reSee.it - Related Video Feed

There's a clear legal path to get one guy back, but what about all the other people? People are upset about illegal immigration, but who cleans hotel rooms, provides food, washes dishes, and does gardening? Immigrants are here through grit and will to give their families a better chance. White men in America are 45 times more likely to commit a violent crime than an immigrant. The media suggests appealing to white voters, but Joe Biden, an 81-year-old Catholic from Scranton, challenged their Trumpian sense and still won. If president, the speaker would call the president of El Salvador and demand they send people back or face invasion, because what they're doing is a crime.

Speaker laments replacing the America our fathers built with something alien. He describes a Walmart visit in a city 'drowning with illegal immigrants'—'not newcomers, not migrants, illegal'—where aisles feel like a 'third world country' and people treat him with a 'cold, hostile glare.' He argues that when you 'sneak into a country' you don't come humbled; you come 'with a list of demands' and refuse to 'learn our language' or 'respect our flag.' 'Breaking into someone's house doesn't make you family. It makes you an intruder.' He asserts 'we are a nation built on the word of God,' 'one nation under God, not one nation under Allah'—a 'Christian nation.' He says speaking truth leads to labels like 'Islamophobic, bigots, xenophobic.' Immigration should 'transform strangers into Americans'; skipping the process is 'invasion with missing paperwork.' Politicians 'cheer' this on, importing a voter base that won't assimilate. 'Diversity without loyalty is division.'

Mass immigration into the United States is argued to alleviate world poverty, but the speaker disagrees. They illustrate that the US takes in 1,000,000 legal immigrants annually, while 3,000,000,000 people worldwide live in extreme poverty. The speaker emphasizes that immigrants tend to come from less impoverished countries, like Mexico, rather than the poorest nations. They assert that immigration cannot effectively address global poverty and advocate for aiding impoverished populations in their home countries.

As a legal immigrant, the speaker expresses frustration with Democrats for supposedly weaponizing diversity. The speaker asserts the U.S. does not need people who will support the ideologies that ruined their home countries. The speaker left their country because people kept voting for a party promising handouts. Legal immigrants supposedly want closed borders to prevent the same problems from arising in the U.S. Many immigrants run away from bad countries, then support the same ideologies in the U.S., expecting government assistance. The speaker claims legal immigrants oppose open borders and illegal immigration not out of selfishness, but because they know what happens when those types of people are the majority. It is frustrating to see America turning into what they ran away from after sacrificing to make America home.

We should be very clear about helping the lower-income population, but every country has to control its borders. Asked about taking a Republican deal that funds other things in exchange for accepting their border and immigration policies, the speaker says they probably would. The speaker states we need to control the borders, and we need more merit-based and seasonal immigration. DACA should have a place here, and we need a path to citizenship. According to the speaker, if you do not control the borders, you are going to destroy our country. The speaker suggests people are now realizing what a problem it is, as migrants are being sent to New York. The speaker says we want to have a big heart for the world, but we have to [control the borders].

"And frankly, the there's a massive incentive on the left to import voters." "So if they can't convince their nation to vote for them, they're going to import people from other nations to vote for them." "This is a massive factor." "And frankly, it's a strategy that will succeed if it is not stopped." "It's really a voter importation thing." "That is 100% what is happening." "I mean, BBC is complicit in the destruction of Britain." "The '97 is a failure if we don't pay for it." "You're forced to pay for your own destruction." "We pay for it." "Yes."

The speaker discusses their views on high-skilled immigration. They clarify that they support merit-based immigration and define merit as the ability to make skills-based contributions to the country and having civic commitments. They express opposition to chain migration and the H1B program, and advocate for a civics test before granting visas. They emphasize the importance of national identity and the need to address illegal immigration. They reject amnesty and propose relocating families as a whole unit to their country of origin. They also support militarizing the southern border and making English the national language. They argue that a cap on legal immigration is not necessary, as long as the criteria for merit and civic commitments are met.

People who are determined to move to another country will always find a way, regardless of the risks involved. The concern of potential ISIS members infiltrating is valid, but it is unlikely that they would go through the same routes as asylum seekers or highly motivated individuals. Politicians often use immigrants as a scapegoat for the country's problems, blaming them for dissatisfaction, economic decline, high energy costs, and inflation. This tactic is nothing new.

Speaker 0 argues that the decision to move to America is not driven by a belief that it is a superior country, but by the relative inadequacy of other options. The speaker emphasizes that people migrate here because it is "a little less worse" than their home countries, countering the stereotype that immigration is motivated by trivial comforts like hot dogs and baseball. Instead, the speaker asserts that migrants are drawn by the opportunity to access better overall conditions—vibes, music, food, culture, and history—while also pursuing greater economic opportunities to support their families. They state: "We just move here because we are looking to make more money and offer a better chance for our families," underscoring economic motivation as a primary driver. The speaker then highlights a concrete economic comparison: in Mexico, the minimum wage "a day, not an hour, in Mexico is not even 15 American dollars." This figure is offered to illustrate the economic gap and the incentive to seek better wages in the United States. They contrast this with their current spending power in San Diego, noting that with fifteen dollars, they could perhaps "buy a matcha and half of a granola bar honey," illustrating the high cost of living and limited purchasing power in the U.S. context relative to the income people may earn back home. A political stance is then expressed regarding immigration enforcement policy. The speaker asserts that supporting ICE equates to supporting "people getting destroyed" and "families getting destroyed." This expresses a strong moral condemnation of immigration enforcement practices and their impact on families. The closing sentiment is personal and emphatic: the speaker declares, "I will see you there babes, for sure," signaling a resolute stance and a confrontational, yet affectionate, closing remark toward the audience.

Speaker 0 questions why Americans ever believed they had no claim on their country, on the jobs, or on a share of the economic pie. They ask whether the goal is for Americans to compete with people from all over the world for jobs in their own country, describing that idea as one of the most psychotic things they’ve heard. The speaker suggests this notion would only make sense if you were part of the asset-owning class that owns everything serviced by people who are paid much less.

Last night, President Trump ended all federal taxpayer benefits for undocumented immigrants, returning that money to American citizens. Democrats will likely label this as racist, offensive, and hateful, but I disagree. Why should America be more accommodating to these individuals than their own countries? I can't expect Paris to do more for me than for Parisians, so why should America have to bend over backward for these people? If you're not waving the American flag, I don't care about you. Go back to where you came from, where you are wanted. If you love those countries so much, go back. I'm an American patriot and I don't care about anyone who doesn't love and support this country, and that includes you Democrats.

Speaker 0: In time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we're gonna be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not gonna be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Speaker 1: Now, I think we have a moral and political and social and economic obligation to look after refugees. You can't you have three alternatives. Leave them on the beaches. Send them back to have their throats slit in Syria, or let them walk up to the Balkans into razor wire borders, or welcome them. Those are the only alternatives. Speaker 0: Jews are gonna be at the center of that. It's a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive. Speaker 2: There are 65,000,000 displaced people in the world right now. Matthew, that number is larger than the population of The United Kingdom, and it's not getting any smaller. What we've seen here is that governments are absolutely feckless in attempting to broker peace agreements, be it Syria or anywhere else, which has created this. Speaker 3: Billionaire George Soros says he's investing $500,000,000 to start ups founded by refugees. Soros is responding to president Barack Obama's call to action initiative. That's a request for companies to help refugees and migrants. Speaker 4: And Norwegian society has a very a very short history with ethnic minorities at a scale. So there is a job to be done. So we do have rising antisemitism, and we have rising antisignism, and we have Islamophobia, and we have racism. So we have a lot to do. So we still have have a need of NGOs like the center against racism. Speaker 5: But then he dismissed out of hand what the Prime Minister is doing in relation to migration. Now, I happen to believe that people in this country don't want to pull the drawbridges up, actually. But they do want a fair system. They don't want a free fall. They don't like this sense that people can come here and take us for a ride. And the point, Evan, is this. That in other member states, they have a contributory system of social insurance. I've seen it and discussed it in different contexts. So that people are sort of working and paying their taxes and putting in before they have the right to take out. Speaker 6: The European Union was intentionally set up to give minority organizations influence on the management of Europe. Harry Truman read an article about Kalergi in 1945. He was so impressed that he adopted the Kalergi plan as US official policy as well. After 1965, the real demographic changes of European countries would be seen. Brock Schisholm, former director of the World Health Organization said, what people in all places have to do is to limit a birth rate and promote mixed marriages between different races. This aims to create a single race in the world which will be directed by a central authority. Speaker 7: Very clear that the Jews want to exterminate the European race and that the means to weakening the European race would be to dissolve all the European nations, destroy all their cultural heritage and their national traditions and replace that with the European Union and then to invite in Africans, Middle Easterners and Asians to dilute the blood of Europeans through miscegenation to the point where they became a degenerate mixed race.

The speaker claims there are millions of people in the country who need to be here, including criminals. The speaker states that there are probably 20,000,000 people in the country.

A speaker argues that allowing young men from countries where women aren’t treated as equal to live in four-star hotels and work illegally leads to attitudes toward women that are completely different and have appalling social effects. A second speaker recounts a case in Warwickshire, England where a 15-year-old girl was raped by two asylum-seeking Afghan men. The attackers’ lawyer blamed the assault on cultural differences, saying his client was not used to a society where women are free and deemed equal to men. The speaker says this defense illustrates why those young men shouldn’t have been in that country in the first place, and suggests that a similar mindset should be applied in the United States to prevent such things from happening here. The speaker asserts that if one sees someone getting hit by a car, it should remind us not to walk into the road, implying we should act to prevent harm before it occurs. The argument continues that action is needed now, not once it becomes widespread in the United States. This is offered as a justification for borders and for ICE, and a warning against those who advocate getting rid of ICE or removing borders. The position is that borders and immigration enforcement are necessary to keep the country sustainable economically, arguing against importing “the whole world.” The speaker contends that immigration should be controlled to prevent overwhelming the systems, and that people who do not share the country’s cultural values should be kept out or removed and sent to another country. The speaker then promotes a free email newsletter, noting it is sent every morning around 7 AM Central and occasionally covers specific topics in more depth. The link is stated to be in the speaker’s profile; readers are invited to subscribe. In closing, the speaker signs off, indicating they will see the audience in the next video.

Mass immigration into the United States is argued to alleviate world poverty, but the speaker disagrees. They illustrate that the number of impoverished people globally is vast, with 3 billion living on less than $2 a day. The speaker emphasizes that the immigrants accepted are not from the poorest regions, and increasing immigration numbers would not significantly impact global poverty. They advocate for aiding impoverished populations in their home countries rather than through immigration.

Changing the population to win elections during an economic downturn is destructive. Allowing non-Americans to influence leadership undermines democracy. Texas, with its diverse history, believes in multiculturalism, but mass immigration will not benefit the state or the country. It is essential to protect the right of Americans to determine who lives in the country.

Increasing immigration levels to open borders is seen as a right-wing proposal that would benefit the global poor but harm Americans by lowering wages. The speaker argues for creating jobs for struggling American youth instead of bringing in low-wage workers. They emphasize the importance of addressing international poverty while also prioritizing the well-being of citizens in the United States and other countries.

There's a clear legal path to get one guy back, but what about all the other people? People are upset about illegal immigration, but who cleans hotel rooms, provides food, washes dishes, and does gardening? Immigrants are here through grit and will to give their families a better chance. White men in America are 45 times more likely to commit a violent crime than an immigrant. The media says to appeal to white voters, but Joe Biden, an 81-year-old Catholic from Scranton, got 81,000,000 votes by challenging Trumpian sentiments and showing empathy for transgender people and immigrants. If president, the speaker would call the president of El Salvador and demand they send people back or face invasion, because what they're doing is a crime.

"The idea that you can vet people from some of these countries is a lie. They don't have databases. And even if you could, you can't know what's in someone's heart, and you can't know what's in someone's head. So in the same way that president Trump has stopped illegal immigration into this country, now we need to stop undesirable legal immigration into the country. But when we're done with that, now we've gotta be sending people home. We're sending home illegal immigrants. Frankly, now we've gotta be sending home legal immigrants who came here for the wrong reasons."

If you believe these people will boost the economy, you're mistaken. Where are the women and children? If they're fleeing their home countries, why aren't the women and children with them?

The speaker has seen videos of white, blonde, blue-eyed women in Europe saying they feel unsafe due to immigrants. The speaker mentions proposed classes for immigrants on how not to rape women, and left-wing people in France suggesting women "just say no." The speaker questions why these immigrants are being allowed into the country, claiming they are raping women and children. They believe these immigrants do not benefit or enrich the culture, arguing that those who do would immigrate legally and likely have money.

Mass immigration will destroy any country that allows it, causing that country to cease to exist. This is due to the numbers: with 8 billion people in the world, even a few percent moving to a country of 50 million, 60 million, or even 350 million, would change it fundamentally. A country is not its geography, but its people. If the people of Italy were teleported to the United States, it would still be Italy. Conversely, if a large number of people from elsewhere were teleported to Italy, replacing the original population, the geographic region would no longer be Italy.

The speaker compares the current immigration situation to a Ponzi scheme, stating that the institution needs constant influx of immigrants to sustain itself. They mention that the number of immigrants coming into the country has reached a saturation point, using the example of Ugandan refugees and Afghan refugees. The speaker highlights that the rate of immigration in the last 25 years has surpassed that of the past 2000 years combined, contradicting the notion that Britain has always been a nation of immigrants.

The speaker asserts the primary concern is everyone's welfare and safety, but believes the individuals in question are illegal migrants, not refugees. The speaker claims it's telling that no one specifies what these people are fleeing from, what wars, countries, or persecution they are escaping. Because of this lack of information, the speaker believes they are by definition illegal immigrants and technically criminals. The speaker states they shouldn't be housed in five-star hotels but in cells. The speaker believes they should not be allowed to leave until they pay for their ticket back. The speaker's question is not where they will be moved to in a year, but how they will be removed from the country.

Europe is the cradle of Western civilization, and the cultural and religious bonds between it and the U.S. will last beyond political disagreements. However, Europe is at risk of civilizational suicide. Many European countries are unable or unwilling to control their borders, but they are starting to push back, which is good. They are also starting to limit the free speech of their own citizens, even as those citizens protest against border issues. Europe needs to respect its own people and sovereignty, something America can't do for them. If a country like Germany takes in millions of immigrants who are culturally incompatible, Germany will have killed itself. The speaker loves Germany and wants it to thrive.