Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Has American honor been diluted with immigrants ?

Posted 2 years ago on Feb. 19, 2012, 8:40 a.m. EST by FriendlyObserverB (1871)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

American ancestry fought for their freedom , they have it in their fabric to stand up and fight for principle. But when foreigners come to America what fabric do they bring? China may be the oldest civilization, but they have never overthrown their brutal government, and when they did it was replaced with another brutalt power. Or look at Mexico , they flee from their own country what fabric is that they bring to America ? Americas inner strength has been weakened by foreigners ?

365 Comments

365 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Hey, would that be the same Mexico that owned a large portion of the west that is now the USA? You know, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma, California, Arizona?

Didn't seem to mind the Chinese when they were sought out to come to the US to work on the railroads. Pay no attention to those that lived in California (when it was Mexico). Whatever you do, pay no attention to the Opium wars.

What is wrong with you? Were you dropped on your head as a child? This is the most outlandish racist crap....

[-] -2 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

American ancestry overthrew an oppressive king. That builds up their " karma points".

You lose points when you flee.

This protest should be in Mexico. Where there is terrible corruption and crime lords. Most of the original protestors are Spanish. They are cowards that fled Mexico. It's not about racism it's about fabric. Go home and help those you left behind in Mexico , fight the corruption in Mexico. Fight back ! Instead of hiding behind curtains in a foreign land. Cowards.

[-] 2 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Yep, fight back. Go back and get a handle on this."More than 70% of 29,284 firearms submitted to the U.S. Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for tracing by the Mexican government during 2009 and 2010 originated in the United States" ...perhaps when they do go back they can take more gifts with them...ya think??? Such bigotry you have!!!

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

people from mexico are mexican not spanish people from spain are spanish.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Whooaah, little buckaroo, were you educated in a "private school"?

Start here.

How many countries are in North America?

Now, look here. That is a close up shot of Central America.

Now, look here.

That is what we call South America.

I will give you a few minutes to take all of that in. Pssstttt........they are all Americans. :D

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I was waiting for someone to point that out.

[-] 5 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

The only natives here are the native Americans. All others are descended from European immigrants. These immigrants happened to be the only people who managed to basically eradicate a native population and culture,and then herd the survivors into so called reservations without having it be called genocide. That's some inner strength there.

[-] 1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Correction: anyone who was born on this soil is a native, regardless of where the parents were born.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

"native americans" are immigrants. they came over the then existing land bridge from asia.

[-] 3 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

No they were they original settlers and they managed to live here for thousands of years without wrecking the place. How long did it take the Europeans? A few generations?

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Europeans brought much to contribute to this new land. He also brought violence, like all conquerors do when bullying their way in. Man is a basically eveil being, seeking to dominate and exploit. Not all, but many. This is true for most people groups.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 2 years ago

Translation: "Man is no more than an animal, maybe less than an animal, so why fight it?" What makes me think Kirby is a "social conservative" Christian. I think "social conservative" really means social Darwinist," but they aren't allowed to use the D word.

[-] 1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Think whatever you want. Maybe you're wrong, maybe you're right, maybe it doesn't matter.

[-] -2 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

they had no written language, until the bad europeans came to the americas , the indians didn't have the wheel, or horses.

[-] 2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

They most certainly had written languages. They also had the wheel they just didn't utilize it. They didn't have horses because there were no fucking horses.

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

they had no written language that would let them communicate. they did not have the wheel, is they did they would not have been using a travois., Quite early in the americas there was a small ancestor of horse which left , going to asia over the land bridge. horses , as we now know them were introduced into the americas by the europeans.

[-] 1 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

They had wheels on children's toys.

http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2images/10.jpg

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

IF those are real pics of indians toys then the indians were really stupid not to employ them in their own adult lives.

[-] 0 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

They didn't have greed or explosives too...

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

they had their own form of greed,...................they more horses an indian had the more his wealth and stature, as for explosives,............they hadn't invented it.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

the Chinese invented gun powder

[-] 1 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

skylar how old are you? And where are you from?

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

mid 40's and born in the usa as were my parents, and their parents and their parents, etc.

[-] -2 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

there were ancestors of horses in the americas but the left , going to asia over the land bridge, they were re-introduced by the explorers. the indians did not have the wheel, if the did they would have used it.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Some tribes used dog packs and sleds over land.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

They did not have an alphabet language. :/

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/native_voices/nav1.html

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

they had pictographs but no alphabet.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Correct. It wasn't necessary, either.

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

sorry, an alphabet is neccessary to communicate.

[-] 2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

Tell that to the Chinese. I bet they feel really dumb pretending to communicate for all those thousands of years.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

the chinese have ideographs, which when taught , can be read.

[-] 1 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

So can pictographs. That is the point of a written language.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Wrong. Stories, maps, genealogy. rituals were written. Further, it proved handy when language was a barrier.

[-] 1 points by buik6 (18) 2 years ago

if that is the case for you, i suggest pursuing the arts or having sex with someone. because i can speak volumes to a female through her pussy.

yes, an alphabet is one way to express complex thoughts i think thats about as far as you can go. jazz expresses complex thoughts and in many cases the artists do not even know notation

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

What good are you to anyone? Your education began with and stopped at the stone age. We require progressive thinkers for the future generations, individuals with knowledge of self, educated, and who maintain breadth of vision. Anyone who continues to believe in those oppressive mandated decadent 1200 AD theories that created illusionary racist divides has no place in the new equal and just society of humanity!!! To know the future, one must be truly knowledgeable about the past... not BRAINWASHED!!

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Are you the resident knowledge master, deciding who's knowledge is of proper depth of truth and truthful enough to be accepted as fact by the educated.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Yes!!! Someone has to pass this along and get brickheads to thinking instead of just swallowing anything and fall for everything!!!. So far all I have read is the same ole BS and racist propaganda that is constantly used by Conquering Nations to keep themselves up on that glass pedestal!!! Until someone shows me differently and not just the brainwashing resulting from the censorship of truth and re-creation of falsehood in the books that are distributed to the public schools out of Texas...the answer is indubitably...Hell yes!! I am not a rebel rouser, I think people need to know the truth about themselves, their origins, and their history, their lost cultures and how great they were before the fall...So far, America has failed at providing that.. If you don't know who you are, then why would you want to become better citizens??? Benjamin Franklin said it best, you remember him right? He signed the Constitution of the United States. So, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin Volume II PHILADELPHIA 1726-1757 Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, &c. As the Increase of People depends on the Encouragement of Marriages, the following Things must diminish a Nation, viz. 1. The being conquered; for the Conquerors will engross as many Offices, and exact as much Tribute or Profit on the Labour of the conquered, as will maintain them in their new Establishment, and this diminishing the Subsistence of the Natives discourages their Marriages, & so gradually diminishes them, while the Foreigners increase. 2. Loss of Territor...you can finish reading for yourselves....Now...if you have truths beside what the founding fathers created...please honey....let me know!!! So, my answer to you is once again...Hell Yes!!! And I have a license to do so!!!

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

You dear, are the brainwashed one.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Oh, and further more.....Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1751 the following.."Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so.(black and tawny) And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? why increase the Sons of Africa, by Planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely White and Red? But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country, for such Kind of Partiality is natural to Mankind".

So, I am suspect of the history books placed in the schools and suspect of any Europeans who came here back then or those who defend that action now because they lied and told people of color that they were brought over on ships. When in reality ..THEY WERE ALREADY HERE!!!!

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Really, read further, about 7 - 9 posts down and tell me who is truly brainwashed!!

[-] 0 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

Most of us Americans have some Indian blood in us especially if your from the east coast, and a wasp, or colored person. The Indian tradition is a proud one, and represents the heart of a warrior, independence, clan and family, and living in harmony with the land. Think of the things we have given the names in honor- Apache, Jeep Cherokee, Tomahawk missiles, among others.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

and being called an indian giver if you take something back from someone.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I always thought that was about american settlers breaking treaties with the Natives

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

the why does the phrase mention indians and not settlers?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

typo fixed (settle)\

]

[-] 0 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

Well lol ive heard people use the Jbomb for that too.... doesnt necessarily make it right

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

Jbomb?

[-] -2 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

you have your history all wrong. the so called " native americans" were not native to amerca. they came from asia over the land bridge that went across the bering sea.

[-] 3 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

That's irrelevant. If you're going that far back then everyone is African. The Native Americans that came from Asia ultimately came from Africa as did the ancient ancestors of white Europeans and any human being that walks this Earth.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Oh, hi, kjack. You asked me a question but didn't allow me to answer you. I think the reason soldiers are for Ron Paul is because they have become anti-war after seeing the heinous affects of war and RP is the strongest antii-war, probably the only, anti-war candidate. It is commendable to be against war. The problem is that that is not his only position. His social and economic positions are also important and would set this country back a few hundred years. See this great comment by Bensdad that deconstructs Ron Paul.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/mainsteam-media-only-3-left/#comment-646738

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

damn. but the only thing that is new is what his stance was on lobbyists. i didnt know the specific details but i knew about his racist attitudes. I dont agree with all his proposed policies partly because they're non starters unless he went back at least to 1945 and implemented them there. Don't get me wrong i'm not voting for him or anything but I likely would in the event the President unable to use political skill to handle Israel and gives in to Israeli/AIPAC pressure and permits an attack on Iran and uses US forces to back them up. As a half black person, i would hate to vote for Ron Paul because of said facts but war with Iran will the deal breaker.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Thanks for reading that. RP has clear problems. Sadly, they all do. And, I agree with you re: Israel/Iran issue. No war. There is no need for another war. What is wrong with these people? I was just watching the news and some totally bogus inept journalist just said that Iran is going to strike first as soon as it thinks Israel will strike, as if that is fact. Pure propaganda. Shameful.

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

the US mainstream news on the issue disgusts me. No US General has testified saying Iran would even be able to build a nuclear weapon in the 6-9 month time frame; a fact the media seems to have missed. Through other sources I've read has argued that the real problem is that in that time frame the Iranians will have intermediate conventional missiles with GPS guidance technology that, if there was actual war, Iran will accurately be able to target the Dimona nuclear power plant or Israel's stock of chemical and biological weapons stockpiles thus using Israel's own weapons against itself.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

That's interesting. Maybe all nations are their own worst enemies. Also, who are we to tell another sovereign nation what weapons it can have? Why is there no attempt to make peace through other means?

The sources are critical and it's all very confusing, but clearly, starting a war is not the answer. Let's keep reading and trying to decipher the facts from the chaff.

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

Agreed. I cant remember what I was watching but someone had posed the question: what if the US withdrew its unequivocal support for Israel and Israel actually had to go to the Arab League and use diplomacy for the mutual benefit of all in the Middle East? This is an interesting article too: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/2012296186462790.html

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Good question and great article. Thanks.

The author makes the cogent argument of why, exactly, Iran is never going to strike Israel: They would face their own destruction, kill millions of Palestinians, and wipe out one of Islam's holiest sites in Jerusalem. Makes no sense and they're not going to do it.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

The problem with anti war," evil flourishes when good men do nothing".

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Try to imagine world peace. Try to imagine everyone getting along. It may sound naive to you, but we don't need to hate one another. There's nothing in the universe that says hate is a requirement.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I can not imagine a world of peace without having equal opportunity.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Okay, well that's a good place to start.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I have already suggested a plan for world peace. It required equal pay. You rejected it.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

I did not. Where did I reject your plan? Do you mean the cap on profits? I never rejected it. I'm still not sure I understand it fully, but I never rejected it.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

So , do you agree a banker or janitor or ditch digger should all receive equal hourly pay?

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Oh, you're going there. I don't think so. You're probably right then, that I don't agree entirely. You are trying to get me to say I'm a socialist. I didn't take your profit cap to mean that. Are you a socialist, FOB?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

The profit cap idea remains a capitalist system privately owned business.

The idea of equal pay reaches further into utopia. It creates world peace.

Bw , if you want world peace you will need to make a sacrifice. Equal pay creates world peace and beyond. It creates a world of freedom where everyone makes there own decision. Can you make the sacrifice to equal pay ?

Please explain why one person working equally as hard as another person , though in a different profession, should not receive equal pay?

[-] 0 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

A janitor and an engineer are not equal. A Banker and a store clerk are not equal. A policeman and a night watchmen are not equal...and on and on. THese simple examples are why you were rejected. because you don't have a point.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

If we created equal pay for all jobs except a few were paid less, who would want to do the lower paid jobs ? Would you ?

[-] 1 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

Young and un-skilled workers will take those jobs while they get training or education. If they want more money ..work 2 un-skilled jobs. That's the way it is and always will be. Nobody is going to pay a living wage to somebody without skills or a work history.

[-] 1 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

FOB ..you assume your trained the same. another immature thought on your part. You don't need training to take out the trash. Your taking out the trash. Lol if your a pilot or and engineer and your boss says as part of your duties you will share the trash disposal duties, that's different. One percent of your assigned duties includes taking out the trash. But your pay is based on your skills to be a pilot or an engineer. If 99% of your duties are to take out the trash, then you get paid to take out the trash. A no-skill job whether your working in a hotel or a space station. Obviously, you took the job for the view... but your still a janitor and that's all your worth to your employer. If you want to be worth more, learn to be an engineer or a pilot. I don't know why your to dumb to understand this. Oh wait, yes I do. You have no skills and no training at anything that will pay you a "living Wage", so you whine because the only job you can bet is janitor on the shuttle. Poor guy. Hahaha

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

If everyone on the space shuttle were trained equally, should the guy who takes out the trash accept lower pay?

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

that is simply an excuse to take other resources. Evil is flourishing because good men are doing nothing. So go do something to stop the war mongering. Not promote more of it. There is nothing that war solves, ever!!!!!

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I am doing something. I am exposing the evil behind the OWS curtain.

[-] 1 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

That was tens of thousands of years ago and there were no people living here before they came. What do you think the word 'native' means?

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

I'm not an indian but I am a "native american" i was born here.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

So the Native Americans are immigrants too? Great!... That only strengthens my case for continuing to encourage immigrants to come to this country.

[-] -2 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

LEGAL immigrant, yes, illegal, NO.

[-] 2 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Of course. We are not a refugee camp. But the thread title post says 'immigrants' and makes no distinction between legal or illegal.

To restrict or deny access to the cream of talent from every country around the world simply to try and keep those small percentages of low pay illegals out (at the cost of tens or hundreds of millions for the additional security and paperwork) makes very little sense to me.

[-] -1 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

Go Back to Siberia! just kiding

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

no written language, didn't have the wheel or horse until the bad explorers brought them here. were constantly attacking other tribes , murdering them and making slaves of the people they captured.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

OMG! So Europeans and the early settlers never fought wars with each other, never murdered each other nor kept slaves? Jeez... that means I should burn practically every history book I have ever read...

Oh wait... so I guess what the settlers did was okay then? That did not count as murder... or enslavement?

Who is to say that they would not have developed writing and technology on their own if left to their own devices?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

it was outsourced

[-] -2 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

you set the indians up as a perfect nature loving group. they weren't. the oldest wheel ever discoverd dates back to mesopotamia , 3500 b.c. writing goes back to about the same time . how much time did the indians need?

[-] 3 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

They lived with nature and respected it for thousands of years. No they weren't perfect.

Contrast that with the cowboys who won the west while decimating the buffalo and clearing indians from native lands. It was a blood bath. No we're not perfect either, but only we are far from it as we continue our destruction of the planet. I don't think Indians were on their way to destroy the planet before we handed them their heads.

Let's get the facts straight!

[-] -2 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

"they lived with nature" only because they invented nothing that would let them do anything else. the indians were constanly attacking other tribes and murdering them, they took captives and made them slaves. they devised the civilized art of scalping.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

And we made atom bombs and dropped a few. We learned to kill massive amounts of people quickly and efficiently. I guess that makes us all God's gift to world.

So, what's your point?

I tell you what it is: You hate the Indians.

Now, kick off, we all know your rant. You came to spew hate.

[-] -2 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

"dropped a few"? wrong , two were dropped to end a war that japan started. japan was given the chance to surrender , but they wouldn't . they still refused to do so after the first bomb was dropped. after the second bomb , they finally gave up. i don't hate indians, but i dont like people who portray the so called native americans as peace/nature loving saints.

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

Skylar,

And you know what I don't like?

That's people who make useless incendiary generalizations like you just did, Exhibit A -------------------- (your words, quoted):

"i don't hate indians, but i dont like people who portray the so called native americans as peace/nature loving saints."

I just scoured this entire thread to see where anyone, and I mean anyone, says the Indians were peaceful, let alone peace loving. So, your comment in this context is confusing and frankly incoherent.

I said Indians lived with nature, in harmony, and were not out to destroy it. That's a proven fact. So, they were Nature Lovers. I'm a nature lover. I think it's a good idea we stop destroying the earth. I also believe that Global Warming is real and our descendents will curse us if continue to do nothing about it.

And nice try, your defense of war is absurd. Many do see this absurdity of WAR. As long as we can excuse it, we will never stop doing it. If you can't imagine a world without war then you can know your one of reasons we won't stop.

Don't get me wrong. I can kill, and I will given the right circumstance. But, my threshold is extremely high. It would be the absolute last resort, absolutely. Then I won't blink. I own a gun and can fire very accurately. It requires practice. I can do it. I have been on both sides.

Skylar, hmmm. interesting name.

[-] -1 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

war is absurd? would you have let hitler keep on going until he controlled and subjugated the entire world? that was his plan. OR would you have tried to stop him along with stoping the japanese plan to conquer and subjugate?

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

Hitler perpetuated war, thus we say it is absurd. better not to have a Hitler in the first place because people are educated, not propagandized. Your own logic betrays you.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

hitlers plan was to conquer the world. many of his generals were highly educated. "better not to have a hitler",.....it doesnt work that way. there will always be evil and people that buy into it.

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

he was successful because he was able to crank out so much propaganda that at first, people didn't actually know what was going on. Much like in America today. If we were to push for the abolishing of acts of war in the first place, and the correct classification of the aggressive acts taken by our country currently, we might begin to address the real issue, which is wealth generation, by those in power, for those in power, to perpetuate that power as long as they can, which, if you look at history, has been quite a bit of time.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

people in the usa know what's going on,..if they bother to do some research. That's why the govt wants to control the internet . when dan rather came up with a charge against bush is was proven false due to the research done on the internet.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Correction. Two were dropped after Japan had attempted to surrender. Japan had already been devastated. They had wooden cities. They were dropped specifically to "put the Soviets" in their place.

At one point, General Curtis LeMay told Robert McNamera that if they did not win this war they would be tried as war criminals.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

no dear, japan would not surrender. at that point in the war, the next step for the allies was to invade the home islands. thousands of allied troops would have died. japan was asked to surrender, they would not, the first bomb was dropped. again they were asked to surrender, they would not, the second bomb was dropped, they then surrendered.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Wrong. Japan was trying to surrender. There was no way in hell that Japan could have made a comeback or posed a threat at the time the bombs were dropped. None. Secondly, there has never been an unconditional surrender. There still hasn't been one.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

japan was not trying to and had no intention of surrendering.japan signed an unconditional instrument of surrender on sept. 2 , 1945

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

hirohito was a puppet ruler, the real rulers of japan at the time was the military and they were not going ot surrender.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Yes, they were trying to surrender. They were toast.

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

We started the war with Japan, by denying them oil. Read some actual history, not that shit made in Texas. We Instigated it, so we would have a reason to use the munitions that we had made from WWI, and those that had been made during the run up to WW2. The Second world war is how many of our current 1 percent were made, and how others were invigorated. Your dislike is because of the guilt associated with wiping our a culture that WAS SUPERIOR as far as sustainability and long term compatibility with the planet.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

did you know that in japanese run POW maps, the japanese soldiers cut the flesh from living prisoners and ate it? Bataan death march? nice guys.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

the usa forced the japanese to invade manchuria and china? ever heard of " the rape on nanking"? Wiping out what culture?

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

they were looking to protect their oil flow. Caused by us. So we are responsible for those acts.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

No dear WE are not. The japanese military was. you are one sick apologist.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Just so we can keep score here:

Indians: Scalping

Europeans: Burning at the stake, thumbscrews, the infamous Iron Maidens, and generally all of the trials by ordeal that they tended to use back then. In modern times, "enhanced interrogation techniques" which include (but are not limited to) waterboarding and sodomy.

Some more reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

indians,..scalping, cut off ears, noses, tongues and assorted other body parts. the iroquoise tortured and cannabalized their enemies.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Not sure about cannibalism, but Europeans have done all that you said and more. Quite cheerfully I might add, and claiming it be in Gods name.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

and muslims are the only group that are still murdrering in the name of their god.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Dear god, here you go again... off on another tangent...

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

you brought up doing things in the name of god.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

It might be a simple question of started it.

http://www.hawthorneinsalem.org/ScholarsForum/MMD2263.html

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

the comanche tortured captives from other indian tribes. the aztecs did human sacrifices, thousands per years.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Didn't read the link?

Of course not.

Lord only knows what the Aztecs had to do with it. the Spanish weren't particularly nice either.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

i read it. the spanish explorers did a lot of things but human sacrifice wasn't one of them.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Missed that whole Spanish inquisition thing, did you?

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

inqisition, about 125,000 people were investigated, resulting in about 2280 deaths. the aztecs sacrificed thousands of people for years, children included.

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

I would like to see something to back up that assertion. Any one can say such a thing, but that does not make it true, nor does it mean that ALL Native Americans behaved this way.

[-] 2 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

1- You assume that writing and the wheel are the only acheivments worth making, how sad for you. 2- Some of the Indians, Iraquois nation for one, were actually at peace with nature, and we took our constitution from their culture, so we learned from them.

Writing does not make the culture. Acts make the culture. And the acts of America, domestic and abroad, are abysmal to say the least. It sickens me that we use base propaganda to explain away our constant genocide, Ecocide. WE ARE DESTROYING OUR HOME< FOR PROFIT. PROFIT OF THE 1%.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

you don't think that writing ( communication) is worthwhile? one of the greatest inventions ever was movable type.
the iroquois were actually 5 tribes that constantly fought with themselves and other tribes. they fought for land and they fought for revenge. our acts abroad are really abysmal, saving the world from fascism,.............how selfish can you get.

[-] 1 points by JDub (218) 2 years ago

what fascism have we saved the world from? the fascist governments implode on themselves, not because we do anything. The only acts we take abroad are those designed to secure more oil, resources, not to end anything. We ignore the worst offenders of human rights violations simply because there is nothing for us to gain(other than moral superiority,).

I never said they did not fight, i said they were in harmony with nature, and, much more sustainable in the long run.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

WW ll was started by hitler in 1939 by invading poland. until the usa got involved, germany was winning. it took years and the cooperation of many countries to to defeat hitler.

[-] 2 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

I never said a single thing about them being perfect, or nature loving for that matter.

All I was saying is that they did not have a monopoly on warring, murdering and enslaving. Europeans had that down to an art form.

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

for all the centuries that the indians were in the americas , they were attacking neighboring tribes, murdering them, enslaving them, indians made scalping an art form.

[-] 2 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Are you daft? Europeans had been doing it for just as long. Heck they were doing it on a global scale. The Europeans had things like the slave trade and Inquisitions and witch hunts going on... or did you simply not bother to learn any history?

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

arab muslims STILL own black christian slaves in the sudan. america abolished slavery in 1865. the british, before that.

[-] 2 points by GildasSapiens (266) 2 years ago

The best estimates are that there are tens of thousands (& probably in excess of a hundred thousand) of sex slaves, forced & bonded laborers, & debt slaves in the USA at any one time.

Are they all owned by Arabs &/or Muslims? Or is it just that you're a racist, xenophobic, supremacist a-hole, B76RT?

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

debt slaves? you mean people that work and spend more than they earn? sex slaves? forced labor? when it's discovered, ring leaders are arrested. how about the slavery of people who not of the same " religion" as their owners"? people out in the open owning other people,..... what arab muslims are doing to black christians in the sudan?

[-] 1 points by GildasSapiens (266) 2 years ago

Debt slaves are people who've been tricked (e.g. by human traffickers) into incurring a large debt with the promise of reasonably well paid work afterwards, but who are then forced to work for nothing until the debt (plus "expenses" & exorbitant, cumulative interest) is "paid off" (which often never happens).

And in many parts of Africa & the Indian Subcontinent, Christians & Hindus openly own both Muslims & non-Muslims as slaves, & the authorities turn a blind eye to (& often even collude in) it.

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

tricked into buying what they know they can't afford? how are these people tricked? work for nothing? they don't get paid?

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Excuse me? I thought we were talking about Native Americans and European immigrants here?

I think most goldfish have a longer attention span than you.

[-] -1 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

a couple of post back you brought up slaver regarding the europeans. i said that the british abolished slaver along time a go but it's still going on in the sudan, by arab muslims owning black christian slaves. why no outcry about it?

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

I would tell you that you have missed the point, but you would miss that too.

This is your post. The one which started the discussion about slavery:

"[-] 1 points by B76RT (141) 1 day ago no written language, didn't have the wheel or horse until the bad explorers brought them here. were constantly attacking other tribes , murdering them and making slaves of the people they captured.."

Slavery in any shape and form of ANY people of ANY race, religion or gender is unequivocally outrageous.

But that is NOT the point I was making.

In your post, you made it sound like the immigrants did not participate in war, or slavery or murder. I was rebutting your argument.

Its great that they abolished it. But that does not change the fact that they DID participate in such activities. THAT is my only point. They were not egalitarian, peace loving, or nature loving either. Not then.

Slavery in Sudan is awful indeed, but I dont see our Govt stepping up to do anything about it. Why? Cause Sudan does not have anything worth saving other than its people (and people don't rate too high on the Military Industrial complex priority list).

Even so, the Sudanese have absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

when slavery was legal in the usa, most of the free people did not own slaves. The people of Brooklyn did not go out and attack the people living in Manhattan....the residents of Philadelphia didn't attack the people of Chester. get the picture? regarding the sudan, what stops the black leaders from denouncing the slavery ?
many people of ows are concerned about people all around the world, why not the slaves in the sudan?

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Umm. That is because they were of the same 'tribe' so to speak. Indians fought wars between different tribes. Kind of like how the different European countries fought each other sometimes.

Again, you fail to see the point. In your first post, you made it sound like the immigrants did not participate in war, or slavery or murder. I was rebutting your argument.

As I had predicted before, you DID miss the point again.

I rest my case.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

beside revenge ( with the iroquois, if one member was targeted , they considered the whole tribe to be a target) they fought for land among themselves and other tribes. european , asian, middle eastern etc. wars are fought for one thing only,......land( the control of it) not revenge.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Franco German enmity, these guys considered themselves to be hereditary enemies at one time.

Blood feuds, Vendettas... do these terms ring any bells? European terms. Often started for the most frivolous reasons and culminating in massacres of entire clans/villages.

They continue in France, Greece and Albania (on a smaller scale but no less brutal)

Heard of the "Regulator Moderator War" perhaps... right here in America?

Most recently there was a massacre in the Philippines... but lets put that outside the sample set for now...

In modern times, it is restricted to gang warfare where gangs are known to retaliate in the most violent fashion for small transgressions by other rival gangs. And these are probably a more accurate example to compare tribal wars to instead of entire continents.

These gang members are usually of the same nationality too... yet they butcher each other at the slightest provocation...

But yeah... lets forget all of that... it never happened...

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

you really think that the allies fought for " revenge"? if not for a written language , you would not be posting.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

I have not even mentioned a specific war by name. That is ALL coming from you.

For your benefit, I will post this excerpt from my post again with some key words highlighted:

"Are you telling me that NONE of the European wars, heck even some of our modern wars were fought for 'revenge'? Are you also saying that they (the Iroquois) ONLY fought for revenge?"

Try (for a second) to understand what I said there.

If YOU understood written language. You would NOT be making such a ridiculous inference from that post.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

WWll was not about revenge. It was about stopping madman from taking over the world.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Dear god, apart from your obvious ignorance of history do you also lack the ability to comprehend written language (that which you so proudly tout as being required for a civilization)?

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

the iroquoise fought for revenge.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Pfft...Bwaahahahahahhahahahahaahahahahh ahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahhaha hahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahhahah ahaahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahha.....

Are you telling me that none of the European wars, heck even some of our modern wars were fought for 'revenge'?

Are you also saying that they (the Iroquois) only fought for revenge?

Kings had big and easily hurt egos back then. Same with people in power now.

[-] 0 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

the iroquois were composed of 5 tribes. beside fighting other tribes they fought among themselves.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

Oh no, you know what? I completely forgot about the Civil War... and the other civil wars in Europe...

Or was that really just a hoax perpetrated on me by my History teachers?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Not true. The tribes had treaties and land division and an economic system as well. Some were enemies and some were not.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Well, since you brought this up there are writings registered with not only the Library of Congress, but also books published by the Ancient American Archaeology Foundation out of Wisconsin. The following is also registered with the Northern District of New York. On the cover it states; "American Antiquities, and Discoveries in the West: being an exhibition of the evidence that an ancient population of partially civilized nations, differing entirely from those of the present Indians, people America many centuries before its discovery by Columbus. And inquiries into their origin, with a copious description of many of their stupendous works, now in ruins; with conjectures concerning what may have become of them. Compiled from travels, authentic sources, and the researches of "antiquarian societies" This book was written by Josiah Priest, published in the year 1834.
Whew...how about that for a title...and guess what....this book was never, ever put in the public schools... Now why do you think that is??? He tries to refer to Newfoundland, and Iceland and the Vikings as being here, but can never quite pull it off....since as history states that they were from Europe and the Northern Atlantic Sea Coastal areas. But he is talking about the Mississippi, Ohio and below!! Then he went on to write "Bible Defence of Slavery in 1853, ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE NEGRO RACE" Why?

So, why did he defend Slavery after his first book, and then concoct some fake origin of the so-called "negro" race that was already here in America? I think it is suspect and requires further investigating. So if anyone reads that first book and can tell me exactly who they think those people were and are...I will shut up, and never put another negative word about RACISM on this forum or any other....ever!!!

Now will the truth be told...finally????

[-] -2 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

Hey toukarin, try coming back to reality. What happened in the past was a result of expansion of an anglo-saxon culture in a new world clashing with an indigenous population. They fought against it and we fought for it. We won, they lost. Tough Luck for them. But dude, get over it. That was then and this is now. Our victories opened the way for the greatest country the world has ever seen. And we have generously repaid our Karmic dept a million times over throughout the world. Please try to find something good or smart to say...or please...just don't talk.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

That was then and this is now?

Fine, lets talk about now and why immigrants are important to us.

Before you say anything else, let me clarify that I am talking only about LEGAL and high skilled immigrants.

Immigrants have been credited with being the founding members of close to 50% of the top venture backed start-ups in the country. They hold high managerial positions in upwards of 75% of them.

Immigrants in academia also have significant research output that has lead to much of the innovation that gives us our competitive edge in the global economy.

They create more jobs than they take. Given the opportunity.

Most companies actually prefer to hire US citizens, the paperwork required to retain an immigrant worker is ridiculous. The problem is that there are not enough people with the right skills. Trust me, I know.

At my graduation ceremony, US citizens were outnumbered 10:1 in the Electronics Engg department. Indians, Chinese and Koreans, heck there were so many that the announcer eventually got used to pronouncing their names correctly... and I work with these people and still cant do it right everytime...

So yes, this is now. Immigrants, have the right skills, Immigrants CREATE jobs, good reasons for them to come in and stay. As for 'getting over it,' I have gotten over it. But the point is (for all their faults) that it was immigrants who made this great country. No reason to stop denying them access now.

All it will do is drive up cost of Homeland Security and discourage the top talent from every other country from coming to us to share their talent and entrepreneurial spirit.

Might keep a few landscapers out too... and I am sure everyone is dying to mow lawns for a living...

This country was great, and could be greater still. But that is if we do not devolve into an isolationist anti-immigrant nation.

The best way to keep them out... if you still want that... is to get our kids into STEM degree programs... let them develop the right skills... so that companies will not need to look to immigrants to find the right skills...

10 times out of 10, a similarly qualified US citizen will get the job over a similarly qualified non citizen... no racial or nationalist bias involved, purely a practical consideration... less paperwork, less hassle...

Case in point, a business partner of my boss. Happens to be an immigrant with >50 employees working for his firm. Only one of those is a non US citizen.

[-] 1 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

Well, fire the non-citizen immediately and then everything is good.

[-] -3 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Where did the native Americans learn to build a fire ? Was it brought over by their ancestors across the Bering strait ?

[-] 5 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

Fire was used by hominids for hundreds of thousands of years.

[-] 1 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

Using fire dates back at least 200,000 to 2 million years ago The current time table for mankind's development taught at most school is Wrong. Man has been on this planet and suffered through at least 4 great destruction or Ages. There could be more. The Hopi and Ancient Egyptians have similar ideas on this history, but it has been ignored & suppressed by the so called learned for all the obvious reasons.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Could it also be that man has lived before the beginning of "alleged" time and recorded history? After all, has anyone proved otherwise?

So-called learned....perhaps that is why this world is so screwed up, the masses depend too much on the "so-called learned" and all their hypothesis, and theories, and idealism with no real straight talk about anything! Hmm..perhaps they too are politicians?

[-] 1 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

I agree with you. The learned have discounted the city of Troy until it was located. Atlantis has been discredited, yet it is documented by countless people surrounding the Atlantic Ocean. The Egyptians told Solon that the Greeks were a new people. Religion would have a rude awakening if the truth ever got out.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Totally, so I wish it would start right here in America... Now, that would truly be a rude awakening, and perhaps a bit frightening for most!

[+] -4 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

Just wondering where you get the nerve to say the Native American's have continued to be wronged. We are the only nation who will completely "eradicate a native population" then give them land and pay them to drink themselves to death. I think this is ridiculous. OWS wants to take a look at fixing problems we should look at programs like this. And before you say anything about me being a racist or a bigot, I myself am a 3rd generation indian and I think these programs are ridiculous.

[-] 4 points by toukarin (488) 2 years ago

I don't see where in my post I said that they have 'continued to be wronged'

What I said was that the original settlers managed to do all of that and still not be smeared with the tag of genocide. Is this the kind of inner strength that we want to aspire to? Perhaps not.

The point being, for all their faults, this was a nation built by immigrants to begin with. To deny them access now is to deny our very roots.

People who take the plunge, step out of their comfort zones (whether by desire or necessity) and leave their countries to explore opportunities elsewhere are more likely to be successful and bring prosperity to wherever they end up.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Ha!!! Original settlers my ass!!! Get off this racist tirade all of you and realize that ALL nations have been subjugated, oppressed..even by their own, and left to suffer and die while others benefited off of their misery!!. Look around...this is the result of the original settlers!.

[-] 3 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

Indians have been wronged in horrible ways over the last century. The white man builds dams and redirects the natural flow of water so they can have golf courses in the desert and this dries out the land rendering it useless for the Indians. Considering all that has been done to your people over the centuries one would think you would have a little more compassion for them and solidarity with them. But I guess you being 3rd generation and all it is common for people like you to look down on them. You know white people have a lot of problems with alcohol too. Its just that we have been consuming it for many generations and our bodies can process it better than Indians who have only been in contact with it for a few.

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

And I bet you want me to feel sorry for african americans because I'm a white person even though none of my white ancestors were rich enough to afford 2 meals a day. This is an absurd thought process. What about all the dam casinos? Where does that money go? Not back to the indian people.

[-] -3 points by PretendHitGirI (13) 2 years ago

I'd scalp your punk ass for free.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

Oh thanks not constructive at all.

[-] 5 points by GildasSapiens (266) 2 years ago

"American honor" is oxymoronic, but your flagrant racism is only moronic.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 5 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

"Has American honor been diluted with immigrants ?"

No. Native Americans are still honorable, despite all the white men immigrating here.

[-] 3 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

exactly!!!!!

[-] -2 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I beg to differ. Unless you consider alcoholism during pregnancy honorable.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

What a dickhead! Was your mommy drunk when she carried you, little boy? That would explain a lot about your mental capacity.

[-] 4 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

The term immigrant is outdated. We are all from the world. Land masses divided by fake lines & water means nothing to me. Join us, The Worldians and escape the horror of these antiquated paradigms. These senseless debates will rage forever unless we make a new reality. Love is All. Love is New. Love is YOU.

[-] 2 points by trololo (21) 2 years ago

usa! usa! us-eh?

[-] 0 points by NightShade (163) 2 years ago

That's globalization talk, your're one of those fucking one order types aren't you?

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Nice post, Quark. I agree.

[-] -1 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

Thank you. That makes me much happier. I wish the world would be one & root out rich greedy pathological corruption once & for all.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Borders are nonsense, anyway. One day the nation-state will be a thing of the past and the world will function for the benefit of all of humanity.

[-] 1 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

Yes, free at last, free at last. You are the best.

[-] 0 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

beautifulworld obviously has smoked to much wacky-tobaccy... What makes America great is that it is one nation under god. We are a sovereign nation. We trade and help others, but we are better because of our borders, and worse when they are assaulted. Go back to momy's house and eat a sandwich..I think your blood sugar is low

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

I would debate who's been smoking too much wacky-tobaccy. I don't smoke but I do think progressively unlike reactionaries like yourself. Why don't you try opening your mind a little.

[-] 2 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

Well, you just keep living in your beautiful bubble. If you want compassion and empathy, go volunteer your services for free, or find a non-profit to work for. But your naivety is astounding and is one of the reasons so many people these days believe that everything should be handed to them. Skills are learned and developed.If you have no skills, and don't develop, then your hard work is and will always be worth much less. Grow up!! This thinking is why our current un-skilled and un-qualified President got elected. Thanks for that...

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

You keep on living in your reactionary callous world, but please don't invite me to it. I'm not interested.

[-] -2 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

Its not always what u say, its how you say!

[-] -3 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Beautifulworld , you obviously are naive and take the safe comforts of America for granted. There is a strong force outside your borders that want to crush you. It is a brutal reality you must face. Your pacifist attitude would have us all kneeling to the Quran. You really should thank those men of honor for without their dedication courage and discipline in the face of danger you would be repeatedly raped by the enemy until they set you on fire.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

No, sir. It is you who is naive. Mankind can and will overcome the hostilities created by false borders. I will never stop believing that someday, okay most likely not in my lifetime, that will happen. We must evolve beyond this ridiculous fear-mongering hatred that resulted from hundreds of years of imperialism and colonization if we are to survive as a species.

[-] 2 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I have offered a couple solutions that would level the playing field with an" over arching" future of peace. It was ridiculed and insulted by the very protestors whom claim they want equality. Even you bw would not agree to equal pay. I strongly recommend leaving the borders where they be. And keep your guard on alert. And don't let your enemies lull you into a dreamy state of mind , because as soon you let your guard down you will be awakened by a horrible reality.

Take a moment to thank a soldier.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Quark is right. He is thinking progressively about how to make lasting change that is positive.

And, I don't have any enemies, my nation-state does. Why? Because that is one of the goals of the nation-state, to pit itself against the "other" in some weird twisted attempt to elevate it's own people. That is what borders have done.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Where do you see that? America is an honorable nation trying to always make the right decisions. Beautifulworld, don't lose your way.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Right decisions for whom?

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

For the whole world.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

It's nice you think that, but I disagree. It just isn't so.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Well , something you may be unaware of. The whole world is looking to America for help. You are the worlds only hope. Big shoes to wear but you have more support than you may realize.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

Hi, FriendlyObserverB. Why do you ask questions and then not allow me to answer them?

First, I do not bad mouth the USA. I love my country and want to see it do the right thing. I'm trying to improve things for the world. Blind love for a nation will get you nowhere.

And, no, I'm not a founder of this protest, although I've been feeling and thinking these issues for a long time before we ever heard of OWS.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

It is not blind flowery love like quark proclaims in an earlier comment.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22252) 2 years ago

I think the whole world is looking to America to do the right thing, yes. Unfortunately, being a nation-state, the U.S. only looks out for its own self-interests as any other nation-state does. This is obvious if you think of Sudan, Rwanda, Congo, places like that, where we've done next to nothing.

[-] 0 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

Self-interest often is conflated with many other factors that the war machine get the media to portray as doing the right thing. Earlier in this thread someone said 'take a minute to thank a soldier' but I think everyone should take a moment to listen to a soldier. Those who have seen out involvement in recent wars and have been on the homefront, America's active duty personnel and their families, have donated more money to Ron Paul's campaign than ANY other candidates' including President Obama. What does that say?

[-] -3 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Why do you bad mouth USA ?

Are you one of the founders of this protest ?

[-] -1 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

lol makes me think of "Donnie Darko" Fear and Love hahahaha

[-] -2 points by NightShade (163) 2 years ago

Beautifulworld is probably one of those unclean infidels that have no respect for our fathers country

[-] -2 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

Quark your not being a realist, people dont speak worldian, they dont go to the world church, and by the way if the world fits your the wrong size, Godly and Worldly strange you use that specific choice of word... We do need to be more envirionmentally aware, as it is the only planet we have. The garden given to us....

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Well lookee here !!! Was your Momma your sister and your Pa and Gran'pa the same person ?!!

Have you "RacistObserverA", been "weakened" by "concentrating" on generations of in-breeding ?!

Just askin' !!

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] 3 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

China overthrew its Mongolian dynasty (do you remember the "Yellow Peril" of the Mongols' making? And where the term "mogul" came from?) and ushered in the much-heralded Ming dynasty. China should be exempted. Oh, by the way, if we the people could achieve something similar against oppressions, I would be mighty proud.

I would not blame Mexicans trying to flee their own country IF they have to buy bottled water at near gasoline prices to survive. I have not verified the actual prices of bottled water in Mexico so that was a big IF. Maybe the U.S. should find ways to make lives better in our neighbor, Mexico, so that its people do not have to flee their own country.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Yes, that's right. Mexican labor in Mexico has been undercut by NAFTA. We need to get rid of "globalization" and develop the capacity in all nations to do their own manufacturing and provide employment for their own people.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

That is the best case but we also should recognize that some countries have comparative advantages over others. For example, U.S.-produced corn ethanol is vastly less efficient than Brazil's sugar-cane ethanol because sugar cane is a C4 plant and the U.S. uses much natural gas to distill for the ethanol. U.S. can use combine harvesters for cultivating its crops and have economy of scale but Mexico's terrain may be unsuitable for driving big machines around on relatively flat and wide-open spaces. I suspect if everyone aspires to U.S. agricultural practices, we may end up starving a number of people. The yield per acre in the U.S. is LOW compared to other countries' with intensive agricultural practices (using more labor for higher yield but it makes SENSE for employment and food production). Keeping up with the Joneses can be a silly practice. Trade should be a component of a vibrant world economy but it needs to be fair. Concentrated-sunlight-produced electricity for example can be a very good Mexican export to the U.S.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Most of that makes sense. I'm not sure about the production of ethanol though, I think we would be better off using food for nutrition.

Also, concerning solar energy, deserts covered in solar panels will always remain deserts. I think it would be better to bring water to the deserts, through projects like NAWAPA which would bring vast quantities of fresh water from Alaska to the central American desert and on to Mexico. I think that green plants use the sun's light more efficiently that any solar device can.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

Corn is probably more nutritious than sugar cane if used for food so the U.S. way of producing ethanol is more detrimental to the world's food supply. Deserts are deserts for good reasons. If you bring fresh water to deserts, they evaporate and deposit salts so eventually you will no longer be able to grow green plants there any more. Green plants are not more efficient than some solar devices in producing electricity because they ALWAYS include WATER and it takes heat (such as from natural gas) to drive away the water before the plant material can become fuel. Some solar devices will definitely surpass green plants in producing electricity. I am NOT thinking about solar panels because that is inefficient in terms of the material needed.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Regarding watering the deserts, if it is not feasible, what is this that we always hear about Israel "greening the deserts"? Also, the Army Corp of Engineers developed the idea for NAWAPA, bringing water to the deserts, which JFK advocated as well. If they thought it was feasible, I would have to give them some credibility.

Also, the idea of plants as an alternative to solar is not intended as an alternative to energy, but rather as producing food as the alternative. Generally, I don't consider solar power a good solution for energy, and would prefer solving the problems of nuclear energy.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

Israel discovered a much more efficient way of irrigation - drip irrigation. It was originally due to observing why a tree grew well in the desert due to a cracked irrigation pipe slowly watering it. The Israelis "greened the deserts" through technology and the resulting efficiency. They have abundant sunshine so they built greenhouses to produce crops. They did not have much fresh water so they drip, drip, drip in a stingy (it is actually a most beautiful word in a desert) fashion. The Israelis are very ingenious. The U.S. on the other hand loves BIG and glorious solutions so in the end we may not have much to show if they do not succeed. Our politicians get their glorious moments but we end up carrying the debts for generations to come. The U.S. has already more than enough food to feed itself so producing more food is not attractive unless you get customers lined up but due to various countries' import tariffs that is not going to work (case in point, Japan, China, and EU). Knowing how we in the U.S. could not even keep our water pipe infrastructure maintained, I have NO confidence that we will have the political will to entomb high-level nuclear wastes for the requisite number of centuries. Nuclear energy may be a last resort that we seize our descendants' health and wealth for our own benefits so that is a bit unethical.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

By the way, I just saw this article:

China starts building home-made nuclear waste processor http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-03/07/c_131452769.htm

CHANGSHA, March 7 (Xinhua) -- A company based in the city of Changsha has started building the first China-made reactor to process radioactive nuclear power plant waste, researchers said Wednesday.

Changsha Boiler Plant Co., Ltd. (CBP) started building the plasma furnace on Tuesday at its base in the capital of central Hunan Province, said Huang Wenyou, director with the national energy development and research center on nuclear equipment...

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

Good. We can ship China our nuclear wastes when their reactor starts working.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Not a bad idea, but I think we would be better off building our own.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Many of our big and glorious projects in the past have been successful, no reason why we couldn't be successful once again. We could do the same as the Israelis if that is what is required. JFK said of NAWAPA that it would pay itself off many times over.

As far as waste is concerned, I think that I would rather have it entombed in the earth rather than put into the atmosphere where we breath it, as is the case with fossil fuels.

Also technological progress could allow us to eliminate nuclear waste, or at least cut it way down through recycling. Also, their is the idea of a fusion torch which could separate materials into their constituent elements, this technology could eliminate or reduce the quantity of nuclear waste:

The Myth of Nuclear Waste http://larouchepac.com/node/14724

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

My experience with many fancy technologies over the years tells me that they purportedly solve some problems at the cost of creating other unforeseen problems. The whole thing tends to turn into the Whack-a-mole game. I have become skeptical because the hyperboles for new technologies are required to overcome the initial resistance against them but they are usually pies-in-the-sky type exaggerations that sorely disappoint eventually.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I think there is more to fear from not progressing technologically. For example, some day, a comet will hit the earth, like the one that resulted in the extinction of the dinosaurs.

If we are not prepared with some kind of space-based technology to eliminate such threats, the human race will become extinct as well.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

I am not against technological progress at all. A comet hit will NOT make the human race extinct. A comet is basically a dirty snow ball so much of it will have evaporated in falling through our atmosphere. Besides the human race is much more globally distributed than in the olden days. Our messing up our only abode of life has a much better chance doing that though. Technologies need to be viewed skeptically just as much as anything else such as politics and religions. Skepticism is conducive to reaching closer to the Truth.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Are you familiar with the comet that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs? Maybe "meteorite" is the word I am looking for.

I think that anti-technology perspectives need to be viewed with skepticism as well. The British Empire was the original anti-technology proponent. They wanted to hinder the technological progress of the US, so that we could not develop our own industries, and would be forced to accept their cheap goods manufactured by slave labor in India.

If you trace the financial support for some of the anti-technological, green movements today, you can find that it is provided by the English financial oligarchy.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

It is much better to put technology as the workhorse under the yoke of human needs. Technology and green movements are NOT mutual opposites. In fact, truly successful green movements must have great technological support.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I would agree with such a green movement, but believe that other more nefarious green movements exist as well.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

humans would most likely survive the meteor that filled the dinosaurs

humans have greater control over their environment

ad canned food

of course many would die

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

If we had something like what "Star Wars" was once supposed to be, we could prevent the deaths of those many.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

"Star Wars" was no panacea for projectiles. Exploding a projectile actually creates more fragments of projectile and increases its potential damage. Anything somewhat substantial flying at atmospheric re-entry speed can be deadly. Do you really want to add to the mass of debris with fragments from the "kill vehicle"?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Regarding a war with Iran, the concern is that the war will spill over on to the territories of Russia and China, involving them directly in the conflict. Like you say, we'll see what happens. A coalition of US military and intelligence officers placed an ad in the Washington post yesterday advising Obama against it.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

We may go the way of the dinosaur sooner than you think. Some say WW3 is imminent, that is, a nuclear war between the US and allies versus Russia and China, triggered by an Israeli or US attack on Iran.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

When it comes to war, I put my bet on the eagle rather than the polar bear or the mythical dragon. The latter two do not have the bravery required to defend Iran. They are much more about defending their national interests. When Iran is attacked, we will see how the polar bear and the mythical dragon will "come" to its rescue. I worry about the Israelis because in any war the opportune moment must be planned and practiced for with coordination on multiple fronts to exact maximal damage. I do not see Israel going in alone being in the interest of the U.S. but this thorn MUST be dealt with sooner or later, hopefully in our own due time.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I hadn't heard about this idea before seeing a video of Vladimir Putin discussing it recently. Its meant to be protection both from nuclear missiles and objects from space.

As it is just an idea right now, it would have to go through a lot of development to be feasible. But if we don't develop something like it, we are bound to go the way of the dinosaur.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

We are probably bound to go the way of the dinosaur so your idea is a little bit irrelevant. Yes, it can help if you can intercept the nuclear missiles and objects from space over the airspace of a DIFFERENT country, not your own. If you view everybody else as the little chicks that hover under your wings as the big fat mother hen, you may have to do the unpalatable and let a few chicks die but not add to the carnage as much as possible. Life is not ideal so we need to do what is realistic.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

larouchepac might not be the most trustworthy source for information.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I know that many people are biased against Larouche, thinking him an extremist, but nobody here has ever been able to show me a quote from his website indicating any extremist views.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The Larouchies are an intelligence operation that works with many governments - for the 99%? Doubt that! They've been working with US police for decades! (edit) They were working WITH the racist apartheid government of South Africa was back in the 70's.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/cult/larouche/larou1.htm

(edit)

In spring of 1977, LaRouche associates gave New Hampshire law enforcement officials detailed but speculative reports that the Clamshell Alliance, an antinuclear group then planning a protest at a nuclear plant, was a terrorist group financed by the Rockefellers. The May 1977 protest was not violent, although 1,400 people were arrested.

The group also has sold intelligence reports to a number of foreign governments, according to LaRouche and current and former associates. Steinberg said in a deposition that several years ago, LaRouche associates investigated terrorism for Italian officials. LaRouche said in an interview that his associates were hired to provide intelligence to the South African government. Ex-members said the intelligence reports dealt with the antiapartheid movement.

Some current and former U.S. officials who do not want to be identified, as well as ex-members, expressed concern that LaRouche's overseas activities may lead foreign leaders to think that he somehow represents the U.S. government, and take his statements as a "trial balloon" of U.S. policy.

At times LaRouche associates, identifying themselves as representatives of the LaRouche-affiliated National Democratic Policy Committee, arranged meetings with foreign leaders, who sometimes mistakenly thought they represented a faction of the Democratic Party, former associates of LaRouche and other sources said.

LaRouche said in an interview that he represents a "back channel," or confidential intermediary, for foreign officials who tire of dealing with the "idiots" in the State Department. "I'll telephone somebody in the White House and say, 'Look, a dear friend of ours in Mexico wants to have the president know something.'

'Incredible Intelligence Files'

But foreign leaders sometimes express confusion about LaRouche's messages because of their often rambling nature, former associates said.

The LaRouche group has developed "incredible intelligence files" on foreign government, business and labor union officials, as well as their counterparts in this country, said one ex-member.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Like I was saying, nobody here has been able to show me a quote from his website indicating any extremist views.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Supporting apartheid and reporting to police against anti nuclear protesters and progressives is extreme, extremely interesting that you represent this intelligence informer group here.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

And may there be hope for you as well buddy-boy. So long.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Don't spread PANIC.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

No, I would not say that I am a cultist nor have I undergone training of any "certain" type, old pal.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Then maybe there is hope for you. Don't spread PANIC old pal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Views_of_Lyndon_LaRouche_and_the_LaRouche_movement#PANIC_proposal_and_AIDS

got to leave now, it's been real.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

By the way, he wasn't against people with HIV, he was against people with HIV spreading the disease.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Good thing Larouche's intended victims woke up and started to campaign against his plan to quarantine HIV positive people in California. Had Larouche won that it could have become the US and maybe the global norm and Larouche might have gained a lot of credibility. What say you on Larouche's stand for apartheid?

(edit) LaRouche Turns To AIDS Politics By David L. Kirp: David L. Kirp is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley. Published: September 11, 1986 SIGN IN TO E-MAIL PRINT

BERKELEY, Calif.— Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. and his political camp followers have taken up a new cause. They are out to make prejudice against AIDS victims respectable. If California voters approve a LaRouche-sponsored initiative that is to appear on the November ballot, doctors and public health authorities fear they will be forced to begin mass testing for AIDS and, worse yet, quarantine all Californians who have been exposed to AIDS.

In Mr. LaRouche's fantastical view of the world - a world where Walter F. Mondale is a Soviet agent and the Queen of England pushes drugs -AIDS has become the No. 1 menace. According to the LaRouche scenario, AIDS is a plot by the ''Soviet war machine'' to conquer America - or else a plot by the International Monetary Fund to wipe out the ''excess eaters'' from starving Africa.

Those claims, as well as Mr. LaRouche's insistence that ''a person with AIDS running around is like a person with a machine gun running around,'' are nonsense, of course. But Mr. LaRouche is being treated with deadly seriousness in California.

His followers on the Prevent AIDS Now Initiative Committee, which they call PANIC, convinced nearly 700,000 fearful Californians to sign petitions putting the initiative on the ballot - more than twice the number needed to qualify. And while the California Poll, conducted by Mervin Field, shows the initiative trailing, the margin is small and most voters haven't made up their minds.

This measure, Proposition 64, is the biggest referendum yet on AIDS policy in the United States. LaRouche supporters contend that it is a modest proposal that merely enables the state to treat AIDS as seriously as it treats other contagious diseases. That's plainly wrong, since public health officials already have all the authority they need - including the power to order a quarantine, if such a step is ever appropriate.

Add up the numbers and the impact of an approved Proposition 64 would be staggering. At a minimum, it requires that the estimated 300,000 people who have AIDS or who are ''carriers'' of the virus be reported to public health officials. The Orange County chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union concludes that the measure could remove more than 100,000 people from jobs in agriculture, restaurants and schools, as well as force an estimated 47,000 children to stay home from school - none of them a real risk, almost all of them victims of inaccurate results in an AIDS antibodies test.

The state's health director reads the initiative as requiring AIDS testing for all 27 million Californians. Conceivably, the state could be legally obliged to quarantine anyone who comes in contact with the virus, although lawyers in the state attorney general's office reject this reading of the initiative.

Public health officials worry that if Proposition 64 passes, AIDS victims who fear losing their jobs or their liberty will be driven underground, hampering efforts to control the disease. They oppose a quarantine as inhumane and ineffective, since it won't stop the spread of the disease, which is actually very hard to contract. They are stunned at the initiative's potential economic impact - nearly $3 billion for 1987 alone, as conservatively estimated by two Berkeley economists. The effects would include the loss of $2.3 billion in economic output plus $630 million in lost tax revenues, increased unemployment insurance premiums and testing costs.

This scary scenario has galvanized California's homosexual community, which is raising $3 million to fight the initiative. The list of opponents reads like a California who's who. Every leading politician has come out against it. Leading medical researchers are lining up to be heard.

These opponents won a notable victory when a judge removed some of Mr. LaRouche's outlandish claims from the ballot pamphlet sent to all voters. There is no credible evidence that AIDS is easy to get or that it is spread by mosquitoes, the judge ruled. He's certainly right. But with Mr. LaRouche planning a media blitz, this decision won't keep the falsehoods, and the fears they arouse, out of the voters' heads.

Mr. LaRouche plainly is hoping that California voters' antipathy to homosexuals, whom he accuses of engineering an AIDS coverup, and their desire to do something - anything -to stop the disease will make scapegoating look like a solution.

Beyond California, he is promoting ''universal screening and isolating or quarantining all individuals in the active carrier states.'' Nationwide, that's upward of two million people. If Lyndon LaRouche wins in California, the nation's most populous state, politicians everywhere will start taking him very seriously on the issue of AIDS.

AIDS spread by mosquitoes Arturo? Thus said Larouche who also said "Spread panic" about HIV

Peoplke with HIV would have been classified as though they were spreading a contagious disease like TB which HIV is not.

Since you still are here upholding Larouche can I guess that you are a Larouchie cultist who has undergone certain "training?" Watch out for that Tavistock institute, right old chum?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

The British Empire was a corporate empire. Today, its remnant exists as the global network of financial districts, centered in the City of London, and including Wall Street, amongst others. In this sense, you could say that Lyndon Larouche was the original Wall Street protestor.

Thanks for the article on South Africa, I will read it in depth.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Well, I suppose you are entitled to your opinion regarding what OWS needs or does not need. And I too am entitled to my opinions.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

What you are saying is hearsay, from third parties. If Larouche was working with South Africa, it wasn't in support of apartheid. He has African Americans in his own organization working at the highest levels.

I don't know about the reports against nuclear protestors, though I do know he supports nuclear energy.

Larouche is a conservative democrat, he believes in the policies of FDR and JFK.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Here is what the Larouchies had to say about apartheid.

http://lyndonlarouche.org/larouche-south-africa5.pdf

Against the ANC, blathering about the British Empire, rallying for apartheid like they rallied against people with HIV.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I am hoping the mods ban you because OWS does not need larouchism.

Having Black members and even higher ups proves little about whether an organization is inimical to the interests of the oppressed Black community. Look at the Republicans - look at Barack Obama! Since the civil rights movement made racism a dirty word (but didn't abolish racism) political racism has often sought out and found a few black people to front for it.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/lyndon-larouches-dirty-little-secret/Content?oid=926950

That's a question we should be asking when we look at the strange case of Proposition 64, a California political campaign that epitomizes the style and substance of the web of organizations headed by America's most interesting and potentially most dangerous right-wing extremist, Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr.

LaRouche had made fighting the AIDS epidemic--and particularly its primary victims, the homosexual community--a key plank in the manifesto he issued in the summer of 1985, a manifesto declaring him a candidate for president in 1988. He quickly got down to specifics. An "opsbulletin" issued October 2 from Leesburg, Virginia--headquarters of LaRouche's National Caucus of Labor Committees--directed one LaRouche front, the Schiller Institute, to begin circulating petitions calling for testing and quarantining as measures to contain AIDS.

The same month, LaRouche's National Democratic Policy Committee published a pamphlet titled AIDS Is More Deadly Than Nuclear War, which contained model legislation in the form of "a memorial bill to stop AIDS." Three weeks later, two California-based LaRouche stalwarts, Brian Lantz and Khushro Ghandhi, announced the filing of an initiative incorporating central elements of the NDPC proposal. Six months later, with nearly double the required number of signatures, the initiative had qualified for the November ballot.

From the beginning, the Proposition 64 campaign was a wholly owned subsidiary of the LaRouche organization. From LaRouche's rallying cry, "Spread Panic, Not AIDS!" his sponsors spun the acronym PANIC (Prevent AIDS Now Initiative Committee); their addresses and phone numbers were those of the two NCLC offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Financial disclosure statements filed with state election officials revealed the central LaRouche business operation, Caucus Distributors Inc. (which according to the attorney general's office is not even registered to do business in California), had put up more than $201,000 of the $218,000 spent to qualify the measure; more than a third of PANIC's disbursements were funneled back to LaRouche entities and NCLC members in expenses and salaries for signature gathering.

The campaign was marked by frequent controversy. At one point California's secretary of state threatened immediate legal action if petition circulators did not stop harassing potential signers and misrepresenting the contents of the measure. Last July, she took the unprecedented legal step of going to court to challenge the truthfulness of pro-64 ballot arguments. The secretary of state was objecting to the case for Proposition 64 that the LaRouche camp turned in to run in the ballot pamphlets--giving arguments pro and con--that the state would be mailing to all registered voters. The three assertions expunged by order of a Superior Court judge said: "AIDS is not "hard to get'; it is easy to get"; "Potential insect and respiratory transmission has been established by numerous studies"; and "Transmission by "casual contact' is well established."

In August, the secretary of state warned both sides in the debate to avoid threats or acts of violence--opponents of the measure reported several instances of harassment, while Brian Lantz alleged his supporters had been assaulted by gay opponents.

Now California's attorney general is investigating possible fraud in the process by which Proposition 64 was qualified for the November ballot. A senior official in the attorney general's office told a joint legislative hearing last October that several LaRouche fronts, including Campaigner Publications, paid for tickets to fly out-of-staters into California to circulate petitions--in violation of state law. The official said this might have been part of a larger scheme involving similar electoral efforts in several states. And evidence has surfaced indicating that many of the signatures that qualified the LaRouche initiative for the ballot were forgeries.

Proposition 64 was deceptively simple. It not only declared that AIDS "is an infectious, contagious, and communicable disease," but also that "the condition of being a carrier of the HTLV-III virus is an infectious, contagious, and communicable condition." It went on to say, "Both shall be placed and maintained [by the state] on the list of reportable diseases and conditions. . ."

There was no mention of quarantine. But both sides agreed the language would trigger existing health codes, particularly sections mandating the isolation of persons with certain communicable diseases, barring them from employment in public education, food handling, and other service professions. The initiative's flaws were abundant but not readily apparent. Not only was AIDS itself presumed equivalent to much more casually communicable diseases such as tuberculosis, but so was the mere "condition of being a carrier." But there is no present test for "carrier" status, nor any measure of the AIDS virus's transmissibility. There is only an antibody test that indicates exposure to the virus. Would the entire population have to be screened to identify "carriers"? Anyone even suspected of carrying the virus seemed to be Proposition 64's target, and its disruptive potential was clear. Every major health, medical, and scientific organization--and every elected official with the exception of Representative William E. Dannemeyer, an ultraconservative Orange County congressman--condemned the measure.

At the outset of any initiative campaign, opinion polls invariably show wide public support, and Proposition 64 was no exception. But in the waning days of the campaign, the outlook changed. At first stunned and taken aback, the opposition quickly mobilized: at the end of last September, California's Fair Political Practices Commission reported that 13 opposing Political Action Committees had raised and spent more than $1.1 million, leaving some $100,000 cash on hand for a last-minute ad blitz. By contrast, PANIC--the sole proponent--claimed to have collected a mere $10,000 beyond what it spent to get the proposition on the ballot. In the home stretch, PANIC did not even have working phones. California overwhelmingly rejected Proposition 64, giving it only 29 percent of the vote.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Very clever those israelis...

' The Israelis are very ingenious.'

http://occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/israel-steals-85-of-palestinian-water/

Israel Steals 85% of Palestinian Water JANUARY 9, 2012 BY OCCUPIEDPALESTINE 0 COMMENTS

Related Special Topic – No Water, No Sewerage Palestine News Network – Thursday, 05 January 2012

Jamil Matawir, deputy chairman of the PA Ministry of Environmental Affairs, said on Sunday that Israel controls up to 85% of Palestinian wells and underground water resources, negatively affecting the Palestinian ecosystem.

The conference in Ramallah where Matawir was speaking was held to “shed light on Israeli occupation polices against Palestinian water [resources], depriving people in Gaza and the West Bank.”

Matawir called on the United Nations to send a mission to investigate the effect of Israeli control of Palestinian water resources on the environment.

General director of the National Water Council Ahmed al-Hindi said the average individual Palestinian consumption reaches to 70 liters of water a day, in some rural areas going as low as 20 liters. The recommended level of the World Health Organization is 100 liters per day. The average individual Israeli consumption, according to Israeli human rights organization B’tselem, is 242 liters a day, or three times the Palestinian average.

“The Palestinian need for sufficient quantities of water is a sustained problem created by Israeli polices based on discrimination and deprivation,” said al-Hindi. “Israel controls the land and handicaps the work of the joint water committee, delaying implementation of water and sewage projects, destroying water wells and confiscating underground water in Areas B and C.”

Al-Hindi charged Israel with violating several international agreements, including the 1994 Oslo Accords, which mandates Israeli recognition of Palestinian rights to water and Article 55 of the Hague Regulations, which prevent Israel from using water resources of an occupied territory for any use besides the military or in excess of previous use levels.

Matawir also said Israel has uprooted more than 1.5 million olive trees since 2000. According to the 2009 UN Human Development report, uprooting trees has greatly affected the atmosphere. Levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) has increased to 600 tons, while the remaining trees were able to absorb only about 1.5 percent of greenhouse gases.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

Israel as the de facto occupying authority in the Palestinians' areas had tacitly assumed the responsibility to manage its water resources ethically for the benefit of the Palestinians. Its not implementing water and sewage projects, destroying water wells, etc., if substantiated, are atrocious acts that need to be condemned internationally. Uprooting olive trees may very well have put a curse on the Israeli state if you are biblically inclined.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

You are not likely to see or hear much about the situation in the MSM and certainly the lapdogs we have seen this week baying at the AIPAC conference are not inclined to chastise Israel.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

It is rather common knowledge that the U.S. has a Jewish/Israel political problem. The U.S. is very much a giant caterpillar with wasp larvae inside animating and eating it from the inside out. Even our President had to kowtow to the political forces exerted by the parasitic wasps. You can see the expressions on our and Israeli politicians' faces rather than just listening to their words. They were not purely lying about how the security of the two countries are intimately entwined due to how they are viewed by others but they were not telling the whole truth either.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I wish it were common knowledge. Noam Chomsky is a demigod in the US and international left and he fights tooth and nail against anyone making this obvious observation.

[-] 1 points by grapes (3444) 2 years ago

It is common knowledge in the ones sworn in to uphold the U.S. Constitution but they are, of course, NOT members of the U.S. and international left. Take a look at how many times our President had gone to New York City recently to raise campaign funds. Who in New York City has gobs of money for him to harvest? We do not need to pity him because he had learnt long time ago that suffering through indignities shows character (bend down for goodness' sake!) and he was too timid to take charge of things upon assuming the reins of power or he was simply overwhelmed or being cynical to begin with. Time may very well be running out for him so we will see how the populace will view his "achievements."

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

Agree completely. The debate here is about how big of a wall would would it take so no immigrants could get in yet no one wants to get the root of the problem; a devastating combination of NAFTA, government subsidies and harvesting efficiency. The cost of growing and harvesting food in the US is relatively inexpensive compared to other western nations. While not all harvesting processes are automated many are, especially king corn which i hear is a staple in the Mexican diet. I don't have any exact figures but imagine how many thousands of workers one combine with one driver replaces! Prime example of economies of scale. So we take that advantage and give it a fat subsidy on it and the price of food gets even cheaper! Then its shipped south of the boarder tariff-free courtesy of NAFTA and is sold at market price; unfortunately that price is less than the amount to cover the costs of his Mexican counterpart who owns land, buys seeds, and employs tens (hundreds?) of workers to tend the crop.

Next move for an unskilled worker in that situation? 1.stay because farming still occurs but the only input changing in the cost of labor i.e. your wage is below a sustainable level for your family. 2. join a cartel and get relatively rich quick but expect to kill others and eventually be killed. 3. Make the perilous journey to the US for labor intensive harvesting where the hourly wage is probably less than the federal minimum wage (what are you going to do, go to the police!?) but still more than an entire days wages.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Yes, Mexico needs to be able to develop the factories to build their own agricultural machinery so the farm workers can be more productive. Then the workers who are freed from doing farm labor by hand can find employment in other diversified manufacturing industries.

I think this should generally be the model for developing countries, as well as those that should be redeveloping nations such as the United States.

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

Yeah but its a little more complicated than that thanks in part to corporate greed and NAFTA. I think Mexico's manufacturing sector is doing well but for different reasons. While i take Roger Moore docs with a grain of salt so to speak, there is one indisputable message in this video about Roger & Me: the complete economic and social destruction Flint, Michigan because US auto manufacturers (General Motors) sought cheaper labor and higher profits so they shut down nearly all of their plants in Flint and opened up all those plants in Mexico. To date Flint has lost 80,000 auto manufacturing jobs through automation and outsourcing, mostly outsourcing. I grew up in Lansing, MI which lost 3 assembly plants when in was in high school (2001-2005) and that really slowed things down but I've seen Flint, and it is not pretty. Disclosure: Lansing also opened 2 plants (with less jobs) before and after that date range but there was also a queue of workers around the country that had priority in terms of re-employment so its not just simple rotation from one local plant to another.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

We could open those factories again and put workers to work building high speed trains like the ones China has. We could cut down on our freeway traffic, while increasing trade and travel.

We'd have to pass Glass Steagall first, and open the Third National Bank to provide credit for projects like these.

[-] 2 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

So, those were immigrants pissing on the dead Afghan soldiers?

[-] 1 points by fairforall (279) 2 years ago

It's always interesting how emotional we get about the urination and not so much the fact they were murdered.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

Maybe insult can be worse than injury.

[-] 1 points by fairforall (279) 2 years ago

Do you think it is in this case?

[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

Murdered? By whom?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

You should not speak of something you know nothing about or have not experienced. Media sensationalism is surfacy at best don't beat their drums. War is hell. You should be more concerned about the well being of our soldiers. And the enemy tactics. I recall American soldiers tied and beheaded. Let's not forget.

[-] 2 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

I believe we were talking about honor. War is hell for everybody involved, so don't make excuses. Exceptional soldiers act with honor.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

And you brought up the act of urinating on the enemy to dishonor our soldiers. I merely suggest do not judge them to harshly until you have walked a mile with them.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

Don't make excuses. I know plenty of soldiers with enough honor not to urinate on corpses.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I heard it was the American way of forgiving his enemy and frees his spirit.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 2 years ago

Given the history of the last fifty years that would hardly be possible.

It was strange how all the Republicans were staunchly in favor of the Bush Wars, but none of them went to fight. I think one guy from the NFL did, but that was all. The rest all stayed home and decided to be cheerleaders. Seems there wasn't much honor there in the first place.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

I can see that whole melting pot ideal, being a good concept is wasted on you.

Perhaps you would be better served by one of the more "culturally honorable" nations of Europe, or Asia.

[-] 1 points by RedSkyMorning (220) 2 years ago

I think the constant wars have diluted American honor. The immigrants work hard atleast.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

More to the point, have hard-working immigrants been corrupted by American culture?

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

thank you hitgirl, I just had an epiphany; you really can't change ones fabric.. we've been in afghanistan ten years , and nothings changed overthere.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 2 years ago

From what I can see things are changing everywhere.

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

nope americans honor was out the window long before the immigrants came here. case in point: when i bid a job at a residence, they only want to pay enough profit for me to do the job, not enough to pay an office worker, to spend the hours and hours of accounting requried by our governmetn for small business. and in teh rare event there is some extra profit in a job to pay for an additional worker its only enough for a mexican laborer, not an american worker.

Prove me wrong, show me a customer that pays my asking price which is a fair price based upon what expenses are actually needed to complete the job and have a thousand dollars left on the table for my business. Its vituallyl non existant.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

This is way off point.

[-] 1 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Um, unless you're a full-blooded Native American, you're either an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants. And even the Native Americans are the descendants of immigrants who crossed the Bering Straight many centuries before the Polynesians discovered Hawaii, which was a long time before Christopher Columbus.

Everyone is an immigrant from somewhere. Even the Kenyans aren't the original people from that region, and that's where we're ALL from! The best way for us to move beyond racial issues is to move beyond racial issues! Grow up, already!

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

well dna studies shows that the indians from the great lakes region to the rocky mountains did not come thru the bering strait, they dont even have any dna markers found in that region or even in asia, but in fact migrated here from Israel, (the highest marker), or turkey, or finland. Haplogroup x clave 2 to be specific.

[-] 1 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

The Polynesians rowed across the Pacific in long boats so anything is possible. Maybe that explains why the Vikings were wiped out. ;-)

In any event, this thread continues only due to the stunningly ignorant and bigoted premise of the original post.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

So, would you compare an honorable person that works hard to provide for his family, to a person who steals , an issue of race or character fabric?

[-] 1 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

What on earth are you talking about?

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

We are defined by our actions.

[-] 1 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

You've defined yourself plenty here today, bobo.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

Is corporate America with it's greed and degradation and America's greedy little addiction to consumerism and cheap overpriced products plus giant corporations abilities to reach it's grubby little hands into deals with despot regimes while Americans stand buy or line up at the register destroying the integrity of and lives of citizens in other nations? http://cnnphotos.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/08/hong-kongs-poor-living-in-cages/

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Our country was founded on freedom! Go read the statue of liberty that our country proudly displays.

Your conclusion is retarded. I don't really know what else to say and I hate to resort to name calling, but your conclusion is really really retarded.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

freedom that was fought for by its people. and that strength and courage lives in you through your ancestry .. and it sets the course of future principles.. upheld with pride.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Like I said, I hate to resort to name calling, but we're grown-ups in 2012 and anyone spouting the idea of racism... is retarded.

Are you suggesting that certain races are at fault? Is it the Italians? The mexicans? Who is it? Just so you know, any sort of attempt at justifying an answer to this question will only make you look more retarded.

What exactly are you trying to get at with this post anyway?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

... we are defined by our actions ...

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

American principle was founded on standing up for the little guy : - we fought for that in the civil war, we fought with it for workers rights, we fought for it with women's rights (not that women are little but you know what I mean), we fought with it for caring for our elderly. We fought to overcome oppression and small mindedness - and freedom of religion and separation of church and state. When you make people your enemy - they make you theirs. There is so much animosity between races at the moment because because we have come to view people as them instead of us. We have also taken on a policy of turning the other cheek which has caused the world to fall apart because we have stopped fighting for our principles and we allow corporations as well as countries like China to do what they want in the name of business even if it means hurting the little guys even if it means wiping out freedom, even if it means people starving despite food surpluses even if it means causing wars and atrocity.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Right now the little guy is poverty vs wealth. A cap on profits would fix this. Will you stand up ?

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

no because I agree with capitalism - I don't however agree with corporatism - there must be balance between socialism and capitalism to prevent socialism from becoming communism and capitalism from becoming corporatism.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

corporatism has the same rules as the little retailer.. they just get better deals from the manufacturer when they buy in " millions" ..

the cap on capitalism will still remainn capitalism .. the companies will not be government owned ..

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

they don't have the same rules at all ...lots of money not only buys goods in bulk it buys lobbyist in bulk and government officials to make laws that specifically benefit them ... and regulate and make it difficult for the small guys - capping profits is not the answer - capping bribing off the people who make our laws is ...

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

the cap would go on both , the little guy and the big guy.. where are the rules different ?

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

You are confusing the heck out of me are you for a cap? If so how does that seem fair to you - if you can make it then you should shake it - just not at my government ... let the people decide what's best and they can choose to purchase - they can't however choose their politicians because right now the process is fixed and flooded with corporate money - though I will say the people are apparently too dumb to close their wallets because cheap is costing far more than they think about the whole country is stuck on short term gains and immediate satisfaction companies are laying off employees in droves which is causing a loss of consumers ... they get an immediate uptick but over the long run - they go out of business - employees shop. I believe that's why we have such an out of control welfare system - people have no jobs and corporations still get to make profit off of the taxpayer win win for the corporation. Until well... the people start to rebel?

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

how do corporations make profit off of the taxpayer ?

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2959) 2 years ago

glad you asked I believe when people on welfare (because they have no jobs) are still able to spend using their welfare money, the rest of us are paying for it by in effect subsidizing shopping (clothing, food, cell phones, electric, gas -heck even the restaurant industry is lobbying for welfare cash to be used) Welfare allows corporations to still make a profit and lay people off - like I said win win - but not for the taxpayer- instead of corporations going out of business - the taxpayer is - that's why the system is eventually going to crash and Armageddon will ensue unless we prevent this from continuing - end corporatism... cap bribery and boycott monopolies !!!

[-] 1 points by randart (498) 2 years ago

No kidding. Just look at what the Europeans have done to this country. Native Americans lived in a balance with the Earth but those damned Europeans came and cut down the trees, dug up the hills, drilled for the oil, stole the land. You are right American honor has been diluted by immigrants, especially the ones from Europe.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Europeans brought a lot over. Metal, science, medicine huge advancements in civilization. Etc etc.

If an alien race landed on this planet tomorrow how would mankind respond ?

[-] 1 points by randart (498) 2 years ago

What do space men have to do with immigration? Are you suggesting that white people would be better off negotiating with them than say a hispanic person?

I am confused as to just what your point is here.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

It's just aquestion. I sometimes thinkhistory could have played out different. If we were faced with a similar situation of an alien race tomorrow, would we welcome them? Surely we would have many questions. I would hope it would be peaceful.

[-] 1 points by randart (498) 2 years ago

If there were a sudden appearance of extra terrestrials there would be a grand majority that would think they were angels and God. Some people, like the Native Americans would see them as "sky people" because they have seen them before. And, there would be a small few who see them for what they are. Out of these few most would be xenophobic and a few would be interested in learning about the.

Personally, I think they have been screwing with humanity basically forever. They are the root of ALL our legends of Gods and angels.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

well.. at least there is nothing wrong with your imagination ..!

[-] 1 points by uhandleit (43) 2 years ago

?????? America was formed and founded by foreigners....American Indians are the real Americans. What are you saying....

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

ha! I assume this blame the immigrants thing is a joke--good one:):) this country has been receiving immigrants since its' founding.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

You miss the point.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

yes i sure do miss the point, but deciphered some from below. the mexicans are not fleeing a bullshit government like we have, there is simply a better life here for them than in mexico--something like 30% of the mexican economy is in receipts from family members working in the us. i don't begrudge them at all and their criminal element is probably about the same proportion as in the black, white, green, purple and red communities. the problem is that unemployed americans could fulfill the many jobs they take.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Your still missing it. The fabric of a runner vs the fabric of aak that stands and fights. OWS is founded by runners.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

then you haven't seen this 325 page SEC submission by quite a few OWS folks with very sophisticated knowledge of the causes of the great depression and the solution how to prevent a repeat--quite literally taking action against the banks' lobbied for regulations. submit it to your reps., as i've done, i've scheduled an explanatory session since this is my field, and obviously not his. this is basically how regulations are adopted, with comment periods, then further drafting and so on. this is our response. http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-41-11/s74111-230.pdf

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

I have offered a couple solutions which have been rejected by all the so called sophistication. I doubt all sincerity of this protest. Their motive is a trap.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

to quote from TDAmeritrade's CEO at a conference, "banking should be boring and not a huge profit center, with balance sheet rather than income statement focus--that's what we do here..." and note, they sailed right through the waters relative to other banks.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

just read the first 10 pages, please before forming an opinion, as it took alot of work and effort. why was all the time spent on it? the many people who worked on it, actually work in capital markets, and want/need to have cutting edge knowledge, and to influence the legislation to actually work without pure financial industry skew--which is what we got. what amazed me is the sheer gaul/brazenness, of the SEC to propose the regulation as it was proposed. the lobbied for provisions and drafting are blatant and a complete disregard for good policy and for the public, favoring instead reprehensible continued chicanery and recklessness so the financial industry can continue to destroy the country while making more illegitimate profits. i was aghast and surprised in light of what has happened i mean--i was shocked by their proposal!!--they never expected serious comment from people "in the know" since all they get is whining banks throwing a tantrum about their profits interest.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Keep me posted. Sounds like progress.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Thank you everyone. I realize this is a delicate subject. I appreciate that no one used any racial slurs.

I would like to ask a question on American history regarding the native population and perhaps the black community. Where do we go from here? How do we build a world together ? How do we " let go" of the wrongs of the past ? I personally think all the hate is unessecary. Hate should be abolished !

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

You have an interesting point of view without really declaring it. In fact you remind of politicians, who say, "I'm not saying my opponent is a Godless atheist and pedophile..."

You throw in a bundle full of incendiary observations then frame them as questions.

I can just hear Adolph Hitler asking similar questions about the Jews, whether they contributed to the revered Germen, Aryan past or whether they harmed society with their supposed stereotypical characteristics.

Hate is hate, no matter how it is framed.

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 2 years ago

American Honor...For some reason it seems that there is a select group that represents American Honor...funny thing is I know that not all of the first immigrants to these shores came from the same country of origin...

There were Scots who got along with the 'local's pretty darned well, the most honorable man I ever knew was a Scot. There were French exploring these lands, French who also fought with and against the colonists at different times. There were Germans, and Spaniards, Portuguse, the first men and women of color on the shores of what is now known as America were freemen and women, as slavery was not legal in Olgethorpe, VA.

The men and women now known as 'Natives' are they included in American Honor? What of those who came to these shores and fought in the American military to gain citizenship? Are they included?

Never doubt that those immigrants who found their way here know better than most what American Honor is...never doubt that they know more about our Constitution and our processes than those of us who were born here.

Many of us gained American Honor by what might be right of birth...yet when that honor is earned the true meaning and value is known.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I checked all of the containers and they are still full.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

Honor?

Who's honor, yours?

Fabric? Isn't that clothing?

The fact you ask the question, what have immigrants done for America shows your lack of knowledge that without them, America, as we know, would not exist, not even close.

Also, I will guarantee that what you think is honor is, is not what I think it is. I think your rely heavily only generalizing and it smacks of prejudice against immigrants. Or, why would you ask a question that flies in face of what immigration has factually done for all of us? If you researched this you would have found what most already know about this issue.

Do you have any facts to share or is it just you want to share your stereotypical view so we can join you in your prejudicial rant against immigrants because they're not "honorable" enough for you?

This thread needs to die a quick death. That's my two cents worth.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

has this website been diluted by baiting caustic titles ?

[-] 1 points by OkFineIWin (46) 2 years ago

WTF is "American Honor" and "America's Inner Strength"? Define these terms first. Then, go get yourself a world history book. China and Mexico were conquered contries and both fought for their independence. Your post is nonsense and sounds like it was inspired by CPAC's racist topic “The Failure of Multiculturalism: How the pursuit of diversity is weakening the American Identity”. Get a clue.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

20,000 beheadings in Mexico and you come here to protest. Take the plank out of your own eye.

[-] 3 points by OkFineIWin (46) 2 years ago

Up to 2,700 killed by drone strikes from the safety of some military base in another country. Want to protect "American Honor" start there. You failed to answer my questions. What's wrong, don't have an answer?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Our country would probably execute more people but the private prisons make more money per prisoner. Which is why we have the largest prison population in the world. Even larger than China.

And what does that stat have to do with Mexicans in America? You ever think that's why they left Mexico to come here?

[-] 1 points by kavinnice (1) 2 years ago

who is not immigrant except RED INDIANS here...

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Red Indians have been given the red carpet. Unfortunately they dump their trash on it.

[-] -1 points by kavinnice (1) 2 years ago

A lie remains a lie......however, u made a good attempt.

[-] 1 points by fairforall (279) 2 years ago

Actually, many immigrants are the best other countries have to offer and they have seen the US for what it is - a place they have an opportunity to succeed where their own country was unable to provide that. I am proud to have these immigrants participate in and advance our success.

[-] 1 points by OccupyCapitolHill (197) 2 years ago

This has to be the most ethnocentric, ignorant post I've seen in a while. We're ALL descendants of immigrants (unless you're fully native American). Ask any native american how OUR immigration to this country diluted THEIR honor. Ever heard of the "Trail of Tears"? I'm not saying you should feel guilty about a 150-year old crime, but just think about that before you take this self-righteous attitude.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

One day their honor will be tested.

[-] 0 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

the so called native americans were immigrants too. they came from asia .

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

The content in this post sounds like some Republican Presidential Primary Debate talking points but before the most feeble minded an least credible candidates dropped out. That being said, this was thought provoking for a different reason. Does anyone remember Speaker Gingrich's heinous comment that Palestinians were 'an invented people'? A nation of people who lack an internationally recognized state yes, but not 'invented.' They're native to the area and have lived there for thousands of years. So what might that imply about America, are American's an invented people?

I can't get past the first step when I tried to visualize the 'prototypical American;' I'm biracial (black and white) where my mother is of western European descent and my father is of African descent. Its impossible to decide which one is 'more American' and their ancestors experiences were so different, it would be absurd to categorize them under the same title as American. Chronologically my father's ancestors arrived in America first, but they were slaves.

Looking beyond the factual errors of your argument, its nothing more than a slippery slope to racism.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

It's not about race , it's about fabric. The black community will always be welcome. Lord knows they've earned their stripes. The hard way.

If you want to talk racism , it is whiteman that is hated by most. We get the brunt of racism. Even jart does not hide her/his hate towards white male.

[-] 1 points by kjack (48) 2 years ago

OK I will give you the benefit of the doubt that its not about race. However if its not about race, how would you define such an abstract word as fabric? This isn't some homogeneous country where everyone shares the same values, beliefs, culture or appearances and it makes the country better. You may call a degradation of the American fabric but I would like to call it the land of the free.

[-] 1 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 2 years ago

Nice of you to turn up after MSNBC dumped you Pat.

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 2 years ago

You are racist and you do not belong in this forum. This is the sort of thing that we should ban from this forum. NOW GO AWAY FROM THIS FORUM AND NEVER RETURN.

[+] -4 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

I notice you don't answer the OP? Afraid?

[-] 2 points by bigbangbilly (594) 2 years ago

This thread is troll bait and hate speech. IGNORE THIS THREAD. AND DOWN VOTE IT.

[-] -3 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

Why? And are you the official last word on "hate speech" ? Hate speech. Sounds like something out of 1984.

[-] 2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 2 years ago

No it doesn't.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

no ,

[-] 0 points by DevilDog420 (133) from Saratoga Springs, NY 2 years ago

You are talking about cultural differences be careful... I tend to think that our mixing has brought diversity and allowed the best and the brightest from everywhere to get a piece of the American dream, and make us stronger for it... But times have changed in the last 60 yrs, minorities have been enabled at the expense of the majority. Corporation's have totally lost their moral compass as they have become multi-national corporations. These of course are generalizations, and politically incorrect, but not at all false. Remember to treat people as individuals as everyone deserves a crack at the American dream, but a wise man predicts trends in the market, and sees the storm coming before it hits.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Or how about those Irish fleeing from those potatoes....or the Swedes fleeing those blonds...or those Brits bringing that revolutionary spirit over here? Can you spell xenophobia?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

You miss the point. It is the Mexican that stands behind the OWS curtain. The same Mexican that fled Mexico. Why didn't they stay there and protest how corrupt Mexico is ? Instead if coming here and causing trouble. Fight back. More like run away Cowards.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

The same reason that all people leave their homelands....economic or political hardships. My dad is from Sweden, and he left because things were not good in Sweden at the time. The same for the Irish in the late 1800s, and early 1900s, etc,etc.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Americans don't run

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Maybe not, but they do accept their lot in life quite readily, even when things are going down the tubes. We are the exception so far.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

What are you referring to?

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

I" referring to why we are here at OWS. Look we are a nation of immigrants. Unless you are an American Indian, your ancestors came here for the same reasons as Mexicans or anyone else. I would not call them cowards. There is much that is good about this country, and there is much that we could learn from other countries, believe it or not.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Immigrants strengthen our civil society, and some do not. Human nature contains great contributors that help the society excell, and riff raff that bring the civil society down a notch. It has always been this way throughout time. Look at Gingiss Kahn and the forcing of sex upon those he conquered in order to spread his dominant seed to millions of offspring.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

I am not sure if you are aware, but immigrants built this country. It was the knowledge and ideas that they brought with them that made this country great.

Now with that being said, I don't know about todays immigrants. It appears to me that all they want to do is change this country to be like their country instead of "melding" in and becoming part of society.

There may be a few immigrants who are "loyal to America" but not that many.

[-] 0 points by Gillian (1842) 2 years ago

I agree Steve. The immigrants today don't come here with the same respect for this country that my immigrant ancestors did and tend to view our freedoms as a ' free for all and anything goes'. My Syrian, Scottish and German ancestors came here with a strong willingness to make this a better country for us all and they learned to speak English and not expect this country to cater to their ethnicity. They created their own ethnic neighborhoods and organizations that would allow them to continue to celebrate their heritage while still making a commitment to integrate into the American culture. With that said, I also believe that people treat us by what we command for ourselves and so I believe that there are too many Americans in this country that have degraded the moral, intellectual and economic fabric of this country as well. If we want immigrants and other countries to respect us, we must respect our own country first. If we want immigrants to speak English, then we must learn to respect our language. Patriotism lacks substance anymore and most Americans think they can just plaster a cheap chinese made American flag on their bumper and call themselves patriots.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

I agree with you 100%. You are right when you say that todays society have degraded the moral, intellectual and economic fabric of this country.

They are being brainwashed into believing that being American is "bad" becasue other countries condem us. But why are they condeming us - it's because America is the best place on the planet to live and they are jealous.

It's interesting you mention about flags and other things being made in China. I am working on an invention and trying to get it to market. The only place that has the resources and the design capabilities for what I need are companies in China.

I approached several American companies but never got one response. I even contacted the American Federation for the blind ( my invention deals with the blind or visually imapred) and they wouldn't even respond.

So I found a company in Illinois that responded and you know what - they have connections in Tiwian and China. I can't get an American based company to even return a message that I sent by e-mail.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 2 years ago

I don't totally agree that Americans think that America is bad. I think Americans have just become lazy and sloppy because we have been spoiled by a country where anything goes and have forgotten that protecting values requires upholding them on a daily basis. Even our english language has been so slaughtered by a society that thinks slang is appropriate.

I hear ya Steve. I watched the Shark Tank program one night when a man in Carolina was desperately wanting to expand his business with American investors help but none of them would bite unless he would move his invention to China. The man refused to do that. I know it's frustrating Steve but don't sell your soul down the river to China. More and more Americans are waking up to the need to shop American and if you can hold out, I'm sure things will turn around for you. In the meantime, you can be part of the pivotal leadership in promoting American manufacturing if you can just find the right people to help you- constantly update your mindset and keep making contacts and don't be afraid to pursue unlikely avenues. NEVER make assumptions. I am curious about what your product is.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Well, I am still trying to get investors - there is a possibility in SC - I sent the guy a confidentialy disclosure statement and waiting to hear back. He is interested in investing.

What I havd designed is a electronic device that a blind or visually impared person can use to detect objects in front of them while using the electronics in conjunction with a walking cane.

I already have a provisional patent on it and am working to get the non provisional. I am hoping to get this to market for it will help millions of people who are visually impared and it won't cost that much to manufacturer.

I have also looked into getting it listed with Medicare/Medicade as Durable Medical Equipment and it shouldn't be a problem.

I have also contacted the Shark Tank and have yet to hear back from them. Trust me when this hits the market it will be big.

Got to keep plugging along to get it out there.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 2 years ago

That sounds like a very worthwhile venture. I really hope it works out for you. What does it cost to build one? How long to build just one? If you rented a warehouse, could you hire enough folks to assemble enough to fulfill orders? Shark Tank and other shows like that take what seems a long time to respond but it's very possible that you will hear back from them if you haven't received a decline by now. GOOD LUCK!

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

The good ones know who they are.

[-] 0 points by debndan (1145) 2 years ago

We are all the stronger for our differences

put a pure breed and a mutt in a fight, the mutt usually wins

and enough inbreeding, and the pure breed becomes weak, fraught with genetic disease.

[-] -1 points by DayumShame (148) 2 years ago

We must purify ourselves from the blood of foreigners! Force inferior races to use contraception! Set up well-guarded borders! We Are America!

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

The deeper intention of this post wasn't about race but character.

[-] -2 points by DayumShame (148) 2 years ago

My character is ready to purify this unclean nation of infidels!

[-] 3 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

You are free to believe and explore the possibilities of a god, but neither science nor religion can truly explain the existence of this world. We are here, let us live in peace together and build grow and develop a beautiful world.

[-] 3 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Crazy person alert. Cue the alarms for DayumShame. He's actually got some pretty funny stuff here.

[-] -1 points by DayumShame (148) 2 years ago

You misunderstand me. Evolution is God and survival of our Superior Race is my utmost desire.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Yes , I did misunderstand.

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 2 years ago

I agree. Down with the Infidels!

[-] -1 points by NightShade (163) 2 years ago

lmfao

[-] -1 points by lonespectator (106) 2 years ago

Shadz66 is the true anti-white racist. He acts offended by anyone who recognizes the obvious truth. Of course our country has been diluted in the last 20 years of illegal immigration and cross breeding. It has distroyed the state of California, and slowly taking the rest of the country with it. Wake up man!!!

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

WOW!! The accusations of racism are fast and thick! And your proof? Lobotomized Marxist fistula's ?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 2 years ago

Mexico is horribly corrupt. Go protest there !

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

In a word: yes. But it has nothing to do with OWS.

[+] -5 points by skylar (-441) 2 years ago

not if you teach american values and reguire that immigrants learn english.

[-] 0 points by GildasSapiens (266) 2 years ago

"American values"? What are they?

Based on the way American society, & domestic & foreign policy, have developed, at least in the last several decades, some of the main American values seem to be greed, selfishness, callousness, profligacy, waste, classism, racism, bigotry, hubris, aggression, militarism, imperialism...

[+] -6 points by FreeDiscussion4 (70) 2 years ago

Filthy illegals.