and welfare system, but rather demand their expansion. At this point, the misery of the society suggests to smart and productive people that this is not a good place to live, and the only migrants who continue to flow into the place are the lowest of the low. They breed, not only with each other, but with the natives – thereby irreparably lowering the genetic quality of the people in the society. The migrants, readily identified by their skin color, language, and culture, rightly become seen as a scourge on the society. If the natives refuse to do business with the migrants, they are branded as racists, and even sued or imprisoned for being so bigoted. This can result in nothing other than racially motivated violence.
At some point, we realize this cannot increase in perpetuity. It must hit a hard limit. Be it by a change in policy, a currency collapse, or riots in the street and a complete breakdown of the social order, the economics of the situation will bring a correction to that market. Depending on the form in which the correction comes, it could be cataclysmic, and with every moment the situation is allowed to continue the likelihood of that outcome increases.
So while the libertarian theorist may comfortably sit back from a distance and wag his finger at the government, the libertarian who actually wants to stop the suffering has no such option. There is an immediate problem, not in some dystopian future, or some Ayn Rand novel, or some economics text book, but in the real world right now. His list of options do not consist of principled or unprincipled behavior, but of policy changes or racial warfare.
Any well read libertarian would surely see market based immigration as a great benefit to any society, just as all market based activity is. But open borders in the presence of a command economy and welfare state is decidedly anti-market, anti-freedom, and anti-peace. If the situation were such that an infinite amount of time existed to solve the problem, I would agree with the open borders advocate that the answer is to educate the populace, to change the economic incentives, to abolish the State itself and solve the core underlying problem. But the problem is immediate and growing worse with time, and since I abhor the possibility of racial holy wars breaking out on the streets of America and Europe, I find myself inclined to side with those favoring stricter immigration controls – even if only to temporarily stave off inevitable catastrophe.
With Donald Trump at the forefront of the Republican presidential primary, and “refugees” pouring into Europe in record breaking numbers, immigration is a hot topic as of late. Reactions range from advocating giant walls be built, to amnesty, subsidy, citizenship, and voting rights. Whenever that great a chasm exists, there must be great controversy, and wherever such controversy exists, I must wade.
For a libertarian, the answer may at first seem quite obvious, open borders. Governments have this nasty habit of building walls to keep people in, far more than to keep them out. Arbitrary geopolitical boundaries seem quite senseless, when drawn by criminal enterprises calling themselves nation States. Governments obtain everything they have from coercive violence, and thus have no legitimate claim to control what are commonly considered public spaces. We will decide for ourselves who comes onto our property, thank you very much.
A practical and strategic problem then presents itself. If one is working toward building a more libertarian society, the importation of millions of communists, socialists, and religious fanatics – many of whom think the State should impose the will of their deity on the society – does not advance their purposes. Increased burdens on welfare rolls mean higher taxes. Increased crime means a greater police presence. Depressed wages means more people looking to government for solutions. Changing demographics in the age of political correctness means racial tension.
But the (good) libertarian will tend to put principle first, no doubt. If welfare rolls are burdened, abolish welfare. If a police presence is repressive, restrain or privatize the police. If wages are low, hire people. If racial tensions flare, abolish anti-discrimination laws. Met with the political realization that none of these things are going to happen, he may choose to allow the suffering and self righteously blame the State, or he may try to find a more practical solution to a problem that is happening immediately.
But let’s rewind a bit and analyze why people migrate in the first place. Growing up under the boot of the modern State, this can be difficult, but try to picture a free market world. People tend to be grouped together in various places throughout the globe. They have varying cultures, practices, and ethnic backgrounds much like they do now. Those cultures and practices lead to certain outcomes, some of which are more prosperous than others.
In one particular area, wages are very high. Even the lowest skilled worker is able to feed a family by working only 40 hours a week. In a market economy, this is a market signal that workers are in high demand in that area. With that signal sent, workers migrate to the area to fill the void. Wages fall until it no longer makes economic sense to travel to the area. Wages then stabilize. This is what healthy immigration looks like. Migration only occurs to meet a legitimate market demand, and once the demand is met, it ceases. There is no massive shift in demographics, the migrants integrate with the culture of the society, and everybody is happy.
But what if wages are very high, and (real) unemployment in the area is at 15%? This phenomenon can only occur under the boot of the State. This happens because of minimum wage laws, welfare subsidies, and other perverse economic incentives. Migrants respond to the market signal of high wages. They migrate, and some find jobs, and others do not. Those who do not find jobs end up on welfare rolls. Wages do not fall, and the market signal telling migrants to keep coming remains broadcasted to the world. More and more migrants come, the job market is saturated, they end up on the welfare rolls, and or involved in crime, and still the signal is broadcast to the world “Come here! Come here! Come here!” The welfare and crime burden increase in perpetuity. To meet the increased burden on public resources, money is printed. Money being printed causes prices to increase, but the steady supply of willing workers means wages do not rise with the prices of scarcer resources. Everybody in the society becomes increasingly miserable, and in their ignorance of economics they do not blame the minimum wage and welfare system, but rather demand their expansion. At this point, the misery of the society suggests to smart and productive people that this is not a good place to live, and the only migrants who continue to flow into the place are the lowest of the low. They breed, not only with each other, but with the natives – thereby irreparably lowering the genetic quality of the people in the society. The migrants, readily identified by their skin color, language, and culture, rightly become seen as a scourge on the society. If the natives refuse to do business with the migrants, they are branded as racists, and even sued or imprisoned for being so bigoted. This can result in nothing other than racially motivated violence.
At some point, we realize this cannot increase in perpetuity. It must hit a hard limit. Be it by a change in policy, a currency collapse, or riots in the street and a complete breakdown of the social order, the economics of the situation will bring a correction to that market. Depending on the form in which the correction comes, it could be cataclysmic, and with every moment the situation is allowed to continue the likelihood of that outcome increases.
So while the libertarian theorist may comfortably sit back from a distance and wag his finger at the government, the libertarian who actually wants to stop the suffering has no such option. There is an immediate problem, not in some dystopian future, or some Ayn Rand novel, or some economics text book, but in the real world right now. His list of options do not consist of principled or unprincipled behavior, but of policy changes or racial warfare.
Any well read libertarian would surely see market based immigration as a great benefit to any society, just as all market based activity is. But open borders in the presence of a command economy and welfare state is decidedly anti-market, anti-freedom, and anti-peace. If the situation were such that an infinite amount of time existed to solve the problem, I would agree with the open borders advocate that the answer is to educate the populace, to change the economic incentives, to abolish the State itself and solve the core underlying problem. But the problem is immediate and growing worse with time, and since I abhor the possibility of racial holy wars breaking out on the streets of America and Europe, I find myself inclined to side with those favoring stricter immigration controls – even if only to temporarily stave off inevitable catastrophe.
libertarianin.tom
akapowy dogmatyk
- 2 700
- 7 113
FSA jest czescia National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. The PResident of Syrian National Council: George Sabra - Sabra is a member of the Syrian Democratic People's Party. He is a Greek Orthodox Christian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Sabra). Cos kiepscy z tego FSA radykalni islamisci skoro sa za Pan brat z chrzescijanami....
Trza pamietac, ze FSA to zbieranina roznych ugrupowac, ciezko oceniac cala organizacje ze wzgledu na dzialania takich czy innych jej czlonkow. Znajda sie psychole jak i normalni kolesie ktorych wkurwial Assad tak jak ciebie i mnie wkurwia Kopacz albo Tusk.
Nawet w trakcie II Wojny Swiatowej wielu mieszkajacych w Polsce Niemcow nie chcialo podpisac Volkslisty i czesto dostawali za to kulke. Wiem to od mojego dziadka, ktory Szwabow nienawidzi (nieraz dostal od nich w skore) ale przyznal, ze nie kazdy Niemiec okazal sie konformistyczna, pro-hitlerowska kurwa. Po czym wnosisz, ze kazdy mumulmanin to psychol, ktory tylko czeka na rozkaz aby ciac ci glowe?
Tiaa, oczywiscie. Wszyscy chrzescijanie to fanatycy jak np. Amisze albo babcie w moherowych beretach....
Polecam:
http://www.examiner.com/article/is-libertarianism-compatible-with-islam
To co mowi ISIS, fanatycy Islamscy czy inni Talibowie ma pewno tyle wspolnego z prawdziwym islamem, co marksistowskie wynurzenia Franciszka albo totalitarystyczne zapedy Terlikowskiego z chrzescijanstwem....
WnusioPinoczeta
Dawniej "Arturek"
- 665
- 1 499
– Pojechałem na siłownię, w której miało być zakwaterowanych 500 imigrantów. Stało pod nią około dziesięciu pojazdów należących do Czerwonego Krzyża i wolontariuszy. Starsi mężczyźni powyżej 60 lat rozładowywali stoły i ławy z ciężarówek, czyścili je szmatkami zanurzanymi w wiadrach z wodą, a następnie wnosili je do środka. Byłem naprawdę poirytowany widząc pogrążonych w letargu młodych mężczyzn. Wszyscy z nich mieli po około 20lub 30 lat. Siedzieli i palili papierosy, wpatrując się w swoje telefony komórkowe, podczas gdy 60-letni wolontariusze pracowali i nikt im nie pomagał – relacjonował Niemiec.
Read more: http://www.pch24.pl/w-niemczech-nad...zuja-ja-imigrantom,38453,i.html#ixzz3nCFjT6Fv
Read more: http://www.pch24.pl/w-niemczech-nad...zuja-ja-imigrantom,38453,i.html#ixzz3nCFjT6Fv
W lutym 2015 roku urzędnicy w Nadrenii Północnej-Westfalii przejęli prywatny ośrodek w miejscowości Olpe, aby zapewnić mieszkania dla 400 imigrantów. Pierwotny plan był taki, że miasto zakupi ośrodek od jego bawarskich właścicieli. Władze Nadrenii Północnej-Westfalii zdecydowały się jednak majątek skonfiskować.
Tylko czekam, kiedy zacznie się odjebka urzędników/polityków, część Niemców ma jednak broń i sytuacja zaczyna do nich docierać.
chesterrush
Żadna skrajność nie jest dobra
- 4
- 0
Skoro nie znasz żadnego Muzułmanina, to dyskusja na ich temat z Tobą nie ma niestety sensu, powinniśmy tu mówić o faktach a nie zacofanych domysłach.
Nie będziesz nam komuchu dyktować, o czym powinniśmy mówić, a o czym nie.
Alert: wielbiciel Gazowni/PO wykryty:
fragment jego innego postu:
"popieram to co mówi w tej sprawie papież Franciszek - Chrześcijanin powinien cechować się miłością do bliźniego, nie barbarzyńską, średniowieczną nienawiścią. Warto też przypomnieć cytat Nikołaja Gogola: "Nigdy nie jesteśmy tak biedni, aby nie stać nas było na udzielenie pomocy bliźniemu". Co do logistycznych aspektów przyjęcia uchodźców - na tym niestety słabo się znam, ale myślę że powinni zostać jak najbardziej równomiernie rozlokowani w kraju. Kiedy stworzymy z nich armię, nie ma co się dziwić że będą agresywnie reagować na otaczającą ich nienawiść. Grupom wielkości, na przykład, dużej rodziny łatwiej pomóc."
Alert: wielbiciel Gazowni/PO wykryty:
fragment jego innego postu:
"popieram to co mówi w tej sprawie papież Franciszek - Chrześcijanin powinien cechować się miłością do bliźniego, nie barbarzyńską, średniowieczną nienawiścią. Warto też przypomnieć cytat Nikołaja Gogola: "Nigdy nie jesteśmy tak biedni, aby nie stać nas było na udzielenie pomocy bliźniemu". Co do logistycznych aspektów przyjęcia uchodźców - na tym niestety słabo się znam, ale myślę że powinni zostać jak najbardziej równomiernie rozlokowani w kraju. Kiedy stworzymy z nich armię, nie ma co się dziwić że będą agresywnie reagować na otaczającą ich nienawiść. Grupom wielkości, na przykład, dużej rodziny łatwiej pomóc."