The tech industry shows solidarity in the face of Donald Trump's immigration ban

[captaincranky]

Sounds like you are the one who is rattled with so many *****s in your posts. It helps to vent, though.

Sometimes when there is no give and take of opinion and information, an asterisk is all that a "jack asterisk" deserves.

@Kunming is not really interested in an honest exchange of opinion, or even an accurate portrayal of historic events. He rewrites history as her goes along, to coincide with him constantly spewing his personal hatred of the US. IMHO, he should strap on a suicide vest, and use it to "right all his perceived delusional wrongs the US has committed against him and the rest of the world", and be done with it. (y)

Beyond that, he's merely a little punk troll, hiding behind the "no sharing of personal information available", on his TS profile. He's managed to not even divulge the location from where he does all his hating of the US.

For all we know, he could be posting from a prison library, Kosovo, or Boca Raton FL. (Which incidentally means "little mouse in Spanish).

 

[wiyosaya]

Well American politics is unfortunately like that. It seems we can't elect a true "moderate" anymore, and you only get either "policy platform packages", from either the far left or far right. I for one would like to see jobs brought back to America, but given today's massive cultural greed and the legendary uselessness of a huge unwilling to work segment of the American population, I don't really hold out much hope for "America Being Great Again", at least not on the level of our new leader's expectations. (But then, he's just disseminating his own ego driven propaganda, hoping, "a spark will start a fire".

But then, I truly believe defunding planned parenthood and overturning Row v. Wade, will be a complete and utter disaster. Both, very tragically, will likely occur during the Trump administration

The "Right to Life" crowd, are our "radical Muslims", who want to send women's rights back to the 7th century. They are religious zealots of the highest order, and are completely out of touch with both the expense and logistics of supporting an ever increasing human population, I suspect if they were given the bill first hand for these children they so righteous insist, "deserve to be born", they'd STFU, and go back to their Bridge club.

Wow! This has got to be an absolute first between you and I on political issues. I could not agree more with you, especially about the "Right to Life" crowd.

There are, as I see it, quite a few radicalized groups in our country that do not include Muslims. In my opinion, naming it Radical Islamic Terrorism is just wrong because the religious aspect of terrorism is not limited to a specific radical version of a religion.

And I also second the notion of having the "Right to Lifers" pay for the cost of raising the children they are supposedly saving, or adopting those same children themselves. Not to mention that in some cases, having a child can be a danger to a woman's life - so how are they going to "pay back" the woman who loses her life because she was prevented from getting an abortion? If I am not mistaken, Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness is not qualified by "As long as we the people tell you how you want to pursue Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness is OK with us" (with the usual exceptions, of course so that no harm is done).

As far as the Second Iraq War goes, "Wubba" didn't invade Iraq, "Shotgun *ick Cheyney" did.

And as far as the "intelligence services", having, "intelligence not worth considering" , WTF are we paying them for, to sit around and drink coffee? (I'll grant you that James Bond movies may have instilled unrealistic expectations in the population at large). But seriously, look up "intelligence" in the dictionary. I'm fairly certain you'll see it doesn't mean, "someone who doesn't know sh!t about squat.

I cannot say. I am not of that community, however, I can imagine that in some circumstances, getting definitive proof of something like this would be extremely difficult. Take the situation in North Korea, for instance. At least as I understand it, we have no definitive proof they have nuclear weapons. Intelligence only believes that they have them. On the flip side of that is the fact that it is better to have a suspicion than to be caught totally off-guard. That the "suspicion" of WMD in Iraq was used as a pretext of war is inexcusable - thus if the CIA did tell those in the Bush admin about the fact that they did not consider that it was concrete evidence, there should have been prosecutions for treason - however - Obama wanted to move on.

 

[wiyosaya]

There have been those in this thread that have said that Obama implemented a similar immigration ban. From what I can tell, this article at Snopes says differently.

 

[Makson]

I still manage a few projects that heavily depend upon tech workers from all over the globe. India will be very hard hit, especially when so many young people are counting on doing work for the US. My only concern at this point is that he may ban the use of off shore workers (data in & out) thinking this is a source of hacking, etc. I kind of like the "concept" that Trump has, but his delivery and execution are sorely in need of help. I thought that is what that favorite son-in-law was there for???

Money and greed by the large corporations is the bottom line. Many, many years ago, American, British, Canadian, Australian and other Western universities opened their doors to teach non-Western students.

Most of the students took their learning and skills back to their own countries to teach their own students, and it continued with assistance from Western countries with monetary aid.

The result is now before you, education, knowledge and skills from non-Western highly educated people is leaving Western -skilled people behind.

Another problem is that when making a 'phone call to most companies for support or advice, the person answering the query is usually from a non-Western country, and I have experienced on many occasions the person, either male or female is very difficult to understand.

Low-cost labour hire from overseas, young people in America, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc; are unemployed, not due to lack of ability, due to GREED by large corporations, big profits, care for the shareholders, dis-loyalty to their own country and it's people, no respect for the millions of men and women who died to keep them free, and all the benefits that go with living in a free country.

Along with many grossly over-paid politicians, bankers, media moguls in each Western country, they are basically disgusting human beings, selfish to the core!

 

[wiyosaya]

Fairly confident nobody other than anti-Trumpers will care about that. Triggered insiders are part of the swamp.

To quote an old comic book phrase, "Who watches the Watchmen?"

I think, in our own way, each of us wants the same thing. Where we disagree is how to accomplish it.

If there is no oversight on either side, is there any way to be sure that what is being done is consistent with the values and laws of the US? Does draining the swamp mean that Trump gets to do his own thing regardless of the law or the constitution? If so, then this country has a hell of a lot more to worry about than who is in the WH; if the freedoms that this country values so much are eroded in any manner by any president, then how long before there are no freedoms left?

If you want to drain the swamp of oversight, too, more power to you.

If I believed that any president, no matter who it was/is or what party they were from, was doing something that was treasonous or otherwise against the law, I would be right there in calling for impeachment, or prosecution for treason.

 

[davislane1]

I think, in our own way, each of us wants the same thing. Where we disagree is how to accomplish it.

Ergo, the futility of multiculturalism.

 

[wiyosaya]

Ergo, the futility of multiculturalism.

Good luck with that. As history has proven many times before, purity is undefinable. Dynasties that have gone that path are no more. Being a history student, I am surprised that somehow you seem to think it is achievable given the number of times that dynasties have tried it over the millennia.

Or is this cultural anger based on your heritage?

The Sioux have a saying, and many other indigenous cultures a similar saying, Mitákuye Oyás’Iŋ or All are Related. IMO, it is long past the time that humanity is able to segregate portions of itself, unless you are one of those tribes in the world that has never had outside contact. Humanity is one race. In discriminating against portions of humanity, humanity discriminates against itself.

 

[davislane1]

Good luck with that. As history has proven many times before, purity is undefinable. Dynasties that have gone that path are no more. Being a history student, I am surprised that somehow you seem to think it is achievable given the number of times that dynasties have tried it over the millennia.

This is the second time you've tried to suggest I am advocating for "purity." Your dishonesty is noted (again) and subsequent responses in this thread will be ignored.

Or is this cultural anger based on your heritage?

You need to stop projecting. My genetic heritage includes, but is not limited to:

Africans
Europeans
Native Americans

What has been done historically to either population has no emotional relevance to me at all. All I care about is that English remains the primary language in my country (it is increasingly not), that Western beliefs and values are the culturally dominant forces in my country (they are increasingly not), that demographic trends ensure things will stay that way (they are increasingly not), and that populations with a propensity for violence are kept out (which is not happening).

I actually pinned a tweet a while back outlining this. Here's the quote:

Immigration reform simplified: 1. Preserve demographhic composition of US. 2. No consideration w/o renunciation of origin culture.

https://twitter.com/davislane1/status/798226210283089920

I also wrote a post about this on one of my blogs. The relevant excerpt is here:

A nation is its people. It is not the lines drawn on a map, a legal document proclaiming a tribe's collective ownership of an allotment of geography, or an "idea."

Many who believe in the Poposition Nation will dispute this. They will tell you that nations can be adopted, if only a foreigner is willing.

While it is true that man, being an especially capable creature, is able to change his colors (and some do), the notion that Americans, or Swedes, or Germans reside on magical population-transforming dirt is absurd.

Imagine, if you will, a giant teleporter. This massive land-based platform is so powerful that it can move any group of people from one place on the planet to another.

Now, imagine if someone used this teleporter to transplant vast numbers of people from one country to another. We will call this person The Conductor, as his role is to manage the flow of people on Earth.

The Conductor pulls a few levers, flips a few switches, and presses some ominous-looking buttons. The machine kicks into gear and the entire population of Uganda vanishes in a brilliant white light that can be seen from space.

Moments later, the ground in Tokyo begins to shake and rattle as thunder cracks in the sky.

Then it happens. A solitary bolt of lightning strikes the ground at the heart of the city with a sonic crack so penetrating it activates car alarms and shatters windows.

As if by magic, millions of Ugandans pour out of the strikepoint and begin to flood into the city.

Bewildered and amazed, the Japanese stand in awe at what they have just witnessed. Moments later, they disappear in a brilliant, shimmering white light only to thunderously reappear in Turkey minutes later.

The Conductor has done his job: There are no longer any Ugandans in Uganda. Likewise, there are no more Japanese in Japan. Each population has been transplanted to a different territory (somebody will have to deal with the Turks in the morning).

Now I have a question for you:

Have the Japanese become Turks?

The opposite of this view, which you have proposed, is historically and scientifically illiterate.

 

[captaincranky]

...[ ]....The Sioux have a saying, and many other indigenous cultures a similar saying, Mitákuye Oyás’Iŋ or All are Related. IMO, it is long past the time that humanity is able to segregate portions of itself, unless you are one of those tribes in the world that has never had outside contact

I'm sure at at one time or another, the Sioux nation has gone to war with its "brothers". That's the thing with "family", sometimes they get along worse with each other than they do with outsiders. But, outsiders aren't trusted or tolerated as "well".

And BTW, if any Indian "nation" was, "at one with all others", none of them would have had to invent the "peace pipe", now would they? (Although it does seem to be within human nature to enjoy getting stoned just for the hell of it).

Humanity is one race. In discriminating against portions of humanity, humanity discriminates against itself.

This is where you're dead wrong. The "human race", consists of, at minimun four (4) sub-species. Ages ago, when, "biological classification was all the rage", scientists tried to float, (quite unsuccessfully), that very concept, but were thwarted with what could only be described as "political and religious correctness". Beings as, religion says "man is not an animal, period", and little old English ladies at tea parties couldn't bring themselves to face, nor would they ever likely have the opportunity to be confronted by, a six foot tall, jet black, Zulu or Masai warrior! Yet the differences in "coloration", and "physiology" are truly astounding.

The world's peoples would easily qualify as sub species, assuming they were being categorized from a distance, by beings evolved to a higher degree than Homo sapiens . One, we are the same species. (We can freely interbreed without risk of sterile offspring) That's really the extent of our "oneness" Physical, (geographic boundaries), have given rise to such dramatic differences in size, facial appearance, and coloration, in any other animal, it would be a slam dunk to classify several groups of humans as "sub species". This is purely an "intellectual truth", in all honesty held by me without prejudice toward any specific group.

However, our "basic animal behaviors", (human nature is really explained by Darwinian principles), and to a perhaps larger degree, heavily reinforced by the differences in our cultural beliefs and socialization strategies, which all point toward difference rather than sameness..

Taking both sides of the coin into consideration, we derive perhaps what could be deemed doggerel as the ultimate conclusion,. Are we the same? Yes, absolutely! Are we different? Yes, totally!

As testimony to the truth, or if you prefer "validity" of what I've just posted, a ustedes yo les presento, 6 of the 9 potential sub species of Tigers:

• Amur (or Siberian) tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) ...
• Indian (or Bengal) tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) ...
• South China tiger (Panthera tigris amoyensis) ...
• Malayan tiger (Panthera tigris jacksoni) ...
• Indo-Chinese tiger (Panthera tigris corbetti) ...
• Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae)

They all can interbreed without fear of sterile offspring, they are all groups separated by geographic boundaries, and, to throw in something tasteless but often spoken by humans, "they all look alike to me"! Furthermore, taxonomists often use the term "race" as an alternate term for "sub species".

@wiyosaya I'm going to post about the intelligence issues presented by the 2nd Gulf War in better detail, but I type very slowly, and I have to feed my cats. Later!

 

[wiyosaya]

This is where you're dead wrong. The "human race", consists of, at minimun four (4) sub-species.

@captaincranky And that is where we might agree to disagree. The impact of language is to classify items. It is a construct of language that belies essential infinitesimally small genetic differences. Some argue that language prevents things from being seen as they really are. That Shakespeare quote, "A Rose by any other name would surely smell as sweet" comes to mind.

I am not going to argue that any civilization was perfect. I will, however, argue that all civilizations, cultures, peoples, etc., are flawed. As I see it, humanity has to make a decision as to whether they want to focus on the flaws, or finding common ground. If it is the flaws, there may be little left standing when all is settled by the victor's standards.

I will argue, too, that many cultures, civilizations, etc., have provided jewels of wisdom. If you want to throw all those away because of the flaws they have, good luck with that.

One thing from Trump that I could get behind is that he claims to want to bolster the space program. As I see it, though, that is something that would be more likely achievable if there were cooperation between nations. Right now, IMO, Trump has shown no indication of wanting to cooperate with anyone. He thinks he is King and wants everyone to know it. Even some evangelicals are against his immigration ban.

 

[wiyosaya]

This is the second time you've tried to suggest I am advocating for "purity." Your dishonesty is noted (again) and subsequent responses in this thread will be ignored.

You need to stop projecting. My genetic heritage includes, but is not limited to:

Africans
Europeans
Native Americans

What has been done historically to either population has no emotional relevance to me at all. All I care about is that English remains the primary language in my country (it is increasingly not), that Western beliefs and values are the culturally dominant forces in my country (they are increasingly not), that demographic trends ensure things will stay that way (they are increasingly not), and that populations with a propensity for violence are kept out (which is not happening).

I actually pinned a tweet a while back outlining this. Here's the quote:



https://twitter.com/davislane1/status/798226210283089920

I also wrote a post about this on one of my blogs. The relevant excerpt is here:



The opposite of this view, which you have proposed, is historically and scientifically illiterate.

@davislane1 Wow! I don't know what you have been smoking, dropping, etc., but it must be some amazing stuff.

Perhaps, when you tell me that all you care about

is that English remains the primary language in my country (it is increasingly not), that Western beliefs and values are the culturally dominant forces in my country (they are increasingly not), that demographic trends ensure things will stay that way (they are increasingly not)

, (note of course, that these are your exact words) you should have the dictionary definition of "Purity" handy. Just in case you need to remind yourself of it - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/purity?s=t

Have fun!

 

[burnt-toast]

I hear that many countries are considering banning ALL Americans from entering their country, as a tit-for-tat response.

A bit extreme - but I guess they are only meeting like with like !

The man's an *****.

 

[captaincranky]

I hear that many countries are considering banning ALL Americans from entering their country, as a tit-for-tat response.

Well, there are a number of countries in the world which aren't safe for Americans in the first place.

IA bit extreme - but I guess they are only meeting like with like !

Americans have a lot of money. Many destinations in the world are dependent on tourism for a goodly portion of the revenue.

It would be great for Americans to spend their tourism dollars right here in America. Instead of, for example, being blown up in a London subway, or run over by a tractor trailer in an outdoor German shopping mall.

Some prime tourist destinations in the USA are, The Grand Canyon, Cape Cod, Colonial Williamsburg Virginia, New York City, Philadelphia, the Entire Jersey shore, Washington DC, all of our National Parks, San Francisco, The Alamo, Disneyland and Universal Studio theme parks, to name just a few.

The man's an *****.

So, Trump gave Americans an excuse to spend those hard earned American dollars right here at home, where they'll do the most good. It seems the man can make more lemonade accidentally, than you, your mommy and daddy, and ten of your "Facebook friends", can ever hope to pour on purpose.

And since you put it this way, "The man's an ***** ", I figure it's fair for me to say, "we've got a new **** in Washington DC, and a new **** here at Techspot as well"! Welcome to the forum.

 

[burnt-toast]

Well, there are a number of countries in the world which aren't safe for Americans in the first place.

Americans have a lot of money. Many destinations in the world are dependent on tourism for a goodly portion of the revenue.

It would be great for Americans to spend their tourism dollars right here in America. Instead of, for example, being blown up in a London subway, or run over by a tractor trailer in an outdoor German shopping mall.

Some prime tourist destinations in the USA are, The Grand Canyon, Cape Cod, Colonial Williamsburg Virginia, New York City, Philadelphia, the Entire Jersey shore, Washington DC, all of our National Parks, San Francisco, The Alamo, Disneyland and Universal Studio theme parks, to name just a few.
So, Trump gave Americans an excuse to spend those hard earned American dollars right here at home, where they'll do the most good. It seems the man can make more lemonade accidentally, than you, your mommy and daddy, and ten of your "Facebook friends", can ever hope to pour on purpose.

And since you put it this way, "The man's an ***** ", I figure it's fair for me to say, "we've got a new **** in Washington DC, and a new **** here at Techspot as well"! Welcome to the forum.

Ha. Thanks for that.
I should point out that the 5 'stars' weren't what I wrote - but it wasn't a bad word either. I have no idea why it was 'starred out'.
But that's 'by the way'.

I don't necessarily disagree with much of what you say, or with some of Trump's ideas.
I DO disagree with his way of presenting and articulating them. He seems to be looking for controversy, and the trouble and condemnation that it brings.
He really, honestly, could do better in that aspect, rather than looking to bring trouble on himself.

But maybe that's the way he wants to show everyone that he's the boss.
My feeling is that can only work for so long.

By the way, I left 'Facebook' long ago. Don't agree with 'Z' ways either !

 

[captaincranky]

...[ ]...I don't necessarily disagree with much of what you say, or with some of Trump's ideas.
I DO disagree with his way of presenting and articulating them. He seems to be looking for controversy, and the trouble and condemnation that it brings.
He really, honestly, could do better in that aspect, rather than looking to bring trouble on himself.

But maybe that's the way he wants to show everyone that he's the boss.

Even the most ardent of Trump's supporters would have to acknowledge that he's a bit drunk with power for now. ATM.

Still, if you or I were elected president of the US, we would more than likely be acting even more power mad and egotistical, than "The Donald".

What people don't seem to get, is that it isn't a problem to adjust from an extremely liberal government to an extremely conservative one. It's as they always say, "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop". Which pretty much summarizes the shock liberals are feeling right now.

Incidentally, all those peaceful liberal souls can turn over trash cans, break windows, riot in the streets and set cars ablaze with the best of them, when they don't get their own way.

With certain things, like woman's issues, I completely disagree with Trump's positions. However, the approach women's groups are taking like, "getting out in front of the issues with protests now", are tantamount to, "crying before you're hurt". This current set of marches will be long forgotten, or at least ignored, by the time "Roe v. Wade" is heard again for the umpteenth time. When it's actually being heard, that's the time to camp out and b!tch, right smack on the Supreme Court's steps.

 

[burnt-toast]

Fair enough ! I've no quarrel with any of that.