Next thing you know the closest thing you'll get to thomas jefferson is a guy named rajesh, welcome to clownworld... When a pajeet in a country founded by whites, is actually a better choice than the 99.99% of whites in the so called "conservative" party, when it comes to, standing for the nation... It's quite fucking telling. That's something to behold... "We" aren't there for no reason and we're there for a reason, and by "there" I mean in the situation mentioned above, not here on poal Think about it. We got sold out, for generations, it's just late stage of more of the same, none of this is new, that shit show has been going on since half a century now, conservative estimate, if we take the late 70s/early 80s as a point of reference, when it comes to the "great betrayal", the great ethnic debasement to infinity, really started to get implemented all across the board... And I'm generous, I could very well start counting at 1965 when the old US immigration law got scrapped to give way to the "diversity is our strength" agenda, or maybe even 1941, when the US decided to side with the rootless international clique, to put it simply Maybe even 1913, when the federal reserve got created, and the balfour declaration signed 4 years later. It all ties together. https://archive.is/7bdTP#selection-281.0-281.74 >Prof. MacDonald argues that it is entirely natural for Jews to promote open immigration. It brings about the “diversity” Jews find comforting and it keeps America open to persecuted co-religionists throughout the world. He says Jews are the only group that has always fought for mass immigration; a few European ethnic organizations have made sporadic efforts to make it easier for their own people to come, but only Jews have consistently promoted open borders for all comers. **Moreover, whatever disagreements they may have had on other issues, Jews of every political persuasion have favored high immigration. This, too, goes back many years, and Prof. MacDonald traces in considerable detail the sustained Jewish pro-immigration effort. Israel Zangwill, author of the eponymous 1908 play The Melting Pot**, was of the view that “there is only one way to World Peace, and that is the absolute abolition of passports, visas, frontiers, custom houses...” He was nevertheless an ardent Zionist and disapproved of Jewish intermarriage. Although the statue of liberty, properly known as Liberty Enlightening the World, was a gift to the United States from France as a tribute to American political traditions, the sonnet by the Jewish Emma Lazarus helped change it into a symbol of immigration. Affixed to the base of the statue several decades after its construction, the poem welcomes to America “huddled masses yearning to breath free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.” Prof. MacDonald has discovered that implausible arguments about diversity being a quintessentially American strength have been made by Jews for a long time. He reports that in 1948 the American Jewish Committee was urging Congress to believe that “Americanism is the spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to people of all races, all religions, all nationalities.” Of course, there had never been such a tradition. In 1952, the American Jewish Congress argued in hearings on immigration that “our national experience has confirmed beyond a doubt that our very strength lies in the diversity of our peoples.” This, too, was at a time when U.S. immigration law was still explicitly designed to maintain a white majority. It is often said that when the old immigration policy was scrapped in 1965, scarcely anyone knew, and no one predicted, that the new law would change the racial makeup of the country. Prof. MacDonald disputes this, arguing that this had been the objective of Jewish groups from the beginning. Prof. MacDonald finds that Jews have been the foremost advocates of immigration in England, France, and Canada, and that Jewish groups were the most vocal opponents of independence for Quebec. Australian Jews led the effort to dismantle the “white Australia” policy, one reason for which was cited in an editorial in the Australian Jewish Democrat: “The strengthening of multi-cultural or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian.” Like Earl Raab writing about the United States, this Australian Jew is prepared to sacrifice the traditional culture, people, and identity of Australia to specifically Jewish interests. It would not be surprising if such an openly expressed objective did not have the opposite effect from the intended, and increase anti-Jewish sentiment.