• Please ignore any forum warnings you may see today as theres things been created/fixed.

Politics πŸ€‘ Donald Trump

Actually no. And I haven't defended anything.

Feel free to answer the question.
You seem to think your question is some amazing mic drop. It's really not.

Conflating "do you believe in open border immigration" while excusing the extremely controversial tactics, ethics, morality of the enforcement & current regime is pretty pretty pretty stupid.
A reasonable human being can want strict immigration but find obverse the question conduct of ICE with their own two eyes.

You're dumb joke was an endorsement & also just highlights pretty clearly your callous nature.
To be this indoctrinated while being a New Zealand is yuck.
 

NZWarriors.com

You seem to think your question is some amazing mic drop. It's really not.

Conflating "do you believe in open border immigration" while excusing the extremely controversial tactics, ethics, morality of the enforcement & current regime is pretty pretty pretty stupid.
A reasonable human being can want strict immigration but find obverse the question conduct of ICE with their own two eyes.

You're dumb joke was an endorsement & also just highlights pretty clearly your callous nature.
To be this indoctrinated while being a New Zealand is yuck.
So, you agree there needs to be border control and illegal immigrants shouldn't be ignored. Thank you for your answer. We can clear that off the table now.

Why do you think there has been a contrast between states and cities where some have their law enforcement agencies work with ICE and others appear to actively avoid it?
 
So, you agree there needs to be border control and illegal immigrants shouldn't be ignored. Thank you for your answer. We can clear that off the table now.

Why do you think there has been a contrast between states and cities where some have their law enforcement agencies work with ICE and others appear to actively avoid it?
Kinda boring with your pattern a: Twist and distort b: when you don't get the answer that fits with where you want it to go you make shit up and attribute context/meaning to other posters that simply isn't true c: Ignore any kind of fact and continue on with this path until no one wants to play with you any more d: Claim victory

Kinda similar in a kindergarten way to Trump
 

NZWarriors.com

Kinda boring with your pattern a: Twist and distort b: when you don't get the answer that fits with where you want it to go you make shit up and attribute context/meaning to other posters that simply isn't true c: Ignore any kind of fact and continue on with this path until no one wants to play with you any more d: Claim victory

Kinda similar in a kindergarten way to Trump
Kinda interesting with your pattern and twist when you don't answer when challenged yet expect everyone else to when you challenge them.

Kinda similar in a kindergarten way....
 
So, you agree there needs to be border control and illegal immigrants shouldn't be ignored. Thank you for your answer. We can clear that off the table now.

Why do you think there has been a contrast between states and cities where some have their law enforcement agencies work with ICE and others appear to actively avoid it?
Labouring the point much. You lost this argument 10 pages back.

We're NZers - our view on US immigration policy is utterly, utterly irrelevant. You seem to be really invested in it for some cooker reason.
But... We're also human and can witness and be disturbed by the human toll of it's enforcement.

On you're second point - Gee I don't know... could be that's the partisan nature of the US political set & the US has one of their most (if not) the most controversial governments enacting some the most contentious policy of our lifetime.

Have a break from the internet bud.
 
Labouring the point much. You lost this argument 10 pages back.

We're NZers - our view on US immigration policy is utterly, utterly irrelevant. You seem to be really invested in it for some cooker reason.
But... We're also human and can witness and be disturbed by the human toll of it's enforcement.

On you're second point - Gee I don't know... could be that's the partisan nature of the US political set & the US has one of their most (if not) the most controversial governments enacting some the most contentious policy of our lifetime.

Have a break from the internet bud.
Could be the partisan nature.

Is the policy that contentious? It doesn't appear to be dissimilar to previous US government policy? Certainly the enforcement of it is different and rightfully questioned.
 

NZWarriors.com

Using an Inruinism how about you provide some evidence that they are
A few pages back you were going on about making statements, providing proof to back it up and comic book reading. πŸ˜‰

Texas is a red state and from what I've read plenty have been deported from there.


Screenshot_2026-01-18-11-36-45-42_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12.webp

The focus certainly seems to have shifted to some of the Democrat led states now though
 
A few pages back you were going on about making statements, providing proof to back it up and comic book reading. πŸ˜‰

Texas is a red state and from what I've read plenty have been deported from there.


View attachment 15427

The focus certainly seems to have shifted to some of the Democrat led states now though
Well done - one would expect them to be active in the state that abuts the border (low hanging fruit and all that) but that is only one red state. Give us some data on other red states

Give us some
 

NZWarriors.com

Amongst all the back and forth this is an interesting concept to explore.

If you don’t control your borders, how do you plan social services, school, hospitals, etc if floods of unexpected people can just turn up? How do you ensure security if people of different mindset want to come eg a murder fleeing another country? Do you have to right to stop anyone?

Taking it to the logical conclusion with no lines in a map, do you believe in private ownership of your own property? If a squatter wants to live in your guest bedroom, what is the philosophical difference to an illegal immigrant demanding access to a country? I see the same underlying issues.

I’m not interesting in arguing, I genuinely want to explore this. I see maintaining borders as the only way to plan, protect a way of life and ensure a cohesive society.
Also find it interesting that western countries tend to be held to a different standard when allowing immigration. Countries such as Japan, China,UAE etc have much stricter and much more nationalistic views when it comes to who they let in but are seemingly not held to the same scrutiny.
I’m not against immigration but there are correct channels to go through, as someone who has gone through the correct channels personally I have little sympathy for those that feel entitled to ignore the process.
 
Well done - one would expect them to be active in the state that abuts the border (low hanging fruit and all that) but that is only one red state. Give us some data on other red states

Give us some
Lol it was your statement mate. I've already given you what you wanted to prove it wasn't correct. Now you want more proof to show it's even more incorrect?
 
Last edited:
Also find it interesting that western countries tend to be held to a different standard when allowing immigration. Countries such as Japan, China,UAE etc have much stricter and much more nationalistic views when it comes to who they let in but are seemingly not held to the same scrutiny.
I’m not against immigration but there are correct channels to go through, as someone who has gone through the correct channels personally I have little sympathy for those that feel entitled to ignore the process.
Fair enough, but as wiz no doubt is aware there's huge complexity going on.

What makes people want to leave their own country in the first place? Want can probably be replaced by need, I'm sure if most people who are forced into illegal immigration had even the basic necessities and human rights, not to mention a fair government that hasn't been stripmined by a big super power and f*cked over through colonialism and greed, which meant they could probably get a good education with better opportunities - I reckon there wouldn't be a problem with immigration as we see it today.

We're calling this immigration too - refugees is another way of looking at it.

Take Syria for example.

These people are fleeing from their own country to other countries like the States who then punish them, even though the States have had a hand in the disaster that is currently Syria. Pick any regime, there's a number of fingerprints behind the scenes.

America has every opportunity to engage with their Southern neighbours. To begin drug rehabilitation and education programmes on their side of the border, to improve gun control and gun smuggling. They choose not to.
 

NZWarriors.com

Also find it interesting that western countries tend to be held to a different standard when allowing immigration. Countries such as Japan, China,UAE etc have much stricter and much more nationalistic views when it comes to who they let in but are seemingly not held to the same scrutiny.
I’m not against immigration but there are correct channels to go through, as someone who has gone through the correct channels personally I have little sympathy for those that feel entitled to ignore the process.

So you’re not for those not going through the due process, what are your views on American citizens being detained? You’re right those countries are far more strict regarding immigration, even Pacific nations you can only lease land in most but America is a country built on immigrants, some forced and some willingly for a better life than where they derive and has generally had a policy to accept and viewed as a melting pot at stages
 

NZWarriors.com


View: https://m.youtube.com/shorts/cFRA3GCqGTw

It’s no wonder there there’s a lack of trust in the enforcement when you’re about to film footage like this nowadays. Obviously taken by surprise the way the agent comes over to usher her away but really not offering any resistance to justify the knees to the face, and the last one seems like an I’ll do because I can shot



And if that isn't worrying enough, Democracy now did a video of the dangerous banned restraint techniques seen in many of the clips available.

Chief among them is putting people in sleeper holds, but as a former restraint instructor I could see they have zero regard for any of the biomechanical and physiological safe guards = people will die, and some will have the choker taken off early and still die.

On this subject I really know what I am talking about. I practised at a level where I taught restraint instructors how to teach restraint courses.

Lets use a simple case study.

Joe Blogs who is potentially out of shape, or even obese gets restrained legally and is face down.

Already the subject is medically at risk, because they are in fight flight, elevated everything including respiratory rate with a decrease in respiratory efficiency.

To keep this simple, breathing regulates several systems, the lungs are a major buffer system in balancing the bodies blood gasses, which also effects the ph of the blood.

Someone in fight flight is producing a lot of lactic acid, they need their lungs to clear this build up, but right now they have their body weight pushing their lungs into the pavement, the fatter you are, the more compressed your lungs.

Then the subject has his arms cuffed in the chicken wing position, the stressors of this prevent full thoracic expansion.

The person now feels that drive which tells them they are dying through lack of air, they try to breath faster, which means they are blowing off CO2 less efficiently (the chief blood gas that raises acidity), they are now entering a state of respiratory acidosis....in a vicious loop, that can cause respiratory failure, cardiac arrest etc.

This how Howick youth Mathew Innes died. Helped by a cops foot on his back, when what should have been happening is that he is upright and being monitored.

When we restrain in secure units, we try to get the person up out of the face plant position as quickly as we can.

A lot of what you see ICE doing is putting their knees on peoples upper backs to deliberately take their breathing away (this is a fact, it is deliberate, the person is cuffed and prone, there is no advantage to the knee plant - and before we knew what we know now, the knee plant in the back to supress breathing was a technique "good on the big besserker types").

Also having your knee on someone's back is poor from the pov of being uncomfortable for the restrainer and off balancing.

I see a lot of these ICE videos both agents on the arms have their knees into the back, so it is a thing, they have decided to bring back banned (illegal in NZ) crap.


Some of the people they restrain will be on drugs, medications, and or alcohol, some will be asthmatics, cardiac patients etc.

As someone who has professionally restrained people, done everything correctly, then noticed their breathing is becoming erratic - stopped the restraint immediately, then been a full on CPR situation with a Doctor on hand while the person goes into full arrest - this ICE carry on is utter shit.

It is weak, it is cowardly, it is dangerous, it is cruel, and most of all it is political....it is like the enhanced interrogation torture techniques that the yanks brought back to torture Muslim suspects.

Those Torture techniques were banned when the Bush administration were removed from office.

These current ICE torture methods are more of the same kinda shit, I mean suffocating someone from an ICE arrest through deliberate airway restriction is the same principle as waterboarding right? From a subjective starving for air traumatic pov both are on a par.
 
Last edited:

NZWarriors.com

America is a country built on immigrants, some forced and some willingly for a better life than where they derive and has generally had a policy to accept and viewed as a melting pot at stages
Your arguement seems to be most countries can enforce border controls but you don’t expect America to?

Isn’t that for America decide and it was one of the main pillars Trump was elected in.

Other posters comments that immigrants have a right to move to escape basket case countries - I think the country accepted immigrants has to ensure the people coming in are an adequate fit and quantity so that the receiving country doesn’t inherit the issues those countries are exporting. I think that’s a legitimate issue.
 
Your arguement seems to be most countries can enforce border controls but you don’t expect America to?

Isn’t that for America decide and it was one of the main pillars Trump was elected in.

Other posters comments that immigrants have a right to move to escape basket case countries - I think the country accepted immigrants has to ensure the people coming in are an adequate fit and quantity so that the receiving country doesn’t inherit the issues those countries are exporting. I think that’s a legitimate issue.
Except they're attacking people. There are clear racial lines harking back to the Jim Crow days. They're attacking us citizens. ICE aren't acting under traditional law, this is now a tyranny etc etc etc
 
Back
Top Bottom