PDA

View Full Version : Military invites illegal aliens to sign up



garhkal
09-28-2014, 06:00 PM
Saw this on USA today.
First off, with how most branches are CUTTING servicemen and women to match new lower budgets, how the heck is anyone with half a brain thinking that accepting potentially up to 1500 illegals a year is a good idea?
2nd, since many jobs require security clearances, how will illegals be vetted to verify they are eligible for one?
3rd is this going to be used as a back door for citizenship for those who serve?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/25/policy-to-allow-undocumented-immigrants-in-military/16225135/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/26/dod-planning-to-let-illegal-immigrants-enlist/

http://nypost.com/2014/09/26/more-undocumented-immigrants-can-join-military-defense-dept/

The foxnews link does hit part 1 and 3, with mentioning that "Among the benefits offered are educational aid, pay and benefits from service, and "expedited citizenship."
Part 1 was hit with "The Army alone is removing thousands from the active-duty ranks, in a bid to reduce the force strength from about 520,000 soldiers earlier this year to as low as 440,000. Those cuts have raised concerns about military readiness. "

To me this is a stupid idea, being put fourth to accommodate an enlarging Illegal immigrant population that is not being wowed by what little congress is allowing to be passed by our white house. Nothing more.
We are already kicking out good men and women cause of Perform to serve (and other similar programs) as well as a low high year tenure, so how do TPTB think this is a good idea is beyond me.

MikeKerriii
09-29-2014, 02:46 PM
Saw this on USA today.
First off, with how most branches are CUTTING servicemen and women to match new lower budgets, how the heck is anyone with half a brain thinking that accepting potentially up to 1500 illegals a year is a good idea?
2nd, since many jobs require security clearances, how will illegals be vetted to verify they are eligible for one?
3rd is this going to be used as a back door for citizenship for those who serve?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/25/policy-to-allow-undocumented-immigrants-in-military/16225135/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/26/dod-planning-to-let-illegal-immigrants-enlist/

http://nypost.com/2014/09/26/more-undocumented-immigrants-can-join-military-defense-dept/

The foxnews link does hit part 1 and 3, with mentioning that "Among the benefits offered are educational aid, pay and benefits from service, and "expedited citizenship."
Part 1 was hit with "The Army alone is removing thousands from the active-duty ranks, in a bid to reduce the force strength from about 520,000 soldiers earlier this year to as low as 440,000. Those cuts have raised concerns about military readiness. "

To me this is a stupid idea, being put fourth to accommodate an enlarging Illegal immigrant population that is not being wowed by what little congress is allowing to be passed by our white house. Nothing more.
We are already kicking out good men and women cause of Perform to serve (and other similar programs) as well as a low high year tenure, so how do TPTB think this is a good idea is beyond me.

You are geting upset at what has been US miilitary policy since the founding of the Continental Army? A policy that provided about 25% or so of the soldier that saved the US from traitors in the 1860s? Do you hav3e any grasp at all of US military History

Do the names Von Steuben, Lafayette, and Pulaski, ring any bells, or how about John Paul Jones?

Serving in the US mitarty is not a back door fro citizenship it is walking through the front door with head held high at citizenship earned the hard way

The mitalry has been handling foreign natonals and secriuty clearances for as long as they have had security clearances and it is not really a problem. It doesn't suddenly become a problem when some frightened racists start paying attention.

TJMAC77SP
09-29-2014, 03:36 PM
You are geting upset at what has been US miilitary policy since the founding of the Continental Army? A policy that provided about 25% or so of the soldier that saved the US from traitors in the 1860s? Do you hav3e any grasp at all of US military History

Do the names Von Steuben, Lafayette, and Pulaski, ring any bells, or how about John Paul Jones?

Serving in the US mitarty is not a back door fro citizenship it is walking through the front door with head held high at citizenship earned the hard way

The mitalry has been handling foreign natonals and secriuty clearances for as long as they have had security clearances and it is not really a problem. It doesn't suddenly become a problem when some frightened racists start paying attention.

I am not sure you have your facts right there. Citing Von Steuben, Lafayette, and Pulaski isn't on point since none of them were illegal aliens.

Neither is foreign nationals in general serving in the US military. Legal aliens have served with honor for many years.

While I don't agree that it is a huge problem I do have mixed feelings because it seems to reward illegal behavior. Having said that, I actually support total amnesty for illegal aliens with some very definitive conditions. That is another topic though.

Truth is that security clearances for the particular category of illegal alien being discussed will probably not be a problem but will necessitate a rewrite of current police and executive orders. They would currently be ineligible for a security clearance except in a very narrowly defined exception (which considering their youth is unlikely to hold up).


This is worth discussion. Adult and reasonable discussion. For instance, at this time when the military faces cuts not seen in 70 years, why would we expand the eligibility to a group never before considered so? What drove this decision, and why now? This shouldn't simply be dismissed as the rantings of 'frightened racists'. There are some legitimate questions raised by this decision.

sandsjames
09-29-2014, 03:48 PM
This is worth discussion. Adult and reasonable discussion. For instance, at this time when the military faces cuts not seen in 70 years, why would we expand the eligibility to a group never before considered so? What drove this decision, and why now? This shouldn't simply be dismissed as the rantings of 'frightened racists'. There are some legitimate questions raised by this decision.

That's easy. My guess would be that they would expect the majority of illegals who do sign up to do the minimum enlistment, get citizenship, get out, and move on, reducing retirement and other long term benefits.

One thing I do know that as a Tech School instructor there are a relatively high number of students coming through without a good grasp of the English language. It makes it very difficult (though not impossible) when a large part of the instruction is more translating than anything else.

TJMAC77SP
09-29-2014, 04:41 PM
That's easy. My guess would be that they would expect the majority of illegals who do sign up to do the minimum enlistment, get citizenship, get out, and move on, reducing retirement and other long term benefits.

One thing I do know that as a Tech School instructor there are a relatively high number of students coming through without a good grasp of the English language. It makes it very difficult (though not impossible) when a large part of the instruction is more translating than anything else.

I can't agree with your guess. There is no real data to suggest that is what would happen. Why would such people give up a sure job in favor of looking for another job in this economy? Surely after receiving the relative generous salary of a military member they would not want to go back to the low-paying jobs that illegals historically fill?

On an off-topic note......I was going to emphasis my position by pointing out that minorities are generally overrepresented in the US Military (and they historically are, at least in the black and Hispanic population) but since 2010 Hispanics are not reported as a minority so there are no definitive figures available. I find that curious. Evidently it was a mandate from the OMB.

MERC8401
09-29-2014, 04:48 PM
I see it as a way to help illegal aliens become legal. This is what we want right? We have to understand that not every immigrant here illegally wants to be here illegally. I assume that most want to be legal in order to be afforded the same rights and protections, but some either don't know how to go about it, or fear the process. Allowing immigrants (illegal or not) to join the military has been around for quite awhile...I don't see a problem with this. I think it says a lot about the persons character, when they are willing to serve a country that doesn't even recognize them as a citizen. And to think we have our own citizens who are unwilling to serve. And yes they should get the same bennies as you and I.

sandsjames
09-29-2014, 04:52 PM
I can't agree with your guess. Ok


There is no real data to suggest that is what would happen.

Nope...that's why it was a guess.


Why would such people give up a sure job in favor of looking for another job in this economy? Surely after receiving the relative generous salary of a military member they would not want to go back to the low-paying jobs that illegals historically fill?For the same reasons the majority of the current military also gives up the generous military salary even when they may have no secure job prospects in the works.

What I'm curious is to know how it's going to work with ASVABs. Do we currently issue ASVABs in foreign languages? In a military culture that requires clear communication to ensure the quickest possible responses, will there be an English language requirement? Those, to me, are the biggest issues. As far as it being a pathway to citizenship, I have no problem at all with it. More so just with the logistics.

garhkal
09-29-2014, 06:24 PM
This is worth discussion. Adult and reasonable discussion. For instance, at this time when the military faces cuts not seen in 70 years, why would we expand the eligibility to a group never before considered so? What drove this decision, and why now? This shouldn't simply be dismissed as the rantings of 'frightened racists'. There are some legitimate questions raised by this decision.

Thanks for the back up T..


I see it as a way to help illegal aliens become legal. This is what we want right? We have to understand that not every immigrant here illegally wants to be here illegally. I assume that most want to be legal in order to be afforded the same rights and protections, but some either don't know how to go about it, or fear the process. Allowing immigrants (illegal or not) to join the military has been around for quite awhile...I don't see a problem with this. I think it says a lot about the persons character, when they are willing to serve a country that doesn't even recognize them as a citizen. And to think we have our own citizens who are unwilling to serve. And yes they should get the same bennies as you and I.

I do though. I see it as a snub to the thousands each and every year that wait, pay out of pocket and DO the right thing to come here LEGALLY, to see those who come here illegally (even if it was being brought over by parents) getting rewarded by being helped to get citizenship.
What of all those who are doing the right thing? Where is the "Help for them to become citizens"?

MERC8401
09-30-2014, 02:26 PM
Thanks for the back up T..



I do though. I see it as a snub to the thousands each and every year that wait, pay out of pocket and DO the right thing to come here LEGALLY, to see those who come here illegally (even if it was being brought over by parents) getting rewarded by being helped to get citizenship.
What of all those who are doing the right thing? Where is the "Help for them to become citizens"?

But what you might not realize is that not everyone has the means to come here legally. And the ones who do have the means typically will not join the military...for the same reason that most American's don't...so I don't see this as a snub to the ones who come here legally...I see it as a way to make them legal, so they are paying taxes, have a driver's license or ID...you know...doing what we want them to do in the first place.

MikeKerriii
09-30-2014, 03:05 PM
I am not sure you have your facts right there. Citing Von Steuben, Lafayette, and Pulaski isn't on point since none of them were illegal aliens.

Neither is foreign nationals in general serving in the US military. Legal aliens have served with honor for many years.

While I don't agree that it is a huge problem I do have mixed feelings because it seems to reward illegal behavior. Having said that, I actually support total amnesty for illegal aliens with some very definitive conditions. That is another topic though.

Truth is that security clearances for the particular category of illegal alien being discussed will probably not be a problem but will necessitate a rewrite of current police and executive orders. They would currently be ineligible for a security clearance except in a very narrowly defined exception (which considering their youth is unlikely to hold up).


This is worth discussion. Adult and reasonable discussion. For instance, at this time when the military faces cuts not seen in 70 years, why would we expand the eligibility to a group never before considered so? What drove this decision, and why now? This shouldn't simply be dismissed as the rantings of 'frightened racists'. There are some legitimate questions raised by this decision.

Since the program hasd been in existences for decades, and is primarily used to fill holes where normal recruiting fails, What is the controversy about letting it continue for the small number of people it applies to?

TJMAC77SP
09-30-2014, 03:25 PM
Since the program hasd been in existences for decades, and is primarily used to fill holes where normal recruiting fails, What is the controversy about letting it continue for the small number of people it applies to?

The program you refer to has not allowed illegal aliens enlist and isn't that old. It did allow properly documented foreign nationals with needed skills to join the US military.

I do agree with you in that I don't view this as a catastrophe but it is certainly worth discussing. There is a strong argument that this is just another step in implementing the DREAM Act via EO vs law.

garhkal
09-30-2014, 08:56 PM
But what you might not realize is that not everyone has the means to come here legally. And the ones who do have the means typically will not join the military...for the same reason that most American's don't...so I don't see this as a snub to the ones who come here legally...I see it as a way to make them legal, so they are paying taxes, have a driver's license or ID...you know...doing what we want them to do in the first place.

SO cause someone doesn't have the means to come here legally, we should ignore the laws on the books, and make new ones to allow them to come here illegally, then 'pay it off' by serving in the military?

Measure Man
10-01-2014, 03:46 AM
Hmmmm...make the entire military foreign nationals...then both the Democrats and Republicans would have no problem cutting the military pay and benefits :-)

As a bonus, voters on both sides won't give a rats ass about sending a bunch of foreigners to war on low pay.

Is that how the French Foreign Legion works? That's the ticket. US Foreign Legion!!

MERC8401
10-02-2014, 10:46 AM
SO cause someone doesn't have the means to come here legally, we should ignore the laws on the books, and make new ones to allow them to come here illegally, then 'pay it off' by serving in the military?

Right...because the laws on the books are so good at stopping illegals from coming here illegally now. It's not about ignoring the laws (which is going to happen anyway), it's about providing a way for people who would come here illegally to do so legally, or if someone is already here illegally, to fix it. And I would rather that...then have them living here tax free. Listen, I know what your "news" tells you about the illegals, but they aren't all gang banging drug dealers.

TJMAC77SP
10-02-2014, 01:20 PM
Right...because the laws on the books are so good at stopping illegals from coming here illegally now. It's not about ignoring the laws (which is going to happen anyway), it's about providing a way for people who would come here illegally to do so legally, or if someone is already here illegally, to fix it. And I would rather that...then have them living here tax free. Listen, I know what your "news" tells you about the illegals, but they aren't all gang banging drug dealers.

Putting illegals on the tax rolls is great but how would this program allow for ' a way for people who would come here illegally to do so legally'.

It (Illegal aliens) also isn't about 'gang banging drug dealers' (although that is a problem to be sure) but it is about significant issues such as taxes.

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 04:40 PM
Right...because the laws on the books are so good at stopping illegals from coming here illegally now. It's not about ignoring the laws (which is going to happen anyway), it's about providing a way for people who would come here illegally to do so legally, or if someone is already here illegally, to fix it. And I would rather that...then have them living here tax free. Listen, I know what your "news" tells you about the illegals, but they aren't all gang banging drug dealers.


The reason the laws are being ignored is because they are not being enforced. The only reason for a SOVEREIGN NATION to even consider taking ILLEGAL ALIENS into its military would be if it were facing a manpower shortage, due to a war which would threaten the survival of the nation itself (which isn't happening Yet). In which case we have the selective service. Otherwise, This is more Diversity Cult Bullshit from the Social Justice Warrior types on the Left and suppression of wages from the Corporate Owned whore sellouts on the Right. The real question is are they going to start offering the ASVAB in the Yucatec Maya dialect or are they just going to get rid of it all together because it's Racists.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 05:54 PM
The reason the laws are being ignored is because they are not being enforced. The only reason for a SOVEREIGN NATION to even consider taking ILLEGAL ALIENS into its military would be if it were facing a manpower shortage, due to a war which would threaten the survival of the nation itself (which isn't happening Yet). In which case we have the selective service. Otherwise, This is more Diversity Cult Bullshit from the Social Justice Warrior types on the Left and suppression of wages from the Corporate Owned whore sellouts on the Right. The real question is are they going to start offering the ASVAB in the Yucatec Maya dialect or are they just going to get rid of it all together because it's Racists.

I like the uppercase rants, very reminiscent of WILL POWERS, and very stylish amongst the Aryan Brotherhood, and other sundry white supremacist groups.

Is that the little clique that you run with? Since you called Rush an AIPAC stooge the other day, I assume that you are anti-Israel, so that probably means you are on the outs with right-wing evangelicals.

Your long running routine with black street dialect, and other anti-diversity rants scream racial animosity.

Is white power your game? Dont be shy, just tells us what you are.

TJMAC77SP
10-02-2014, 06:11 PM
I like the uppercase rants, very reminiscent of WILL POWERS, and very stylish amongst the Aryan Brotherhood, and other sundry white supremacist groups.

Is that the little clique that you run with? Since you called Rush an AIPAC stooge the other day, I assume that you are anti-Israel, so that probably means you are on the outs with right-wing evangelicals.

Your long running routine with black street dialect, and other anti-diversity rants scream racial animosity.

Is white power your game? Dont be shy, just tells us what you are.

Off topic but do you know why Christian Evangelicals are pro-Israel?

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 06:55 PM
Off topic but do you know why Christian Evangelicals are pro-Israel?

I'm guessing it has something to do with their belief in the prophecies contained in the book of Revelations, coupled with the Jews being God's chosen people. At least, that's the kind of talk that I remember from my years as a youngster in Baptist churches.

If the Christian Evangelicals in their various lobbyist organizations have political justifications on top of what I just mentioned, I wouldn't be surprised, but I sincerely think the core of that support is rooted in what I first mentioned.

I tend to be rather pro-Israel myself, but not for religious or prophetic reasons. Politically, they make a sound ally for the US in the Middle East, although their national interests often diverge from our own.

garhkal
10-02-2014, 06:57 PM
Your long running routine with black street dialect, and other anti-diversity rants scream racial animosity.

Is white power your game? Dont be shy, just tells us what you are.

For ME its not that i am for white power, but more that i am against "Being diverse just for the sake of being diverse". Especially when i see this as nothing more than doing this for political sake (latino voters make up a good block of the Democratic voting base).

USN - Retired
10-02-2014, 06:58 PM
I like the uppercase rants, very reminiscent of WILL POWERS, and very stylish amongst the Aryan Brotherhood, and other sundry white supremacist groups.

Is that the little clique that you run with? Since you called Rush an AIPAC stooge the other day, I assume that you are anti-Israel, so that probably means you are on the outs with right-wing evangelicals.

Your long running routine with black street dialect, and other anti-diversity rants scream racial animosity.

Is white power your game? Dont be shy, just tells us what you are.

It appears that AA has a homoerotic infatuation with Rainmaker.

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 07:19 PM
I like the uppercase rants, very reminiscent of WILL POWERS, and very stylish amongst the Aryan Brotherhood, and other sundry white supremacist groups.

Is that the little clique that you run with? Since you called Rush an AIPAC stooge the other day, I assume that you are anti-Israel, so that probably means you are on the outs with right-wing evangelicals.

Your long running routine with black street dialect, and other anti-diversity rants scream racial animosity.

Is white power your game? Dont be shy, just tells us what you are.

Rainmaker is a Citizen of the United States of America. Rainmaker is Not a subject of The United Nations or of the State of Israel. Now that Rainmaker has answered your race-baiting smears. It's your turn. Don't be shy, just tell "us" what you are.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 07:21 PM
For ME its not that i am for white power, but more that i am against "Being diverse just for the sake of being diverse". Especially when i see this as nothing more than doing this for political sake (latino voters make up a good block of the Democratic voting base).

WTF?

You sound like the "Bill the Butcher" character from the film, Gangs of New York. Go watch it, it is loosely based on real events, I'm guessing that is as close as you'll ever get to studying history.

You do realize that the US has always been diverse?

Even in the colonial era, we weren't a land of homogeneous people. In the early 1800s immigration started picking up, and by the mid 1880s people were streaming in from all over the place.

I'd say it is a damn good thing that "we are diverse for the sake of being diverse"; however, I wouldn't word it that clumsily.

I might reword it to say that, American strength and ingenuity were created from the combined efforts of our richly diverse population.

As for political maneuvering for the votes of immigrant populations, that's nothing new either.

If you want to keep all the foreigners out, go create a "Native Born" party like "Bill the Butcher."

However, I must warn you that his party lost influence and was swept into the dustbin of history.

sandsjames
10-02-2014, 07:44 PM
I might reword it to say that, American strength and ingenuity were created from the combined efforts of our richly diverse population.



Indeed it was. However, the focus was never about the fact of it being diverse. It was about us being unified. I don't need every T.V. show, news report, political speech, etc, to tell me that we are a diverse country. It's like telling me that 15 minutes can save me 15% on car insurance. Everybody knows that!

Let's quit being ABOUT diversity and start being about unity through our diversity.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 07:44 PM
Rainmaker is a Citizen of the United States of America. Rainmaker is Not a subject of The United Nations or of the State of Israel. Now that Rainmaker has answered your race-baiting smears. It's your turn. Don't be shy, just tell "us" what you are.

I'm a registered Democrat that usually votes Republican in presidential and congressional elections. I registered as a Democrat just to participate in city and state-level primaries because in Baltimore, Republicans are outnumbered 10 to 1. Our local officials are almost always decided in the Democratic primaries.

I have many views that are in-line with Libertarians; however, I tend to disagree with their thinking on many national defense and foreign affairs issues.

If you read through the website of the Cato Institute, you'll get a good idea where a lot of my thinking lines up with; however, I'm not that comfortable with their vision for US foreign policy and nation defense.

I don't have a party that embodies all of my ideas, few of us do.

Are you satisfied with that answer?

Now, back to my question, because you most certainly did not answer it.

What is the deal with you? I only asked if you were a white supremacist because you seem very hostile to ethnic groups other than white Europeans.

You sound like the race baiter, not me. In nearly every post you make on this forum, you mock black people, and when you aren't doing that you are being anti-Hispanic, anti-Jew, and bemoaning diversity.

What am I supposed to think? You sound pretty damn hostile and intolerant to me. What's the deal?

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 07:45 PM
I'm guessing it has something to do with their belief in the prophecies contained in the book of Revelations, coupled with the Jews being God's chosen people. At least, that's the kind of talk that I remember from my years as a youngster in Baptist churches.

If the Christian Evangelicals in their various lobbyist organizations have political justifications on top of what I just mentioned, I wouldn't be surprised, but I sincerely think the core of that support is rooted in what I first mentioned.

I tend to be rather pro-Israel myself, but not for religious or prophetic reasons. Politically, they make a sound ally for the US in the Middle East, although their national interests often diverge from our own.

http://www.moia.gov.il/english/pages/default.aspx

Maybe you can Emigrate. It's probably pretty easy to do and surely they place high value on Diversity there.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 07:47 PM
Indeed it was. However, the focus was never about the fact of it being diverse. It was about us being unified. I don't need every T.V. show, news report, political speech, etc, to tell me that we are a diverse country. It's like telling me that 15 minutes can save me 15% on car insurance. Everybody knows that!

Let's quit being ABOUT diversity and start being about unity through our diversity.

Okay, you don't sound that far off from me, but you still sound pissed off about something.

You are bothered by diversity in some fashion? Please explain.

sandsjames
10-02-2014, 07:48 PM
What is the deal with you? I only asked if you were a white supremacist because you seem very hostile to ethnic groups other than white Europeans.



I've never seen him hostile towards white Americans.

sandsjames
10-02-2014, 07:53 PM
Okay, you don't sound that far off from me, but you still sound pissed off about something.

You are bothered by diversity in some fashion? Please explain.

No...not at all. Diversity is a wonderful thing. It's what our country is built on. What irritates me is constantly having to listen to how diverse we are. It's my opinion that we'd be better of as a country if we focused on what makes us the same instead of what makes us weak.

The most focused and unified I have seen us in my lifetime was after the events of 9/11. Whether our response was right or wrong, the fact is that, relatively, we all got along as Americans. Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etc were able to look past our differences (again, relatively, as 9/11 obviously raised other racial issues) and realize that we are all the same and all want pretty much the same thing. We were united. 9/11 was horrible, but the months after were some of my favorite times as I could walk down the city streets and get a smile, a nod, an acknowledgment from those I passed that we were all together.

Of course that unity faded and we went back to bickering and pointing out all of our differences.

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 07:57 PM
I'm a registered Democrat that usually votes Republican in presidential and congressional elections. I registered as a Democrat just to participate in city and state-level primaries because in Baltimore, Republicans are outnumbered 10 to 1. Our local officials are almost always decided in the Democratic primaries.

I have many views that are in-line with Libertarians; however, I tend to disagree with their thinking on many national defense and foreign affairs issues.

If you read through the website of the Cato Institute, you'll get a good idea where a lot of my thinking lines up with; however, I'm not that comfortable with their vision for US foreign policy and nation defense.

I don't have a party that embodies all of my ideas, few of us do.

Are you satisfied with that answer?

Now, back to my question, because you most certainly did not answer it.

What is the deal with you? I only asked if you were a white supremacist because you seem very hostile to ethnic groups other than white Europeans.

You sound like the race baiter, not me. In nearly every post you make on this forum, you mock black people, and when you aren't doing that you are being anti-Hispanic, anti-Jew, and bemoaning diversity.

What am I supposed to think? You sound pretty damn hostile and intolerant to me. What's the deal?

Anti-Affirmative Action, Anti-Amnesty for illegal aliens and anti-non elected foreign lobby policy group that wields undo influence in our government contrary to the will and good of the citizens who sent them there. So, if you think that equates to Anti Black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-Semitic, then Rainmaker really don't give a shit what you think about it.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 08:07 PM
I've never seen him hostile towards white Americans.

I was speaking to their origins, but yes, he isn't very hostile to white Americans.

sandsjames
10-02-2014, 08:12 PM
I was speaking to their origins, but yes, he isn't very hostile to white Americans.My origins are from Santa Cruz, California. My parents origins are from California and Missouri. My grandparents origins are from Missouri, California, Nevada, and Arizona. That's 3 generations of native Americans. Now, if we want to talk about ancestoral heritage, then I'd put my money on it that the majority of us were originally based in Africa. But, hell, we can go with the European ancestory. It's as good as any. As long as we continue to point out any differences we can we'll be just fine.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 08:29 PM
No...not at all. Diversity is a wonderful thing. It's what our country is built on. What irritates me is constantly having to listen to how diverse we are.

Come on SJ, you are more articulate than that! Explain yourself with examples, because that sounds like some lame ass shit garkhal would say.

Give a specific example of someone spouting a diversity message in your ear, and tell me why it bothers you.

This reason I am asking you to be so specific is because I suspect this is a non-issue.


It's my opinion that we'd be better of as a country if we focused on what makes us the same instead of what makes us weak.

The most focused and unified I have seen us in my lifetime was after the events of 9/11. Whether our response was right or wrong, the fact is that, relatively, we all got along as Americans. Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etc were able to look past our differences (again, relatively, as 9/11 obviously raised other racial issues) and realize that we are all the same and all want pretty much the same thing. We were united. 9/11 was horrible, but the months after were some of my favorite times as I could walk down the city streets and get a smile, a nod, an acknowledgment from those I passed that we were all together.

Of course that unity faded and we went back to bickering and pointing out all of our differences.

People of all colors and ethnic groups smile at me all the time, and I live in Baltimore. A city with a horrible reputation for being violent, and racially divided.

The only hostility that I ever encounter on the street, and it has been rare, are from uneducated people, or criminals. I've had unpleasant encounters with drunk white dudes, just as many times as I've had run ins with black males. I can count the number of times I've had bad stuff happen on one hand, and that has been living in downtown Baltimore, off and on, since the 1999.

Yes, we have idiot drivers on the beltway, but all in all, people are friendly to me. People smile, say please and thank you, wish me a good day when I do business at a store.

We don't bicker that much in Baltimore, what kind of grumpy place do you live in?

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 08:29 PM
My origins are from Santa Cruz, California. My parents origins are from California and Missouri. My grandparents origins are from Missouri, California, Nevada, and Arizona. That's 3 generations of native Americans. Now, if we want to talk about ancestoral heritage, then I'd put my money on it that the majority of us were originally based in Africa. But, hell, we can go with the European ancestory. It's as good as any. As long as we continue to point out any differences we can we'll be just fine.

In the beginning there were 5 root races on the 5 continents. God gave each race one, and so the peoples lived in peace and harmony. then the White boys from Atlantis (with all their fancy white technology like anti-gravity boots and death rays and electricity and running water and indoor plumbing and shit) started Global warming and the polar ice caps melted, causing the great migration.(see esoteric meaning of Flood story and tower of Babylon).
It's all there hidden in plain sight for you to see. It's happening again. There is nothing new under the sun. SEE: Ecclesiastes 1:9

The Atlanteans became the Aryan Hellenic, peoples and later the Greeks and Romans, then Saxons, then Brits then eventually Non native- Americans( Read US).

So, if you are of White European descent, then you are most definitely responsible for all the ills in the world, since the beginning of time and you and your descendents owe all peoples of color a living from now until the end of time. You must give them all of your property. and If you don't hate yourself and your chilluns and your European culture, than well. you're probably just rayciss. just ask Abs in the Antidote and the rest of the enlightened progressives. Rainmaker has cracked the code for you, and so now you should be able to pass World History and Civics at any Public University in this country. You're welcome assholes. now Rainmaker has to go work on his preps. Because, the Ebola Pandemic is on our shores. out bitchez.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-02-2014, 08:43 PM
Anti-Affirmative Action, Anti-Amnesty for illegal aliens and anti-non elected foreign lobby policy group that wields undo influence in our government contrary to the will and good of the citizens who sent them there. So, if you think that equates to Anti Black, Anti-Hispanic, Anti-Semitic, then Rainmaker really don't give a shit what you think about it.

I just embarrassed you in these last few posts, and rightly so. You refuse to give me a direct answer as to what your political affiliations are and you refuse to denounce white supremacists groups.

So yes, I and probably many others are going to go right on thinking you are aligned with some fringe white power group.

What's with your long running routine as the street-wise black urban dialect speaking rainmaker?

That coupled with all of your other uppercase rants that routinely lambaste the establishment, why are you surprised that I think you are some kind of an extremist?

You earned that reputation, one post at a time. Don't get upset over it now.

Rainmaker
10-02-2014, 08:49 PM
I just embarrassed you in these last few posts, and rightly so. You refuse to give me a direct answer as to what your political affiliations are and you refuse to denounce white supremacists groups.

So yes, I and probably many others are going to go right on thinking you are aligned with some fringe white power group.

What's with your long running routine as the street-wise black urban dialect speaking rainmaker?

That coupled with all of your other uppercase rants that routinely lambaste the establishment, why are you surprised that I think you are some kind of an extremist?

You earned that reputation, one post at a time. Don't get upset over it now.

Rainmaker is a registered independent (Florida). Not upset at all. Like Rainmaker told you before. It's Hyperbole. You either get it or you don't. No skin off his balls. Now Rainmaker going to his bug out location to watch Dem O's on the inter-webs. Remember Rainmaker was bird-land long before your gentrified ass showed up in the charmed city. Gnomesaying?

USN - Retired
10-02-2014, 08:57 PM
"I am free of all prejudices. I hate everyone equally." ~W. C. Fields

USN - Retired
10-02-2014, 09:05 PM
So yes, I and probably many others are going to go right on thinking you are aligned with some fringe white power group.

"It ain't what they call you, it's what you answer to." ~W. C. Fields

garhkal
10-02-2014, 09:12 PM
WTF?

You sound like the "Bill the Butcher" character from the film, Gangs of New York. Go watch it, it is loosely based on real events, I'm guessing that is as close as you'll ever get to studying history.

You do realize that the US has always been diverse?

Even in the colonial era, we weren't a land of homogeneous people. In the early 1800s immigration started picking up, and by the mid 1880s people were streaming in from all over the place.

I'd say it is a damn good thing that "we are diverse for the sake of being diverse"; however, I wouldn't word it that clumsily.

I might reword it to say that, American strength and ingenuity were created from the combined efforts of our richly diverse population.

As for political maneuvering for the votes of immigrant populations, that's nothing new either.

If you want to keep all the foreigners out, go create a "Native Born" party like "Bill the Butcher."

However, I must warn you that his party lost influence and was swept into the dustbin of history.

Maybe i am being clumsy as hell in my phrasology, but that is how i see it. I hate getting diversity this, diversity that pushed down our throats (herritage months in the mil for one), while at the same time seeing a lot of those 'diverse groups' not really doing anythign to actually INTEGRATE into our society but try to push our society to be more like theirs. I hate having to mix this or that 'demographic' into every aspect of society/work/school, just cause it 'meets diversity goals', rather than look to whom is going to work the best in that spot.

TJMAC77SP
10-02-2014, 09:44 PM
I'm guessing it has something to do with their belief in the prophecies contained in the book of Revelations, coupled with the Jews being God's chosen people. At least, that's the kind of talk that I remember from my years as a youngster in Baptist churches.

If the Christian Evangelicals in their various lobbyist organizations have political justifications on top of what I just mentioned, I wouldn't be surprised, but I sincerely think the core of that support is rooted in what I first mentioned.

I tend to be rather pro-Israel myself, but not for religious or prophetic reasons. Politically, they make a sound ally for the US in the Middle East, although their national interests often diverge from our own.

You are correct in both. They believe the Rapture, End-Days, whatever cannot occur unless God's chosen people are in 'have possession' of the Holy Land.

That is not to say that the Jews will be included in the Rapture because that isn't part of the belief.

Given the (quiet) anti-Semitism which still exists with some Christians I find it a paradox they would support Israel until you consider the rather one-sided motivation involved.

TJMAC77SP
10-02-2014, 09:50 PM
http://www.moia.gov.il/english/pages/default.aspx

Maybe you can Emigrate. It's probably pretty easy to do and surely they place high value on Diversity there.

I wouldn't suggest it. As a non-Jew you will not be able to marry a Jew in Israel. Converting is very difficult (if you can find a Rabbi to agree to conduct the long process at all).

You will find it very difficult to do business, particularly run your own business. The first question usually asked in any job interview is "What unit did you serve with". Pay close attention to the wording of that sentence, it is deliberate.

Don't get me wrong, I lived in Israel for 3 years and admire many things about the country and its people. Not everything and certainly not everyone. There are aspects of both the culture of the government and the people which grate on me tremendously.

Certain aspects are more of a theocracy than a democracy.

sandsjames
10-03-2014, 10:20 AM
Was reading an article about the best and worst TV comedies of all time. They brought up "Friends". It was labeled one of the worst because there was too little diversity on the show. The argument was how can there be a show set in such a diverse city with no (or very few) minorities involved. I don't care whether you liked the show or not, diversity should not be an issue, for a couple reasons. One, is it that hard to believe that you could have a group of 6 friends without a minority? Two, it's a freakin' TV show and, three, does every TV show need to have a quota for the number of minorities involved in order to be good?

Absinthe Anecdote
10-03-2014, 02:03 PM
Was reading an article about the best and worst TV comedies of all time. They brought up "Friends". It was labeled one of the worst because there was too little diversity on the show. The argument was how can there be a show set in such a diverse city with no (or very few) minorities involved. I don't care whether you liked the show or not, diversity should not be an issue, for a couple reasons. One, is it that hard to believe that you could have a group of 6 friends without a minority? Two, it's a freakin' TV show and, three, does every TV show need to have a quota for the number of minorities involved in order to be good?

LOL!

SJ you are priceless, you truly are! Sometimes I just want to grab you in a headlock and give you a noogie.

I asked you to provide a specific example of what about the diversity message irritates you, and that is what you come up with.

LOL!

A criticism of a TV sitcom that aired its final episode a decade ago. Remember when I suggested that this might be a non-issue?

Other than seeing the occasional diversity PSA, or a poster on a bulletin board, I can't remember encountering the subject of diversity, anywhere in my daily life, except on this forum. Yet, you and garkhal claim it is being crammed down your throats.

Want to try again, or perhaps admit that you were being grumpy?

Rainmaker
10-03-2014, 02:46 PM
I wouldn't suggest it. As a non-Jew you will not be able to marry a Jew in Israel. Converting is very difficult (if you can find a Rabbi to agree to conduct the long process at all).

You will find it very difficult to do business, particularly run your own business. The first question usually asked in any job interview is "What unit did you serve with". Pay close attention to the wording of that sentence, it is deliberate.

Don't get me wrong, I lived in Israel for 3 years and admire many things about the country and its people. Not everything and certainly not everyone. There are aspects of both the culture of the government and the people which grate on me tremendously.

Certain aspects are more of a theocracy than a democracy.

Sound like the State of Israel makes legal immigration too hard. So, Maybe Rainmaker can just do it illegally then. After all laws are made to be broken and if they won't hire Rainmaker he can just work for cash under the table right? Rainmaker will just enroll his 5 chilluns in the local schools, get free lunch and child care and rely on the emergency room when he catch a cold or Ebola. There's no possible way for them to stop it. I know they have limited resources. But, It should be the duty of every citizen of the State of Israel to support anyone in the world who wants to come there and join because they’ve done so well for themselves because of their White Privilege and all. It’s only fair. Gnomesayin?

sandsjames
10-03-2014, 03:43 PM
LOL!

SJ you are priceless, you truly are! Sometimes I just want to grab you in a headlock and give you a noogie.

I asked you to provide a specific example of what about the diversity message irritates you, and that is what you come up with.

LOL!

A criticism of a TV sitcom that aired its final episode a decade ago. Remember when I suggested that this might be a non-issue?

Other than seeing the occasional diversity PSA, or a poster on a bulletin board, I can't remember encountering the subject of diversity, anywhere in my daily life, except on this forum. Yet, you and garkhal claim it is being crammed down your throats.

Want to try again, or perhaps admit that you were being grumpy?You asked for an example. The argument that was made about it was a current argument, even though the show has been off the air.

I'll add the discussions I hear about something else. In discussions about why Major League Baseball isn't as popular as it used to be, it has been said that there aren't enough black players and that baseball needs to do more to make baseball inviting to blacks. My question is why?

Or how about every time we have to hear about the number of females and minorities hired by certain companies. Never mind that fact that most of the people who go to college for tech degrees are white, the argument is made that more minorities need to be in the leadership positions of those companies.

All in the name of diversity.

I told you what irritates me about it. The "diversity message" does nothing to further unity in the country. In fact, it does just the opposite. Also, it irritates me that the stats are always given about the number of white males in a position compared to minorities, but it's never pointed out how many of those minorities actually apply for the positions and are qualified for the positions.

It's no different than it is with male vs. female wages. What we hear is that women make less than men. What we don't hear is that men are better at negotiating contracts and packages when it comes to getting hired.

Those are a couple of the things that irritate me.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-03-2014, 04:08 PM
You asked for an example. The argument that was made about it was a current argument, even though the show has been off the air.

I'll add the discussions I hear about something else. In discussions about why Major League Baseball isn't as popular as it used to be, it has been said that there aren't enough black players and that baseball needs to do more to make baseball inviting to blacks. My question is why?

Or how about every time we have to hear about the number of females and minorities hired by certain companies. Never mind that fact that most of the people who go to college for tech degrees are white, the argument is made that more minorities need to be in the leadership positions of those companies.

All in the name of diversity.

I told you what irritates me about it. The "diversity message" does nothing to further unity in the country. In fact, it does just the opposite. Also, it irritates me that the stats are always given about the number of white males in a position compared to minorities, but it's never pointed out how many of those minorities actually apply for the positions and are qualified for the positions.

It's no different than it is with male vs. female wages. What we hear is that women make less than men. What we don't hear is that men are better at negotiating contracts and packages when it comes to getting hired.

Those are a couple of the things that irritate me.

Much better, I knew you could express your thoughts better.

People come up with silly notions all the time. The MLB one is a good example of that, besides, the last time I was at an O's game the roster looked pretty diverse to me.

Don't let it bug you so much when a commentator writes something stupid, or takes a good idea a bit too far.

It isn't as if the MLB jumped at this guy's suggestion, right?

Your a cool fucker in my book SJ, and it bothers me to see you being garkhal-esque in your posts.

Have a great weekend!

Stalwart
10-03-2014, 05:11 PM
It is probably a blunt way of putting it, but in some cases I agree that "diversity for diversity's sake" is not the best idea in all situations.

-Should [X] percentage of [PICK A RANK] be [PICK A GENDER/RACE] because of that [GENDER/RACE's] demographic distribution in the service and/or society?

-Should we allow a certain percentage of medical students to become doctors based on their gender or race vice based on being the best and most qualified to be medical doctors?

On one hand ... diversity, with the intent to provide inclusion can further exclude people who are just as or more qualified that those providing diversity; we should not pretend this doesn't happen ... how rampant it is or widespread is a subject of debate. To punish a individual by ruling them ineligible for an opportunity because of their gender, race, sex etc. is just as wrong if it is a back female being arbitrarily ruled ineligible or a white male. I will agree, there are certain positions that I would prefer go to (for example) a female (chairing an organization that deals with women's issues .)

At the same time, being conscious of how people from different backgrounds and experiences bring different perspectives to the table, diversity is valuable and a good thing ... I don't know jack about being a minority or a female ... so if I want to be aware of factors that effect or are unique to that group I had best be able to know who to ask.

Diversity for the sake of diversity will in some cases disenfranchise someone for an arbitrary reason that ... at least to the individual ... is unfair, and while sometimes called 'reverse discrimination' is truthfully just discrimination against a non-stereotypical demographic.

BT BT

Friends was a great series ... except the episodes with the monkey, that was crap.

Absinthe Anecdote
10-03-2014, 05:41 PM
Stalwart

Honest question: Is there a medical board in this country that is actually certifying people to practice medicine based on their race? Or is that a hypothetical situation you used to illustrate a point?

If my memory serves me correct, didn't the Supreme Court hear a case on the legality of racial quotas in hiring and promoting? I don't think it is legal.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Stalwart
10-03-2014, 06:27 PM
Stalwart

Honest question: Is there a medical board in this country that is actually certifying people to practice medicine based on their race? Or is that a hypothetical situation you used to illustrate a point?

Sorry, that was hypothetical ... at least I really hope so.


If my memory serves me correct, didn't the Supreme Court hear a case on the legality of racial quotas in hiring and promoting? I don't think it is legal.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Off the top of my head I don't know if it is legal, but (really just trying to promote the discussion here) at what point does a de facto push for diversity become a quota based agenda? Ferguson MO is a potential example. The town is majority African American, the police force is majority Caucasian, something that is a crux of the argument by many in the town right now. Does it matter if the police are white, black etc. or does it matter that they are enforcing the law in an even and unbiased manner?

I was a bit bothered by the University of Michigan Law School case from a few years ago that denied enrollment to a white female who was (after the discovery process) found to be more qualified that minority students who were accepted for enrollment. This case eventually resulted in a 2006/7/8? Michigan law that prohibits public universities from favoring any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin -- basically reversing affirmative action. The law resulted in other lawsuits which this year went to the Supreme Court who upheld the law 6-2.

garhkal
10-03-2014, 08:48 PM
Was reading an article about the best and worst TV comedies of all time. They brought up "Friends". It was labeled one of the worst because there was too little diversity on the show. The argument was how can there be a show set in such a diverse city with no (or very few) minorities involved. I don't care whether you liked the show or not, diversity should not be an issue, for a couple reasons. One, is it that hard to believe that you could have a group of 6 friends without a minority? Two, it's a freakin' TV show and, three, does every TV show need to have a quota for the number of minorities involved in order to be good?

With how some shows are, it does seem like they set certain "Wickets" to be filled by this or that demographic.

Rainmaker
10-04-2014, 02:21 PM
Was reading an article about the best and worst TV comedies of all time. They brought up "Friends". It was labeled one of the worst because there was too little diversity on the show. The argument was how can there be a show set in such a diverse city with no (or very few) minorities involved. I don't care whether you liked the show or not, diversity should not be an issue, for a couple reasons. One, is it that hard to believe that you could have a group of 6 friends without a minority? Two, it's a freakin' TV show and, three, does every TV show need to have a quota for the number of minorities involved in order to be good?


Yes, this is the meme they are constantly pushing. Hollywood is run by Kabbalists that have a diversity fetish. We all need to sit around the campfire and sing Kumbuya while we magically evolve into coffee colored super-beings in a new Aquarian age Utopia. Anyhow, Rainmaker agrees. Friends was terrible. Martin was a much better show and more authentic.