Post by: Paddy on August 31, 2007, 03:49:23 PM
White power' chanted during immigration discussion at school
written by: Jeffrey Wolf , Web Producer
and Nelson Garcia , Reporter
Students chant 'white power' during immigration discussion at school. 9NEWS at 5 p.m. 8/30/07
BROOMFIELD It started with a simple question and ended with at least one student chanting "white power" in a classroom.
It happened Tuesday in a classroom at Holy Family High School, the Catholic school that sits at the corner of 144th Avenue and Sheridan Boulevard in Broomfield.
The classroom discussion started with the question: Why do students need to learn Spanish?
According to the Archdiocese of Denver, the conversation soon became about immigration and it turned ugly.
"It became a heated discussion and some rhetoric was used that was inappropriate for the classroom," said Jeanette DeMelo, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Denver.
At least one e-mail sent to 9NEWS said that at least one student started a chant of "white power" and some said that all Mexicans should go back to Mexico.
"Immigration is an explosive topic right now. It seeped into the classroom," she said.
The Archdiocese says they did not expect something like this to happen in their system, which has embraced its Hispanic students. Archbishop Charles Chaput has come forward several times in support of the Mexican community.
"I think the teacher was a little bit unprepared for that type of discussion in a language classroom," said DeMelo.
The archdiocese says the four students who instigated the whole thing have been talked to and supposedly are remorseful. The Spanish teacher also met with administrators.
An e-mail sent to 9NEWS states the Hispanic students in the class at the time asked to leave, but were forced to stay in the classroom.
Holy Family Principal Sr. Mary Rose Lieb, O.S.F. released a statement on Thursday evening about the incident:
"On Tuesday in a Spanish-language class at Holy Family High School, a single handful of students used heated and inappropriate rhetoric in a discussion on immigration. In a class of approximately 30 students, fewer than six students voiced strong anti-immigration opinions. The remaining two-thirds of the class were silent or voiced support for immigrants. At the end of the discussion, one student inappropriately said "white power," two or three times. Most of the students in the class did not hear the comments. Contrary to media reports, there were no chants by more than one student. Two students, who were offended, asked to leave the classroom and were given permission to leave. However, the discussion ended when other students realized how these students were affected and all of the students remained until the end of class."
"When the administration received a complaint regarding this discussion, interviews were conducted of the students in the classroom as well as the teacher. The student who acted inappropriately was disciplined and the situation has been addressed with the teacher."
"The administration treated this situation as a teaching moment - an opportunity to reaffirm that respect and charity should be the foundation of every dialogue and encounter with another."
"Holy Family High School is dedicated to being a family - through respect and charity for all its members. It's always had a diverse student body. It values that diversity and strives to be a place of unity and respect for all. The distortion and inaccurate reporting of this situation is hurtful to a community that should be praised for how well they get along in their diversity."
"In all archdiocesan Catholic schools there is ongoing in-services for administrators, teachers and staff on relevant topics such as immigration, historic justice, issues of bullying and respect."
School leaders at Holy Family say their school is all about inclusiveness. It is in the school's motto and in the spirit of their teachings.
"Holy Family is precisely what its name is: a family. And they've always prided themselves on the diversity," said DeMelo.
Holy Family has a large Hispanic population and the archdiocese wants to make sure everyone is comfortable going to school.
"We are seeing the Hispanic population trust in the Catholic school system and in the diversity that exists there," said DeMelo.
http://www.9news.com/news/top-article.aspx?storyid=76418
Post by: De Selby on August 31, 2007, 04:01:30 PM
Quote
In any event, it is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza':
Legitimate how? Since when is racism of your own a "legitimate" response to someone else's racism?
Liberals and illegal immigrant activists routinely allege that anti-illegal movements are driven by racism, and that "no illegals" is actually code for "no mexicans or other brown people". Incidents like these tend to prove them right.
Post by: Paddy on August 31, 2007, 04:06:50 PM
Quote
Since when is racism of your own a "legitimate" response to someone else's racism?
I don't see it as 'racism' at all. It simply expresses disapproval of illegal immigration and the forcing of some foreign language and culture on those students. It's dissent, dontcha know?
Post by: onions! on August 31, 2007, 05:16:36 PM
Yeah,like a you wouldn't want to learn anything in a school.
Post by: Sindawe on August 31, 2007, 08:15:46 PM
I never woulda thunked that such an innocuous establishment that I pass each week would be the site of rancor and adversity. I wonder if it could be harnessed and directed....
<insert evil cackle>
Quote
Holy Family has a large Hispanic population and the archdiocese wants to make sure everyone is comfortable going to school.
Would that life was "comfortable.
But it ain't.
What better place to grow a pair (proveribially speaking) than in a "controlled" such as a school. If an invidual can't stand up in school, what hope they in the "real world"?
Post by: De Selby on August 31, 2007, 09:14:35 PM
Quote
Since when is racism of your own a "legitimate" response to someone else's racism?
I don't see it as 'racism' at all. It simply expresses disapproval of illegal immigration and the forcing of some foreign language and culture on those students. It's dissent, dontcha know?
Are you serious? You think "white power!" is just disapproval of illegal immigration? Then why make it about race?
Do you actually believe this, or are you playing devil's advocate for the people who want "white power!" chants to be acceptable in all circles?
How is chanting a racist slogan "standing up" in school? I don't see what leg these kids have to stand on. If you think La Raza is a racist organization, surely being a racist or chanting racist slogans is not the only (or proper) way to respond...(but was La Raza even mentioned in this debate?)
Post by: vernal45 on August 31, 2007, 09:28:33 PM
Post by: Paddy on August 31, 2007, 09:36:36 PM
Quote
Are you serious? You think "white power!" is just disapproval of illegal immigration? Then why make it about race?
The race parameter had already been introduced by those who would force a foreign language on Americans.
Quote
Do you actually believe this, or are you playing devil's advocate for the people who want "white power!" chants to be acceptable in all circles?
The U.S.A. was founded by 'whites', specifically, caucasians of northern Europeon extraction. We subsequently invited others to freedom. Don't mistake our hospitality for weakness.
Quote
How is chanting a racist slogan "standing up" in school? I don't see what leg these kids have to stand on.
I never said anything about 'standing up'. Those are your words. Their 'leg to stand on' is their heritage.
Quote
If you think La Raza is a racist organization, surely being a racist or chanting racist slogans is not the only (or proper) way to respond...(but was La Raza even mentioned in this debate?)
We're not the fools you think we are. Witness those young people in the article.
Post by: De Selby on September 01, 2007, 12:27:18 AM
Quote
The race parameter had already been introduced by those who would force a foreign language on Americans.
Uhhh, how so? How does speaking a language other than english introduce a "race parameter"?
Quote
The U.S.A. was founded by 'whites', specifically, caucasians of northern Europeon extraction. We subsequently invited others to freedom. Don't mistake our hospitality for weakness.
Oh, I see. So you don't count the millions of black slaves as Americans? They were just invited guests, and are subject to the "hospitality" of the northern europeans?
The proposition that America today is a white man's land where all others are guests is simply untenable. The "we" in America does not mean just whites-at least, not the last time I checked.
Quote
Their 'leg to stand on' is their heritage.
What "heritage" is that?
Quote
We're not the fools you think we are. Witness those young people in the article.
Wait, so you think young people chanting "white power! white power!" proves that they're smart!?
Who's the "we" we're talking about here? All my life, I never knew that the "American we" meant only white people. This is news to me, for sure.
Could you clarify? Are people with brown and darker shades of skin included in that "We" who are not the fools I supposedly thought they were? Or what?
Post by: Dannyboy on September 01, 2007, 01:32:00 AM
Post by: Barbara on September 01, 2007, 02:24:29 AM
Quote
We subsequently invited others to freedom.
Except the ones they chained up and forced to come here.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 01, 2007, 02:40:01 AM
But it's all just a tempest in a teapot.
Quote
At the end of the discussion, one student inappropriately said "white power," two or three times. Most of the students in the class did not hear the comments. Contrary to media reports, there were no chants by more than one student.
Post by: Paddy on September 01, 2007, 06:18:24 AM
Quote
I never thought Catholicism had a racial angle, but I could be wrong.
There are about a billion Catholics worldwide, including every race on earth.
Quote
But it's all just a tempest in a teapot.
Quote
At the end of the discussion, one student inappropriately said "white power," two or three times. Most of the students in the class did not hear the comments. Contrary to media reports, there were no chants by more than one student.
Quote
At the end of the discussion, one student inappropriately said "white power," two or three times. Most of the students in the class did not hear the comments. Contrary to media reports, there were no chants by more than one student.
Exactly. It was a 'nothing' event. It made the news only as an opportunity for the pro illegal immigration propagandists to play the race card-again.
Post by: longeyes on September 01, 2007, 07:37:35 AM
It's ugly, it shouldn't be--but it is. And if there isn't more honesty about a lot of things it will devolve into something a lot worse than sloganeering.
Post by: wooderson on September 01, 2007, 07:50:46 AM
Quote
"Racism" is the inevitable byproduct of the kind of society that has been a-borning for the last half-century. A lot of Americans would say, if pressed and in private, that the U.S. Government is racist, that it has deliberately chosen to play demographic race games and specifically at the expense of "Europeans."
Yes, we crackers are just horribly oppressed, aren't we?
Post by: Stickjockey on September 01, 2007, 08:06:48 AM
Post by: longeyes on September 01, 2007, 08:25:30 AM
Quote
Yes, we crackers are just horribly oppressed, aren't we?
When "race" becomes overt, I think there's oppression, yes. I deal with people one at a time, as individuals; I plan to go on doing that. I think when you have a society intent on dividing itself up as tribes and thinking collectively, racism is always a by-product.
The people who are oppressed today are the productive class--of whatever background or DNA.
***
I'll tell you what's racism. Try Mexican gangs targeting African-Americans in Highland Park, CA with the idea of expelling all blacks from "their" neighborhood. Or try the incident in Long Beach where a band of blacks beat up four white girls last Halloween night to cries of "get whitey!" No, it's not just whites who have "a problem" in this society. Not by a long shot.
Post by: S. Williamson on September 01, 2007, 09:24:01 AM
Quote
Question: If a group of people of African descent were in this group and they began chanting "Black power!", would that be racism?
Nope. Can't be racist if you're a "minority."Quote
The people who are oppressed today are the productive class--of whatever background or DNA.
Okay, Karl... 
Post by: longeyes on September 01, 2007, 10:12:16 AM
And you're not exactly Dionysus.
Post by: De Selby on September 01, 2007, 12:26:12 PM
Quote
I never thought Catholicism had a racial angle, but I could be wrong.
There are about a billion Catholics worldwide, including every race on earth.
Exactly. It was a 'nothing' event. It made the news only as an opportunity for the pro illegal immigration propagandists to play the race card-again.
If this was just about Catholics, why did you title the thread "White backlash?"
The race card here was played by the guy chanting "White power." We don't know what the other kids were saying, but how is it that you can't see "white power!" as having to do with race?
I'm really puzzled by your claims here. Could you respond to my questions above as well? Who is the "we" in America?
Post by: Thor on September 01, 2007, 01:14:32 PM
Post by: Ron on September 01, 2007, 01:38:00 PM
Focusing on one specific group of illegal immigrants distracts from the real issue of border security. If the only folks able to slip across the border were Mexicans looking for work this wouldn't be an issue with me at all.
The fact is anybody can slip across that border. That is the issue and problem.
Quote
Quote
Quote
We subsequently invited others to freedom.
Except the ones they chained up and forced to come here.Note the use of "they" and "we".
"They" in fact were guilty of having slaves.
"We" still offer an invitation to live free, at least as free as we still are. But that only should apply to those who follow the rules. Otherwise they need to go.
Post by: HankB on September 01, 2007, 02:04:29 PM
As a matter of fact, we don't actually know that the student who did it was European Caucasian - it could have been a student of another ethnicity being sarcastic; it could have been a reaction to something equally racist coming from a Mexican student.
To me, this sounds like they tried to push some "we must accomodate illegals" cr@p down the student's throats, and were shocked - shocked I tell you - when some pushed back.
Post by: De Selby on September 01, 2007, 02:11:17 PM
it could have been a reaction to something equally racist coming from a Mexican student
Would this have made it okay?
Quote
To me, this sounds like they tried to push some "we must accomodate illegals" cr@p down the student's throats, and were shocked - shocked I tell you - when some pushed back.
I don't know-to me "white power!" sounds like someone who is racist, being angry at all the brown people he sees in America. That doesn't mean there are no good reasons to be against illegal immigration-it just means that the "white power!" crowd likely are in it for a reason other than jobs and security.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 01, 2007, 03:03:32 PM
Quote
I never thought Catholicism had a racial angle, but I could be wrong.
There are about a billion Catholics worldwide, including every race on earth.
I know that. I'm trying to figure out why you thought this might be "radical Catholicism."
Post by: The Rabbi on September 01, 2007, 04:41:40 PM
Quote
I never thought Catholicism had a racial angle, but I could be wrong.
There are about a billion Catholics worldwide, including every race on earth.
I know that. I'm trying to figure out why you thought this might be "radical Catholicism."
Post by: Barbara on September 01, 2007, 06:11:26 PM
Quote
Somehow I get the feeling that if we had millions of Englishmen flocking illegally here the noise level would be much less.
That was colonization.
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 01, 2007, 06:41:04 PM
it could have been a reaction to something equally racist coming from a Mexican student
Would this have made it okay?
No. But if that was the case it should have been brought up. A lot of times you never hear about what someone may have been reacting to, just the reaction.
Post by: RevDisk on September 01, 2007, 07:09:45 PM
Quote
Somehow I get the feeling that if we had millions of Englishmen flocking illegally here the noise level would be much less.
I can recall of two occassions in which we had massive flocks of hostile Englishmen flooding into our country in an unwelcome fashion, we killed a sizeable number of them.
Thing is, millions of English flooding into the country wouldn't be as big of an issue as they wouldn't have a problem with the language nor would assimiliation be an significant issue. Plus, I'd have a hard time imagining most English guys I know entering the country illegally. The lot of them are typical law abidding people.
Post by: The Rabbi on September 02, 2007, 04:30:42 AM
Quote
Somehow I get the feeling that if we had millions of Englishmen flocking illegally here the noise level would be much less.
I can recall of two occassions in which we had massive flocks of hostile Englishmen flooding into our country in an unwelcome fashion, we killed a sizeable number of them.
Thing is, millions of English flooding into the country wouldn't be as big of an issue as they wouldn't have a problem with the language nor would assimiliation be an significant issue. Plus, I'd have a hard time imagining most English guys I know entering the country illegally. The lot of them are typical law abidding people.
We did not have massive influxes of immigrants. We had an invasion by an army. Some people cannot tell the difference and that is sad. I blame the school system.
Second, every immigrant group gets the rap about not assimilating. Franklin said this about the German immigrants of his day. Some of those immigrants probably have descendents writing on this board. Not one of those descendents is an unassimilated non-English speaking German-American.
Third, I know in Nashville the number of illegal immigrants from England is actually pretty high. I imagine the same elsewhere.
Post by: HankB on September 02, 2007, 01:16:44 PM
. . . That doesn't mean there are no good reasons to be against illegal immigration-it just means that the "white power!" crowd likely are in it for a reason other than jobs and security.
ONE student does not a crowd make.Too bad nobody taped or filmed the entire session . . . otherwise, most of what is being written here about what may have gone on is speculation.
Post by: Paddy on September 02, 2007, 08:11:20 PM
Quote
We subsequently invited others to freedom.
Except the ones they chained up and forced to come here.
Except the ones they chained up and forced to come here.
Who were sold out by their black brethren in Africa.
There's a double standard here that's inherently racist. It's ok for anybody but whites to make affirmative statements about their own race. As soon as a white person does it, he's 'racist'. Implied there is the assumption that the person of color is somehow inferior to the white; that they are not on equal footing. Closet racism hiding behind a show of 'tolerance.'
Post by: Barbara on September 03, 2007, 06:40:32 AM
Not in my book.
As far as the blacks selling each other? Sure..they did. But at least their descendents are sensible enough not to pat themselves on the back for how they offered them the chance for freedom.
Post by: Paddy on September 03, 2007, 08:04:24 AM
Quote
Oh, bull. Some minorities make racist statements, so its ok for whites to do it? Is that what you're saying? So racism is fine, as long as everyone is doing it?
No, it is not.
Nobody alive today was ever a slave. Nobody alive today was ever a slaveowner. Slavery was an abhorrent practice of the past that has long since been corrected-in this country. Yet slavery is always presented as though it is some kind of prima facie evidence of current white 'racism' in the U.S. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many blacks and other people of color hold positions of prominence and power in the United States today. They possess great wealth and influence. That is as it should be.
Yet the charade continues. (Some) blacks (and others of color) use their race as a platform from which to accuse ALL white people of 'racism' and 'oppression'. (Some) whites in turn do the mea culpa and attempt to alleviate their 'guilt' with affirmative action and other 'gifts'. These same whites will give lip service to equality but privately believe blacks (and others of color) inferior. They turn a blind eye to the real racism and genocide happening in other parts of the world. They subsidize slavery and oppression in third world sweatshops with their consumer dollars, some even justifying it with 'free market' rhetoric.
That's the 'bull'.
Post by: Desertdog on September 03, 2007, 08:27:53 AM
Quote
The classroom discussion started with the question: Why do students need to learn Spanish?
When I went to school Foreign Language was an elective, it was not forced on you, except for certain majors. Even then you could choose from a number of languages other than just Spainish.So what is the answer to the original question: Why do students need to learn Spanish? To me it is not racist to not learn Spainish or any other foreign language.
If the school requires a freign language, they need to offer more than just one language, maybe French, Arabic, German, Chinese, Greek, Polish, or any of many other Languages.
Post by: The Rabbi on September 03, 2007, 08:57:49 AM
There are lots of benefits to learning a foreign language that have been documented elsewhere. If someone had to pick one, Spanish would be a good one since it is easy to practice it in almost every major city. It is also a "cash register" language, so that people who can speak it have advantages in the job market over people who don't.
Post by: wooderson on September 03, 2007, 10:22:18 AM
Quote
Yet slavery is always presented as though it is some kind of prima facie evidence of current white 'racism' in the U.S. [...] (Some) blacks (and others of color) use their race as a platform from which to accuse ALL white people of 'racism' and 'oppression'.
Those are some lovely strawmen you have there.Quote
Many blacks and other people of color hold positions of prominence and power in the United States today.
'Many' is a rather arguable point. But you don't want to have that discussion - so you rely on weak arguments like the above.
Post by: Bogie on September 03, 2007, 10:38:37 AM
Quote
Nobody alive today was ever a slave. Nobody alive today was ever a slaveowner.
Wrong on both points.
Slavery still exists... Just generally not in the US...
And we still have "gangs" importing people into the US as essentially indentured...
Now, from what I read of the original post...
Quote
It started with a simple question and ended with at least one student chanting "white power" in a classroom.
Otay, Buckwheat... Looks like they had -maybe- one dumbbleep who didn't take his Ritalin that day... And he wanted to get noticed. What is the big deal? Kid oughta get spanked, and made to stand in the corner and contemplate his actions for a while.
Yawn.
Post by: HankB on September 03, 2007, 11:18:12 AM
As far as the blacks selling each other? Sure..they did do.
Corrected the tense - it's still happening in parts of Africa today.But, sadly, nobody seems to care.
Post by: longeyes on September 03, 2007, 12:18:43 PM
Quote
Those are some lovely strawmen you have there.
Really? Take a look at the syllabus for White Studies courses in various institutions of "higher learning" around the U.S. The basic thesis is: The White race is the cancer of history.
Racism is racism, wherever found.
I think what we need to look at more closely is culture. The values most of us espouse on this forum belong to a "culture of liberty" that has very specific historic roots. We ignore that at our peril.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2007, 01:06:18 PM
Quote
Nobody alive today was ever a slave. Nobody alive today was ever a slaveowner.
Wrong on both points.
Slavery still exists... Just generally not in the US...
I think it was fairly obvious he was saying that none of the slaves or slave-owners from the nineteenth century are still alive today. But whatever general point he's trying to make, I'm not sure and don't care to figure out.
Post by: Hugh Damright on September 03, 2007, 01:09:40 PM
Post by: Barbara on September 03, 2007, 01:27:02 PM
Not all people of Hispanic ancestry speak Spanish.
Equally shocking:
Not everyone whose last name is Schmidt speaks German.
Post by: Hugh Damright on September 03, 2007, 02:31:36 PM
Post by: The Rabbi on September 03, 2007, 02:39:31 PM
Like I said, I thought that "hispanic" meant "Spanish-speaking". I am perfectly aware that "Schmidt" doesn't mean "German-speaking", thank you.
Not necessarily. I remember there was some Hispanic-named CEO of a major corporation who went to Mexico and gave a speech at the company's subsidiary. A journalist asked him a question in Spanish and he needed someone to interpret.But just because their parents speak Mexican (or Ecuadorian or Columbian) Spanish at home doesn't mean they can't learn a thing or two in class. Just like people from KY still take English.
Post by: roo_ster on September 03, 2007, 04:44:39 PM
Hispanic=someone from (or descended from someone from) a Spanish-speaking country in latin America
Hispanoblante=anyone who speaks Spanish
Post by: Bogie on September 03, 2007, 05:43:56 PM
Non event guys. Bury it.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2007, 06:33:37 AM
Quote
Oh, bull. Some minorities make racist statements, so its ok for whites to do it? Is that what you're saying? So racism is fine, as long as everyone is doing it?
No, it is not.
Nobody alive today was ever a slave. Nobody alive today was ever a slaveowner.
Nobody alive today founded the nation and "invited guests to freedom" either, but that didn't stop you from taking credit for it as a member of the "Northern European race" that you claim did it.
How come you're so quick to claim the credit for founding the "nation of liberty" because you identify with the "Northern Europeans" above mentioned, yet refuse to claim any responsibility for the system of slavery implemented by the very same people?
Post by: Paddy on September 04, 2007, 07:15:43 AM
Quote
Non event guys. Bury it.
Long since called in Reply #11 and reaffirmed in #12. But not before ss had spontaneously overreacted in nos. 1, 5 & 8.
Quote
How come you're so quick to claim the credit for founding the "nation of liberty" because you identify with the "Northern Europeans" above mentioned, yet refuse to claim any responsibility for the system of slavery implemented by the very same people?
Simply for the purpose of exposing radical and agenda driven proclivities.
Post by: cordex on September 04, 2007, 09:22:32 AM
Quote
How come you're so quick to claim the credit for founding the "nation of liberty" because you identify with the "Northern Europeans" above mentioned, yet refuse to claim any responsibility for the system of slavery implemented by the very same people?
Simply for the purpose of exposing radical and agenda driven proclivities.
I think racial slogans are childish whether the slogan in question is "Black Power!" or "White Power!" or "Viva la Raza!"
I certainly don't see one as a valid response to another.
Post by: Euclidean on September 04, 2007, 11:11:28 AM
It is perfectly acceptable, nay encouraged, for any ethnic group but one to proudly proclaim "Viva la raza", "Black Power", etc. Such cries are applauded, encouraged, and heralded in certain circles. Under various guises, the main one I see being encouraging diversity, those who push these agendas do anything they can to set apart one group from all others.
There is one common thread however: "white" people are not to, at any point, engage in any of the same behaviors. So, which is it? Is it not acceptable for anyone to proclaim themselves a supreme group or ethnicity, or is it acceptable for everyone to do so?
And quite frankly the latter of those two is far more equitable than there being one group which isn't allowed to talk about the issue or say the word "*let's not go there*" on television while members of other groups say bigoted and racially charged things often without consequence.
Post by: jnojr on September 04, 2007, 03:21:17 PM
Quote
In any event, it is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza':
Legitimate how? Since when is racism of your own a "legitimate" response to someone else's racism?
"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.
The more our government and rampant political correctness try to force us to accept millions of impoverished immigrants, the more of a backlash will build against them. Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious. If we have amnesty, or anything short of a renewed commitment to border security, I believe within a very few years we'll start seeing more and more "immigrant bashing". "Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it... Most American citizens simply do not want to be overrun with poor Third Worlders and then be forced to support them. As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2007, 03:47:11 PM
Quote
"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.
In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'". So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.
Quote
Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.
And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders.
Quote
"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...
I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.
Quote
As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.
What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?
Post by: Paddy on September 04, 2007, 08:17:54 PM
Quote
In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'". So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.
I was wrong. The correct response to 'viva la raza' is immediate deportation.
Quote
Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.
And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders.
And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders.
Only if they're white
Quote
"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...
I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.
I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.
That would be illegals and their proponents, lawbreakers, who by definition do not care about right from wrong.
Quote
What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?
Enforcement and immediate deportation.
Post by: richyoung on September 05, 2007, 12:48:55 PM
Uhhh, how so? How does speaking a language other than english introduce a "race parameter"?
...when its the language of a naon-Caucasian, (that is to say "different race") invader....
Quote
Quote
The U.S.A. was founded by 'whites', specifically, caucasians of northern Europeon extraction. We subsequently invited others to freedom. Don't mistake our hospitality for weakness.
Oh, I see. So you don't count the millions of black slaves as Americans?
Reading is fundamental - try looking up the word "founded" in your Funk and Wagnel's.... now tell me how many non-Whites signed the Declaration of Independence, or held leadership positions in the Continental Congress or Army....
Quote
They were just invited guests, and are subject to the "hospitality" of the northern europeans?
No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc. The vast majority of which would have been killed for violating a taboo or losing an inter-tribal war, were there not a way for their African captors to turn them into trade goods...
Quote
The proposition that America today is a white man's land where all others are guests is simply untenable. The "we" in America does not mean just whites-at least, not the last time I checked.
NO, but it HSOULD mean just "Americans" - as in United States Citizens - along with LEGAL visitors.
Quote
Quote
Their 'leg to stand on' is their heritage.
What "heritage" is that?
The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...
Post by: richyoung on September 05, 2007, 12:56:00 PM
As far as the blacks selling each other? Sure..they did do.
Corrected the tense - it's still happening in parts of Africa today.But, sadly, nobody seems to care.
..because those are CHRISTIANS being captured into slavery by MUSLIMS - not a priority to Farakahn...
Post by: De Selby on September 05, 2007, 01:24:49 PM
Quote
...when its the language of a naon-Caucasian, (that is to say "different race") invader....
Are you presuming here that the only native is caucasian? If not, then how does any "non caucasian language" constitute "the language of an invader"? And how would this apply to the language at issue, spanish, which is the language of a caucasian people?
Quote
now tell me how many non-Whites signed the Declaration of Independence, or held leadership positions in the Continental Congress or Army....
Funny, I didn't see "only people who signed paperwork" in the definition of "founded." I count the soldiers who fought the battles, the workers who made their guns, powder, and clothing, and those who fed them as being part of the effort. Indeed, were there no popular support, the masses of colonists could've easily sold every name on the declaration to the British and kept things going just like in the Imperial days.
And if you factor in founding a nation of democracy and freedom, without racism, then there's no debate: of course millions of black Americans and other minorities were instrumental in achieving that goal. So yeah, I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe".
Quote
No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc.
Do you not find it ironic that you can give "Northern Europeans" the sole credit for founding a nation of freedom in one breath, and then turn around to post this just a few lines later?
Quote
The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...
Yeah, the problem is that these things are the heritage of all races of people who believe in equality and freedoms. They are definitely not the heritage of the various gangs throughout American history who chanted "White power!" during civil discussions.
Post by: richyoung on September 05, 2007, 04:33:40 PM
Are you presuming here that the only native is caucasian?
Yhe AMerican culture is white, English speaking, anglo-saxon Protestant. Tap dance all you want - thats what it IS.
Quote
If not, then how does any "non caucasian language" constitute "the language of an invader"? And how would this apply to the language at issue, spanish, which is the language of a caucasian people?
We are being invaded by Mexicans, and other Latin-Americans, who a mix of some Spanish, but predominantly Indian ancestry. Further, the "Spanish" they speak is not the same as spoke in Spain.
Quote
Funny, I didn't see "only people who signed paperwork" in the definition of "founded."
It doesn't count till you sign on the line....those who "declared independence" are those who were the ...Founding Fathers - a pretty lily white bunch....
Quote
I count the soldiers who fought the battles, the workers who made their guns, powder, and clothing, and those who fed them as being part of the effort.
"Effort" not equal "Founding".
Quote
Indeed, were there no popular support, the masses of colonists could've easily sold every name on the declaration to the British and kept things going just like in the Imperial days.
"Support" not equal "Founded".
Quote
And if you factor in founding a nation of democracy and freedom, without racism, then there's no debate: of course millions of black Americans and other minorities were instrumental in achieving that goal.
"Achieving" not equal "Founding". English a second language for you?
Quote
So yeah, I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe".
Whether you "take issue" with it or not doesn;t change th historical fact that it indeed was so. Deal with it.
Quote
Quote
No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc.
Do you not find it ironic that you can give "Northern Europeans" the sole credit for founding a nation of freedom in one breath, and then turn around to post this just a few lines later?
Who ever said history was without irony? Whether I find it ironic or not, it was, in fact, so.
Quote
Quote
The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...
Yeah, the problem is that these things are the heritage of all races of people who believe in equality and freedoms. They are definitely not the heritage of the various gangs throughout American history who chanted "White power!" during civil discussions.
Those things are the heritage of those who MADE IT SO, and without those dead white dudes that FOUNDED this country, there would be no dream for others to realize. - sadly, much of humanity is yet to catch up....
Post by: De Selby on September 05, 2007, 05:22:25 PM
Quote
Yhe AMerican culture is white, English speaking, anglo-saxon Protestant. Tap dance all you want - thats what it IS.
No tapdancing here, just an honest question: Says who? Where did this resolute definition of what is "American culture" come from? And what does that make blacks who may have been here for longer than most of the white population?
Quote
We are being invaded by Mexicans, and other Latin-Americans, who a mix of some Spanish, but predominantly Indian ancestry. Further, the "Spanish" they speak is not the same as spoke in Spain.
Since your Funk and Wagnall's dictionary is already on the desk flipped open to "founded", you need to turn a few pages forward to "I" for "Invade."
The Spanish they speak is different in the same way that American English is different from Canadian and British English-that is, in sound and in some slang, but not enough to constitute even a different dialect. But I notice that your claim seems to be heading towards skin color, and not language. If that's so, why mention learning the language in school at all?
Quote
"Effort" not equal "Founding".
Like I said, I looked up founding. Nothing about "signing the papers" in there. Maybe you don't think the work needed to be done to "found" the nation, but that's going to be a tough case to make.
Quote
"Achieving" not equal "Founding". English a second language for you?
Yes, but the distinction you are pointing out here ignores the point made. The grammar is fine-the problem is not my writing or diction, it is your unwillingness to comprehend the point. You are reducing the whole concept of "founding America" to signing a single sheet of paper, which is (expressed in any grammatical style or language) a ridiculous proposition.
Quote
Those things are the heritage of those who MADE IT SO, and without those dead white dudes that FOUNDED this country, there would be no dream for others to realize. - sadly, much of humanity is yet to catch up....
Except that people of this heritage didn't make it so-you just acknowledged that they treated women, children, and blacks as "chattel". That is hardly the stuff of freedom and liberty.
You can try to one line your way out of every point, but if you want to take the discussion seriously, you'll have to do better and exercise your analytical skills alongside your dictionary research skills.
Post by: richyoung on September 05, 2007, 05:35:57 PM
Post by: De Selby on September 05, 2007, 06:18:23 PM
SS - you don;t WANT to learn - you think you know it all already. Rave on...
What was I supposed to learn from being referred to a dictionary and told that, on the one hand, only white people founded the "nation of liberty" and are entitled to take credit for the personal freedoms we enjoy today, but on the other that they treated non-whites and women as chattel?
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 05, 2007, 07:47:18 PM
Post by: richyoung on September 06, 2007, 10:49:30 AM
SS - you don;t WANT to learn - you think you know it all already. Rave on...
What was I supposed to learn from being referred to a dictionary...
The definition and use of the words you not only don't know the definition and use of, but are in fact convinced they mean and are used other than the way they actually are...
Quote
...and told that, on the one hand, only white people founded the "nation of liberty"...
White men, actually. At the time the events in question happened, white men had a near monopoly on political power and wealth in Europe and the English colonies in the New World. That may seem shocking to those cursed with a politically correct public school education. Nonetheless, thats THE WAY IT WAS. White men founded the United States. They also RESISTED the founding of the United States. The imported slaves. They protested slavery. They were the only ones who had a meaningful say in anything at the time & place in question. Names like Crispus Atticus and Molly Pitcher have made it down to us through the ages exactly BECAUSE they were so much an exception.
Quote
... and are entitled to take credit for the personal freedoms we enjoy today,...
Yes, absolutely. They didn't have to risk being executed for treason, much less having their estates confiscated, or pillaged, to seperate us from England. Even those that did didn't have to engage in a risky experiment in democracy - they could have instituted a monarchy. How many democracies, (I know, I know, "constitutionally limited republics") still a varient of democracy....) existed just beforre the U.S.? ZERO! How many after? ONE! Even so, the attempt could have turned to despotism and bloodshed, as did France's. Instead, the Founding Fathers not only risked their lives and wealth to secure freedom and prosperity for their childrenm, they brought hope and an example to the whole world. This is NOT to say that the dream sprang forth fully realized - indeed, it is still yet to be fully realized yet today, and will probably never be fully, perfectly realized. They did FOUND, (your word, remember?) the experiment - and without a begining, there is no middle and no end. Have others, of every concievable race and color given even up to the full measure of their existance to protect and further this experiment? Of course! But thats NOT what we are discussing - we are discussing the "founding" - and the Founding Fathers were exclusively English speaking Christian white males.
Quote
but on the other that they treated non-whites and women as chattel?
That was the past. They do things differently there. For bonus points, read up on how they treated Irish immigrants (even white English speeking Christian ones...), indentured servants, native Americans, Chinese railroad workers. For more bonus points, read up on how the newly freed Negro was welcomed with open arms in Northern utopias like Chicago, Kansas City, New York, etc, by the Yankess who supposedly cared so much about their welfare. Why so shocked? Are you unaware that signifigant parts of the world TODAY treat women as chattel, and don't fully recognize minority religions? (Hint: "religion of peace").
Post by: De Selby on September 06, 2007, 11:31:11 AM
shootinstudent, back out now, whilst your sanity remains intact. If it's not too late.
I shouldn't have waited to recognize just how right you were.
richyoung,
It looks to me like you simply don't want to recognize the contributions that non-whites made to creating America. You've got the fundamentals right there in your post-how they sacrificed their lives to make this a country with justice and freedom. The problem is that you're stuck on ignoring that because only white people are commonly referred to as "The Founding Fathers", as if receiving the magic title of "Founding Father" means you get sole credit for the freedoms we currently enjoy.
It looks like we agree on the facts: that white Christian protestants were not only not solely responsible for creating a state with freedom and equality for everyone, but that they actually worked against this, and that the justice and liberty we enjoy today are the fruits of many races' and religions' hard work.
You just don't think that work is relevant or deserves any credit, because, apparently, "America is a white culture", so any work done by others just doesn't count as "American" or it's not relevant for some other reason. Is that a fair summary of your point?
Post by: richyoung on September 06, 2007, 05:48:43 PM
shootinstudent, back out now, whilst your sanity remains intact. If it's not too late.
I shouldn't have waited to recognize just how right you were.
richyoung,
It looks to me like you simply don't want to recognize the contributions that non-whites made to creating America.
The contribution that non-whites made to FULFILLING and CONTINUING the dream that is America is huge and ongoing. However to "colorize" the CREATION of that dream by putting minorities in that simply weren't there is revisionism. "Creation" implies STARTING and BEGINING, and in the begining, those in positions of wealth, power, and influence were universally white males - sorry if that hurts your feelings, but thats simply how it was BACK THEN. Women and other races were'nt in a position to either volunteer or withhold anything meaningful - such participation as they had was at the direction of...white men. The amazing thing is that very dream began to cause the inclusion of other races and genders - as soon as 60 years later, both Anglos AND mexicans stood togerther within the Alamo for Texas independence. A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time. That's HUGE movement in less than 100 years - ALL made possible by the original Founding Fathers and their dream.
Quote
You've got the fundamentals right there in your post-how they sacrificed their lives to make this a country with justice and freedom. The problem is that you're stuck on ignoring that because only white people are commonly referred to as "The Founding Fathers", as if receiving the magic title of "Founding Father" means you get sole credit for the freedoms we currently enjoy.
Again, to "create" is to "begin" - only those that actually BEGAN the country should get credit for , well, begining the country. Naturally, what they began was strongly influenced by white, English-speaking, Christian concepts and traditions - it still is. For a counter example, look at what passes for law and justice in places like Zimbabwe....
Quote
It looks like we agree on the facts: that white Christian protestants were not only not solely responsible for creating a state with freedom and equality for everyone, but that they actually worked against this, and that the justice and liberty we enjoy today are the fruits of many races' and religions' hard work.
Yes. Again, only white Christian protestants had acces to money, land, power, guns, ships, the press - they were the only ones at the time that COULD have done it....
Quote
You just don't think that work is relevant or deserves any credit,
Not true. Major props to anyone, regardless of race and nationality, who has helped us get to here. However, it does nothing but DIMINISH those very real accomplishments to also crow-bar them into the CREATION of that dream when they simply weren't there, or to deny that the prinicples and attributes of our culture that are threatened by unassimilated immagrants are those of a white, Protestant, Anglo-Saxon culure.
Quote
because, apparently, "America is a white culture",
Not apparently. Is. Look at your television. Bryant Gumble isn't speaking Spanish, or "Black English", or Jamacain patios. He's speaking corn-fed Middle America White dialect. Same for Wayne Brady, Geraldo Rivera, Oprah, Cameron Diaz....
Quote
... so any work done by others just doesn't count as "American" or it's not relevant for some other reason. Is that a fair summary of your point?
NO. Your words were "I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe". I merely pointed out that whether YOU "take issue" with that historical fiact has no effect on the truth that it was, in fact, so. Then YOU threw out a bunch of stuff about the ONGOING contributions of minorities to FULFILLING that dream, (which are inarguable - but have nothing to do with FOUNDING IT, or the inherent WASP nature of it.) So my point is that you are wrong, and indignant about it, for some reason...
Post by: cordex on September 07, 2007, 06:09:33 AM
Quote from: richyoung
A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.
Settled it "for all time"? Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?
Post by: richyoung on September 07, 2007, 08:27:22 AM
Post by: jnojr on September 07, 2007, 10:47:56 AM
Quote
"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.
In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'". So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.
Quote
Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.
And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders.
Quote
"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...
I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.
Quote
As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.
What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?
How about getting illegal aliens deported?
People are not going to be satisfied with marching in anti-illegal-alien rallies and chanting slogans while more and more illegal aliens pour into our country. We do not want to "vent" and then go home. We want the problem solved. We want our border secure. We want no more illegal aliens having anchor babies, collecting welfare, running up ER bills they'll never pay, living 20 to a clown house next door to us, etc. If the governmetn doesn't act to secure our borders and deport illegals, then people will start to act. Yes, some will go to prison... but how long will it be before "vigilantes" start getting juries full of people who are also sick and tired of the invasion and refuse to convict them?
I am not saying that it's "right" for people to turn vigilante. I do not think it's "right" that some poor illegals may wind up beaten or worse for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm saying that it's going to happen when it becomes clear to people that the "legitimate" means of ridding themselves of illegals have completely failed and have no hope of working.
There are many indications that our economy is in deep trouble, and that a recession may be around the corner. The policies that the Fed is pursuing to try to prevent a collapse will only lead to bigger problems tomorrow. Wait and see what happens if unemployment starts to take off. People can get pretty nasty when they see a scapegoat for their problems. The Germans of the 1930s didn't innately hate Jews... Hitler told them look, those damn Jews are responsible for the plight you find yourselves in! We Germans are a great people, and we've been dragged down by the subhuman filth! Find them! Report them! Cheer as we drag them away!
No, I am not claiming that we are going to start a mass roundup and "elimination" of illegal aliens. But there is a seething bed of resentment towards millions of people who are at least perceived as coming here to milk us dry, and towards a government that has completely ignored our repeated demands that something be done. It is entirely possible that that resentment will boil over.
Post by: De Selby on September 07, 2007, 01:41:03 PM
Quote
How about getting illegal aliens deported?
Deporting illegal aliens is, last I checked, not only allowed but actually has happened millions of times.
And, what does deporting people have to do with "legitimate means of expressing opposition" to illegals? No matter how many illegals the Federal police deport in a given year, does that impact your ability as an individual to demand more deportation?
Quote
If the governmetn doesn't act to secure our borders and deport illegals, then people will start to act. Yes, some will go to prison... but how long will it be before "vigilantes" start getting juries full of people who are also sick and tired of the invasion and refuse to convict them?
So in other words, what you said about legitimate outlets for frustration just wasn't so? They're not shut off, it's just that nobody will accept any solution other than massive Federal police searches around the US to deport every last illegal?
I would say that vigilantes who commit crimes will likely never, ever find juries that refuse to convict them on this issue. Especially not the vigilantes who chant "White power!" at their rallies.
Quote
can get pretty nasty when they see a scapegoat for their problems. The Germans of the 1930s didn't innately hate Jews... Hitler told them look, those damn Jews are responsible for the plight you find yourselves in! We Germans are a great people, and we've been dragged down by the subhuman filth! Find them! Report them! Cheer as we drag them away!
I think we agree that people can be irrational and brutal. Is this a reason to appease the "White power!" chanters?
Quote
But there is a seething bed of resentment towards millions of people who are at least perceived as coming here to milk us dry, and towards a government that has completely ignored our repeated demands that something be done. It is entirely possible that that resentment will boil over.
I agree that it's always possible to have racist sentiments boil over. But why should we encourage this behavior by appeasing them and giving in to their demands?
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 07, 2007, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: richyoung
A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.
Settled it "for all time"? Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?Owned!!
Post by: longeyes on September 08, 2007, 06:47:39 AM
Quote
I would say that vigilantes who commit crimes will likely never, ever find juries that refuse to convict them on this issue.
Really? Of course, the infamous O.J. jury might qualify as a jury operating by a "higher calling," no?
For those people "Justice" was being served by pursuing what I'll call meta-Justice. (I'm not condoning it any more than "jnojr" was, just noting what's really going on under the surface of politically correct reportage.)
This occurs when governmental authority becomes viewed as tyrannical and de-legitimizes itself by omission or commission. There are millions of angry Whites who increasingly believe that their own Government is either not working in their interest or actively at cross-purposes. This anger is only going to increase if real substantive steps are not taken, and soon, to remedy what is viewed as an out of control alien invasion. Any economic downturn or any signal dramatic event could ignite a major conflict.
Post by: richyoung on September 10, 2007, 01:05:16 PM
Quote from: richyoung
A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.
Settled it "for all time"? Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?Owned!!
[LostInSPace] Oh, the pain....the PAIN! [/LostInSpace]
Post by: MechAg94 on September 10, 2007, 02:25:02 PM
As my mother tells me, my Grandfather was the first generation of kids in their family that didn't learn to speak German. It was during WWI and they had those laws against teaching German. My mother says her Grandparents spoke German around the house all the time.
Back to some confusion on the first page: "White power!" as a slogan/chant is associated with the KKK. Much like Nazi salute has been associated with the Nazis. Using that slogan lumps you in with the KKK whether you like it or not.