FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 02:40 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-02-2003, 06:42 PM   #51
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,532
Default

From Beyelzu:

Quote:
blacks are more likely to be convicted of felonies, and so any attempt to remove felons is going to remove more blacks than whites. there is absolutely no proof of deliberating targeting african americans.
First of all, one might want to question why there is a higher rate of felony conviction among African Americans and what racism has to do with that.

Second, given that fact, anyone culling the voting lists would have to know that greater numbers of African Americans would be affected.

Happy Black History Month.

RED DAVE
RED DAVE is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 07:34 PM   #52
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Silent Acorns
Not necessarily, since the Japanese were on the verge of surrendering anyway. Also, even if the Hiroshima bomb was "necessary" it is far from clear that one had to be dropped on Nagasaki too. I'm not saying this to "prove the US is evil" but to point out that the situation was much more complicated than it has been portrayed.
Yes, more complicated than it has been portrayed by the dupes of the Japanese Right who buy nonsense like this. There was never any plan to surrender -- next time you are in Japan you can visit the mountain in Nagano prefecture that the military hollowed out to act as their last stand redoubt when the US invaded. Bix suggested a few years ago that Hirohito surrendered in part because all of the Imperial regalia would not fit inside the ten miles of tunnels (dug with Korean slave labor -- need I mention that no reparations have been made?). The "Japan was going to surrender" idea is a myth. The reality is that throughout the summer of '45 Japan rejected all contacts with the US that might have led to a surrender, and in any case simply could have surrendered any time by simply getting on the air and announcing it.

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 07:38 PM   #53
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Here are some sites on the Iraq-S Africa nuke connection:
BBC article

"Mr. Pahad [of S. Africa] pointed out that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has already indicated that the British report has no substance. The IAEA insists that it is keeping an eye on stores of uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons in Africa�and they would know if any went missing."

NTI's excellent overview site is here:
CNS Nuclear and Missile Developments Database: Sample Abstracts on South Africa's Nuclear Doctrine

The British government report looks like a bit of disinformation to hide something that someone else was doing. This is not the first time such a story has appeared, and turned to vapor when light was shown on it.

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 08:09 PM   #54
Obsessed Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not Mayaned
Posts: 96,752
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Beyelzu
I read your articles and I missed the part where anybody DELIBERATELY targeted blacks while allowing white felons to continue voting.

blacks are more likely to be convicted of felonies, and so any attempt to remove felons is going to remove more blacks than whites. there is absolutely no proof of deliberating targeting african americans.
It doesn't need to be targeted in order to be effective. Target felons, period. You will hit disproportionately blacks. The ballot box isn't based on proportions, it's based on votes. Knocking out 200 blacks and 100 white is the same as knocking out 100 blacks and zero whites. Thus by indiscriminately targeting felons you have made the Republicans fare better in the election.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 08:37 PM   #55
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,532
Default

By Loren Pechtel:

Quote:
It doesn't need to be targeted in order to be effective. Target felons, period. You will hit disproportionately blacks. The ballot box isn't based on proportions, it's based on votes. Knocking out 200 blacks and 100 white is the same as knocking out 100 blacks and zero whites. Thus by indiscriminately targeting felons you have made the Republicans fare better in the election.
Thank you. My point, exactly.

RED DAVE
RED DAVE is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 08:56 PM   #56
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist
Posts: 2,869
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by RED DAVE
From Beyelzu:



First of all, one might want to question why there is a higher rate of felony conviction among African Americans and what racism has to do with that.

Second, given that fact, anyone culling the voting lists would have to know that greater numbers of African Americans would be affected.

Happy Black History Month.

RED DAVE
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that african americans are more likely to be convicted of a felony because they are 1 less likely to have a really kick ass defense attorney and 2 they are more likely to commit a felony.

I would also like to point out that florida law says that felons arent allowed to vote which has nothing to do with electin in 2000, that law would have been pre-existing.
beyelzu is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 08:59 PM   #57
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist
Posts: 2,869
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Loren Pechtel
It doesn't need to be targeted in order to be effective. Target felons, period. You will hit disproportionately blacks. The ballot box isn't based on proportions, it's based on votes. Knocking out 200 blacks and 100 white is the same as knocking out 100 blacks and zero whites. Thus by indiscriminately targeting felons you have made the Republicans fare better in the election.
regardless, the law in florida prior to the election was that felons dont get to vote.

It has been argued by others that blacks were disenfranchised intentionally. I am opposing that point. Of course not allowing felons, who as a group are disproportionately black, to vote is going to help republicans. but that has nothing to do with this particular election.
beyelzu is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 09:02 PM   #58
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist
Posts: 2,869
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by August Spies



The difference is "pointing out" implies truth. You would not "point out" an un-truth. For example if I said "Look out a blue cow is about to eat you" and you said "you liar there is no cow there" I couldn't say "oh I was just pointing out that it was there, I didn't mean it really was there."


and now having proving my assertion, I can say that I pointed it out huh?


what with the whole americans dont value human life comment?



thanks for the apology in advance.
beyelzu is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 09:23 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 638
Angry

The problem with what happened in Florida is that they rigged the rolls and denied people their constitutional right to vote. Even if all of the people who were wrongly denied were white what they did was criminal. Bush wouldn't be sitting where is he now had his brother not cheated people who had never been convicted of anything their voice.

And yet, Jeb is still doing the same job and is probably getting ready for the next election as we speak. I wonder how he'll cheat this time.
Danya is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 09:47 PM   #60
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist
Posts: 2,869
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Danya
The problem with what happened in Florida is that they rigged the rolls and denied people their constitutional right to vote. Even if all of the people who were wrongly denied were white what they did was criminal. Bush wouldn't be sitting where is he now had his brother not cheated people who had never been convicted of anything their voice.

And yet, Jeb is still doing the same job and is probably getting ready for the next election as we speak. I wonder how he'll cheat this time.
I think that the whole thing was a clusterfuck, but that doesnt mean that it was intentional or that minorities were unfairly targeted. I guess I dont see complete and utter ineffeciency as cheating.
beyelzu is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:01 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.