One LARGE order of S-HOLE coming right up!

[Kutnupe14]

I wonder what his opinion will be when the pendulum inevitably swings the other way, as it always does.

It will be just as wrong in the future, as it is now, and in the past... and I won't be clamoring for the United States to start admitting refugees.

 

[Dead Duck]

It will be just as wrong in the future, as it is now, and in the past... and I won't be clamoring for the United States to start admitting refugees unless she's Smokin HOT.

FIFY

 

[KLB]

Are you guys being purposefully obtuse, or it is just that anything Kut says must be opposed?

What is going on there is wrong and bad. What makes it worse than any of the other horrible situations in the world today that we aren't saving people from?

The US cannot and should not try to be the world's policeman and savior.

 

[jbombelli]

Just as I've said about people in other countries, their problems are not my problem. If they want their freedom, let them fight for it. If they would rather run away then they aren't the type of people I want here.

 

[CampingJosh]

Just as I've said about people in other countries, their problems are not my problem. If they want their freedom, let them fight for it. If they would rather run away then they aren't the type of people I want here.

In many countries, they have no weapons with which to fight. Firearms in South Africa are heavily restricted.

ETA: Though it is at least a bit of irony that the gun regulations were almost certainly put in place to that the white minority could maintain power over the black majority. As we here all recognize, that's the real reason for gun bans.

 

[jamil]

Thank you Jamil for sticking up for me, rather than play into the nonsense.

At first it seemed that you were saying, “can you blame them?” But you’ve made it clear enough since that you’re just saying it’s a cause.

 

[printcraft]

Seems like it would be appropriate for Western governments to denounce such actions.

Yes, it would. JUST like they did during apartheid.
But now they’re not saying a word.
Weird right?
Maybe it’s because South Africa made their bed and it’s time for payback.
Revenge is justified.

 

[jbombelli]

In many countries, they have no weapons with which to fight. Firearms in South Africa are heavily restricted.

ETA: Though it is at least a bit of irony that the gun regulations were almost certainly put in place to that the white minority could maintain power over the black majority. As we here all recognize, that's the real reason for gun bans.

They reap what they sow. Just like us.

 

[BugI02]

People always start their oppressive government regime based on the idea that they were oppressed by X group, then seek out means of getting revenge.

[The quote you were replying to]

Oh, well, that actually is true. Noteworthy difference is that sometimes the idea is factual, like in blacks being victims of oppression South Africa, and sometimes it's bogus, like Jews being oppressed in Nazi Germany.

[Your reply, quoted]

Wow. You don't think the Nazis using the Jews as scapegoats was bogus?

[Kutsplaining]


Not certain I buy it, considering it comes from someone who claims to use words so precisely

I would think it should say something more like "... and sometimes it's bogus, like [STRIKE]Jews being[/STRIKE] [Germans claining they were oppressed and betrayed by Jews] [STRIKE]in[/STRIKE] [prior to the rise of] Nazi Germany."

In light of, IMO, a predilection to support the Palestinian narrative vis a vis Israel, I find it .... Freudian, perhaps

 

[BugI02]

I don’t think he’s saying it’s justified. He’s saying the past is a cause.

Isn't that how you wind up with the [Name goes here] martyr's brigade and people who never knew [Name] killing other people who never knew [Name] fifty years later?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you guys being purposefully obtuse, or it is just that anything Kut says must be opposed?

What is going on there is wrong and bad. What makes it worse than any of the other horrible situations in the world today that we aren't saving people from?

The US cannot and should not try to be the world's policeman and savior.

They can certainly be both.

 

[BugI02]

Are you guys being purposefully obtuse, or it is just that anything Kut says must be opposed?

What is going on there is wrong and bad. What makes it worse than any of the other horrible situations in the world today that we aren't saving people from?

The US cannot and should not try to be the world's policeman and savior.

It's the (not unexpected) hypocrisy that grates. The support of migration from ****-hole countries to the US for no other reason than because the conditions are a ****-hole, when the migrants are perceived to be of the proper skin tone. Then coming out quickly against the migration of people from a country intent on becoming a ****-hole to the US seemingly for no other reason than their skin tone. The disingenuous idea that the people being killed in these situations ever deserve it, are ever more than little people caught in the gears

The spectacle of someone who likes to intimate dark racial motives beneath the surface of positions others advocate seemingly having those same motives ensconced in his own positions

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Are you guys being purposefully obtuse, or it is just that anything Kut says must be opposed?

I get the opinion he likes being in that role. If he didn't, there are less evasive, more incisive ways of presenting his alternate views.

 

[KLB]

It's the (not unexpected) hypocrisy that grates. The support of migration from ****-hole countries to the US for no other reason than because the conditions are a ****-hole, when the migrants are perceived to be of the proper skin tone. Then coming out quickly against the migration of people from a country intent on becoming a ****-hole to the US seemingly for no other reason than their skin tone. The disingenuous idea that the people being killed in these situations ever deserve it, are ever more than little people caught in the gears

The spectacle of someone who likes to intimate dark racial motives beneath the surface of positions others advocate seemingly having those same motives ensconced in his own positions

I must have missed the thread where he did that. I have seen him question others being against it supposedly because of the color of the skin of the people involved. I have not seen him say it was OK because of the same.

The point in this one has been, why are those that were so against others being brought here, now in favor of these people being brought here? Why is it relevant that these people are white and their antagonists are black? There are people of all colors killing people of all colors all over the world right now. It is not our place to try to save them, no matter what color their skin is.

There are rules in pace for immigrating to this country. These people can follow those rules like everyone else. It wasn't right in the past cases to ignore them, nor would it be right to use past mistakes to excuse new ones.

 

[printcraft]

I must have missed the thread where he did that. I have seen him question others being against it supposedly because of the color of the skin of the people involved. I have not seen him say it was OK because of the same.

The point in this one has been, why are those that were so against others being brought here, now in favor of these people being brought here? Why is it relevant that these people are white and their antagonists are black? There are people of all colors killing people of all colors all over the world right now. It is not our place to try to save them, no matter what color their skin is.

There are rules in pace for immigrating to this country. These people can follow those rules like everyone else. It wasn't right in the past cases to ignore them, nor would it be right to use past mistakes to excuse new ones.

Yes, and when THAT very yardstick is used when viewing his "motives" as to the same circumstances it's suddenly being obtuse?

 

[BugI02]

I must have missed the thread where he did that. I have seen him question others being against it supposedly because of the color of the skin of the people involved. I have not seen him say it was OK because of the same.

[As I am questioning him being against emmigration by the farmers to the US apparently solely because they are predominantly white (and thus guilty of oppressing SA blacks solely because of that characteristic - no other evidence offered) If wanting to leave a ****-hole and reside in a place like the US is OK because your current country of residence is a ****-hole - and only because of that - nothing else should matter. I am not aware of any argument being made that any Haitians should be denied TPS even if they were implicated in the ****-holeness of the country they wanted to leave (TonTons or their descendants)]

The point in this one has been, why are those that were so against others being brought here, now in favor of these people being brought here? Why is it relevant that these people are white and their antagonists are black? There are people of all colors killing people of all colors all over the world right now. It is not our place to try to save them, no matter what color their skin is.

[No, actually it is the obverse of that, the suspicion that for some on this board only POC can ever be oppressed and ever deserve special considerations on entry. We merely offer them a chance to demonstrate ... consistency. Or not]

There are rules in pace for immigrating to this country. These people can follow those rules like everyone else. It wasn't right in the past cases to ignore them, nor would it be right to use past mistakes to excuse new ones.

So you are saying TPS has no legal basis and those people should be sent home where they can apply for visas just like everyone else? And if not, what would be the rationale for advocating that they stay?

ETA: And there is a bit of conflation going on IMO. You assume that because someone is against people on TPS being allowed to stay permanently, short-cutting those rules that you speak fondly of, that those same people were against the humanitarian reason for allowing them to come here in the first place. The Salvadorans have been here in some cases since 1990 and the Haitians since 2010 and there are at least six other groups (Honduras,Nepal, Nicaragua, Sudan, Syria, Yemen) also on TPS. If following the process should be required, what of them. If not following the process is acceptable in certain situations, are those situations dissimilar from what is extant in SA

 

[Kutnupe14]

I must have missed the thread where he did that. I have seen him question others being against it supposedly because of the color of the skin of the people involved. I have not seen him say it was OK because of the same.

The point in this one has been, why are those that were so against others being brought here, now in favor of these people being brought here? Why is it relevant that these people are white and their antagonists are black? There are people of all colors killing people of all colors all over the world right now. It is not our place to try to save them, no matter what color their skin is.

There are rules in pace for immigrating to this country. These people can follow those rules like everyone else. It wasn't right in the past cases to ignore them, nor would it be right to use past mistakes to excuse new ones.

Probably because I didn't say that. And I'd challenge anyone to find a post where I have supported one group of people coming here over another. I have been steadfast in saying I don't want anybody coming here. I just take up so much room in people's head, they're trying to make me pay rent somehow. When on a peddles porn, the other a stalker, so it's easy to dismiss their nonsense.

 

[printcraft]

Probably because I didn't say that. And I'd challenge anyone to find a post where I have supported one group of people coming here over another. I have been steadfast in saying I don't want anybody coming here. I just take up so much room in people's head, they're trying to make me pay rent somehow.

That's not what this is about.

You ascribed motives to those who were in favor of bringing these people in.

 

[Kutnupe14]

 

[printcraft]

Nah mate, I can read...

Why is it OK for these people but not others?

Is there a purple version of this:

I don't agree. Past mistakes do not excuse future mistakes. This is no different than being in favor of your guy in office doing while bemoaning the last guy in office doing it.

If you don't agree with the past cases, why would you be in favor of this one?

Seriously, do you really not know, or do you simply want to see if someone will admit it?

I can make assumptions.

I think there are multiple reasons depending upon who it is. Off the top of my head, race and financial standing come to mind.

Fair enough, "know" implies know for fact... we'll just say strong inclination to believe.

Thousands Sign Petition Asking Trump to Let White Farmers in South Africa Migrate to U.S. After Country Votes to Force Them Off Land

Interesting. I wonder if it's Trump conservatives or liberals that are the ones signing this petition.

That bigoted comments have occurred on INGO? We've all seen them. So..... Since I am a member here, and bigoted comments have been made here, then I am bigoted. Is that the leap of logic you want me to make? Otherwise, why is INGO important? Bigots are part of any cross sectional slice you take out of society.

If you're wondering why some comments go unchallenged, that could be for all sorts of reasons. Do you have specific examples you would be willing to share? I'm sure you have a whole spreadsheet built.

Nope. Why would you care now, if you didn't care then?

That is THIS thread BTW. You must be a mind reader too? But you already knew I was going to say that didn't you? You sly dog.