|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 22 2018 06:05 kollin wrote:
There is literally no point in trying to get someone to care about morality if they don't see some sort of fundamental worth in individual human life. It is a waste of time.
He has entered into the classic nationalist argument that he values his fellow citizen’s lives more than the those of people fleeing violence from other nations. Of course he evokes the jingoistic “American Lives” while not delving into what makes an American live of greater value that those of the asylum seeker. Were we to bore down into why those seeking asylum are of lesser value, we would see a more odious reasoning behind their lack of value .
He hints at it, with the concern about letting them procreate and granting them rights. What could cause this terrible vision of America he has, 100 years from now, having allowed people fleeing violence to stay and live among us? What about these people does he see as a threat?
|
On June 22 2018 06:07 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:05 kollin wrote:
There is literally no point in trying to get someone to care about morality if they don't see some sort of fundamental worth in individual human life. It is a waste of time. as devil's advocate, I'd argue it might be theoretically possible to make a successful argument anyways; it of course requires taking a very different approach. but even then it depends on whether you're actually trying to argue from reason, or just arguing with rationalizations (in which case you'd need to get at the emotional root in order to understand how to manipulate them into agreeing)
I think it depends on whether Thunderjunk is asking WHY we should do anything about immigrants, or why we should DO anything about immigrants. I think most reasonable people can be convinced of the latter, whereas the former is more hopeless because, rather than being rationalised or manipulated into morality, he (or she) would have to be manipulated into humanity.
EDIT: Though what this does show, quite interestingly, is the difficulty of actually rationally justifying human rights to someone unconvinced of their value.
|
On June 22 2018 06:14 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:07 zlefin wrote:On June 22 2018 06:05 kollin wrote:
There is literally no point in trying to get someone to care about morality if they don't see some sort of fundamental worth in individual human life. It is a waste of time. as devil's advocate, I'd argue it might be theoretically possible to make a successful argument anyways; it of course requires taking a very different approach. but even then it depends on whether you're actually trying to argue from reason, or just arguing with rationalizations (in which case you'd need to get at the emotional root in order to understand how to manipulate them into agreeing) I think it depends on whether Thunderjunk is asking WHY we should do anything about immigrants, or why we should DO anything about immigrants. I think most reasonable people can be convinced of the latter, whereas the former is more hopeless because, rather than being rationalised or manipulated into morality, he (or she) would have to be manipulated into humanity. EDIT: Though what this does show, quite interestingly, is the difficulty of actually rationally justifying human rights to someone unconvinced of their value.
you could still do the former; though it'd be tricky. you could make some arguments from convergent evolution, and the effects of memetic choices on group survival.
|
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war.
|
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech.
|
On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war.
As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can.
|
On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech.
1) Oops.
2) Defeatist.
3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.
4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization.
|
On June 22 2018 06:35 ThunderJunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war. As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can.
You can have the courage of your convictions and stated your carefully thought out justification why American lives have more value than the asylum seeker. But I think you are worried that justification might not be welcome on the website known as teamliquid.net.
On June 22 2018 06:38 ThunderJunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech. 1) Oops. 2) Defeatist. 3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization.
Edit: Empathy is the courage to put yourself into the shoes of someone else suffering to better understand it. It is seen as weakness by people who fear the power of their own emotions and cannot be bothered to get over that fear.
|
On June 22 2018 06:42 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:35 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war. As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can. You can have the courage of your convictions and stated your carefully thought out justification why American lives have more value than the asylum seeker. But I think you are worried that justification might not be welcome on the website known as teamliquid.net.
Nope, I'm all out of justifications. The asylum argument is rock solid.
Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:38 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech. 1) Oops. 2) Defeatist. 3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization. Edit: Empathy is the courage to put yourself into the shoes of someone else suffering to better understand it. It is seen as weakness by people who fear the power of their own emotions and cannot be bothered to get over that fear.
Empathy is a weapon used by weak people to control your mind, and make your muscles give them your gains.
|
On June 22 2018 06:52 ThunderJunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:42 Plansix wrote:On June 22 2018 06:35 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war. As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can. You can have the courage of your convictions and stated your carefully thought out justification why American lives have more value than the asylum seeker. But I think you are worried that justification might not be welcome on the website known as teamliquid.net. Nope, I'm all out of justifications. The asylum argument is rock solid. Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:38 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech. 1) Oops. 2) Defeatist. 3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization. Edit: Empathy is the courage to put yourself into the shoes of someone else suffering to better understand it. It is seen as weakness by people who fear the power of their own emotions and cannot be bothered to get over that fear. Empathy is a weapon used by weak people to control your mind, and make your muscles give them your gains.
RenSC2 literally just gave you a reason as to why empathy is good for a species, and you try to argue it with "no, bad!". Do you think that makes you a reasonable human being who can be discussed with? If you're not open to the idea that you could wrong and learn something, then you are yourself a weak minded person. And as you've mentioned, we can't afford weak minded people in our society right now, because Andromeda is going to crash into us in 4 billion years.
|
On June 22 2018 06:52 ThunderJunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:42 Plansix wrote:On June 22 2018 06:35 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war. As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can. You can have the courage of your convictions and stated your carefully thought out justification why American lives have more value than the asylum seeker. But I think you are worried that justification might not be welcome on the website known as teamliquid.net. Nope, I'm all out of justifications. The asylum argument is rock solid. Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:38 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech. 1) Oops. 2) Defeatist. 3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization. Edit: Empathy is the courage to put yourself into the shoes of someone else suffering to better understand it. It is seen as weakness by people who fear the power of their own emotions and cannot be bothered to get over that fear. Empathy is a weapon used by weak people to control your mind, and make your muscles give them your gains.
I have never meet anyone who is empathetic that would be described as weak. Empathy is something you feel, not something that is inflicted on you.
|
On June 22 2018 06:55 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:52 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:42 Plansix wrote:On June 22 2018 06:35 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:24 Plansix wrote:
The real reason to respond is to undercut his narrative of being the rational thinker vs an emotional humanist. Evoking the mantle of the rational actor, being above petty emotions that may drive less people to make unsound decisions(like helping asylum seeker), is always a cover for a more odious views that cannot be expressed without intimidate rebuttal.
And also to undercut the narrative that accepting asylum seekers is an irrational act. The reason we have an asylum system is because of a rational view on the impact of destabilized nations and that people migrating from those regions have to go someplace. And not having a system leads to those migrants being abused and destabilizing whatever region they happen to end up in. The asylum system and accepting refugees is an effort to control and lessen the unpredictable consequences of natural disaster and war. As much as I don't want to admit defeat. I think I've taken this about as far as I can. You can have the courage of your convictions and stated your carefully thought out justification why American lives have more value than the asylum seeker. But I think you are worried that justification might not be welcome on the website known as teamliquid.net. Nope, I'm all out of justifications. The asylum argument is rock solid. On June 22 2018 06:38 ThunderJunk wrote:On June 22 2018 06:25 RenSC2 wrote:
Thunderjunk, there is so much wrong with your last post, which isn't any better than your first couple. A few key ones:
1) The milky way will collide with andromeda in approximately 4 billion years, not 1.5 million.
2) We likely won't last that long anyways. Humanity is learning to harness more and more power, which can be used for good, but also for evil. One particularly evil man in a position of major power could destroy the surface of the world already.
3) Empathy is probably a genetic negative on the small scale as unempathetic people take more for themselves at the expense of others. So our society may eventually be held together by laws, but no morals coming from empathy. When those laws break down, it could be nearly species ending. Empathy tends to be good for a species overall and unempathetic people are leeches on that society. So we should promote empathy as a good for the human species and tell selfish jerks to fuck off (or cut off their balls to prevent procreation... but empathetic people wouldn't ever do that).
4) New ideas tend to be the combination of old ideas. So if you bring in immigrants, you tend to get a meeting of old disparate ideas which lead to new discoveries. America as the immigrant nation was a world leader in advancements for quite some time. Likewise, the acceptance of western culture into the far east has also helped make countries like Japan into world leaders in tech. 1) Oops. 2) Defeatist. 3) Empathy is a tactic used by weaker people to guilt stronger people into sharing more.4) How does Japan and the U.S. have anything to do with old/new? They're just totally different trajectories. The U.S. is an innovator and Japan is a leader in optimization. Edit: Empathy is the courage to put yourself into the shoes of someone else suffering to better understand it. It is seen as weakness by people who fear the power of their own emotions and cannot be bothered to get over that fear. Empathy is a weapon used by weak people to control your mind, and make your muscles give them your gains. RenSC2 literally just gave you a reason as to why empathy is good for a species, and you try to argue it with "no, bad!". Do you think that makes you a reasonable human being who can be discussed with? If you're not open to the idea that you could wrong and learn something, then you are yourself a weak minded person. And as you've mentioned, we can't afford weak minded people in our society right now, because Andromeda is going to crash into us in 4 billion years.
I admitted I was wrong in the top half of the post to something else. I can disagree about empathy.
|
You feel it because it's inflicted on you. Like a cold, or herpes.
|
On June 22 2018 06:59 ThunderJunk wrote:
You feel it because it's inflicted on you. Like a cold, or herpes.
I get it, empathy is like herpes in that most people lie/don't know they have it and have to take drugs to pretend like it doesn't exist. The few people without it are irrationally terrified they might catch it.
|
My guy, you need to go to a therapist. That is an utterly unhealthy way to view your own emotions and feeling towards fellow humamd.
|
On June 22 2018 07:02 Plansix wrote:
My guy, you need to go to a therapist. That is an utterly unhealthy way to view your own emotions and feeling towards fellow humamd.
Unfortunately, conditions like these are not something that can be cured through a therapist or otherwise. Some people are just born with a varying degree of lack of empathy, and we call is psychopathy or sociopathy. (and as GH mentioned earlier, it's been medically proven by seeing how much of a certain section of the brain lights up). Hell, TJ even views it as a strength rather than a weakness, so it would be arguably unethical to even try to fix it.
|
I'd also like to mention, unrelatedly, that the idea that people thought it utterly insane that the earth is round has been wrong for a very long time.
Especially during columbuses time, which is usually mentioned. The reason that columbus didn't get a lot of support was not because people thought the earth is flat. It was because he was wrong. He calculated the circumference of the globe completely incorrect, and people rightfully told him he was wrong. If he hadn't utterly lucked out and random found a continent which no one, Columbus included, expected to be there, he and his whole crew would have died of thirst long before reaching asia.
Since there have been two major mistakes in the two things which ThunderJunk confidently mentioned as examples, i would suggest that he tries to reexamine the rest of his assumptions. Apparently you do not know nearly as much about stuff as you think you do, or you are trying to troll us.
|
On June 22 2018 07:02 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 06:59 ThunderJunk wrote:
You feel it because it's inflicted on you. Like a cold, or herpes. I get it, empathy is like herpes in that most people lie/don't know they have it and have to take drugs to pretend like it doesn't exist. The few people without it are irrationally terrified they might catch it.
It's not a trait, it's an experience in the moment. A weak person thinks, "Aw man, I'm mad that guy has a more beautiful body than me. It's because he eats better, works harder, and is superior to me, but I don't want to be accountable for my weakness, so I'm gonna blast him with some Empathy."
Okay, I'm sorry I don't want to derail the thread. Get back to talking about legit things plz.
|
On June 22 2018 07:12 ThunderJunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2018 07:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 22 2018 06:59 ThunderJunk wrote:
You feel it because it's inflicted on you. Like a cold, or herpes. I get it, empathy is like herpes in that most people lie/don't know they have it and have to take drugs to pretend like it doesn't exist. The few people without it are irrationally terrified they might catch it. It's not a trait, it's an experience in the moment. A weak person thinks, "Aw man, I'm mad that guy has a more beautiful body than me. It's because he eats better, works harder, and is superior to me, but I don't want to be accountable for my weakness, so I'm gonna blast him with some Empathy." Okay, I'm sorry I don't want to derail the thread. Get back to talking about legit things plz.
You don't really sound like you know what empathy is so much as you sound like you have severe self-esteem and self-worth issues. I hope things turn round for you
|
Every once in a while those hipsters out in Oregon show people what being too ignorant/stubborn to accept that they "can't do anything" can accomplish.
The agency says safety concerns from staffers who had been blocked from leaving the facility have "temporarily halted" ICE operations.
Protesters started occupying the property around the ICE building on Macadam Avenue on Sunday evening, and the protest has grown to include more than two dozen tents and at times hundreds of demonstrators.
An ICE spokeswoman said in an email that the agency will re-open the building when the safety concerns from the protest have been addressed.
Here's the agency's full statement on the closure:
“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) fully respects the rights of all people to voice their opinion without interference. ICE remains committed to immigration enforcement consistent with federal law and agency policy. The Federal Protective Service was called to the ICE office on Macadam Avenue Tuesday afternoon due to security concerns resulting from the ongoing protests at this location. Questions regarding arrests that took place should be directed to the Federal Protective Service. ICE operations at this location have been temporarily halted due to security concerns. Normal operations will resume once security concerns have been addressed. “Appointments scheduled for Wednesday at the ICE office on Macadam Avenue have been canceled. ICE deportation officers will touch base with individuals who had scheduled appointments at this location to reschedule. These appointments will not be reported as missed check-ins.”
www.wweek.com
As for clearing out the protesters. It doesn't look like they'll be getting much help from local officials.
.
You want to stop ICE from abusing and terrorizing people in or around your communities? That's what it's going to take.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
