With The World Environment Day Conference.....

Merlin Dorfman wrote:

In ba.transportation Stan de SD wrote:


"Merlin Dorfman" wrote in message
...

In ba.transportation Frank F. Matthews

wrote:


Merlin Dorfman wrote:

...


only


2-3% of the students in those programs were black to begin with? I

recall


that out of nearly 1000 students in the natural sciences department
(Chemistry, Physics, Biology) there were maybe a dozen black

students -

and


half of those were Africans. Fact of the matter was that black

students

simply weren't intrested in that academic track, despite the effort

of

the


CC to offer all sorts of minority "outreach" programs to minorities.

And why do you suppose that is? And do you see that as a

problem,

or should we just shrug our shoulders and move on?


I don't see that as a "problem" if there aren't a bunch of PC assholes
insisting that the reason these groups are "underrepresented" is

somehow due

to "racism"...


Suppose all us PC assholes disappeared overnight, and we still
had a situation where only 2-3% of the students in the hard sciences
are black. Do you see that as a problem that the universities, or
the government, or private organizations ought to address, or do you
believe it will correct itself over time, or is it simply not a
problem and therefore it should be ignored?


If you want to force all students to take courses in mathematics and
science then, perhaps, you can do something. You can provide students
with an opportunity to take classes but it is difficult to see how to
force them into a major.

I was thinking more along the lines of working at the root cause
of the lack of minority students in these programs...surely it's not
a cultural aversion to high-paying, respected jobs...


You sure of that? I lived in a racially mixed, fairly "liberal" neighborhood
in Southern California in the 1970's. Our neighbor was a black aerospace
engineer who worked for Hughes and who saved and scrimped to bring his
family out of the ghetto and into the suburbs. Both his kids attended the
same suburban, racially mixed schools I did, but both of them became
ne'er-do-well types who dropped out of school, shacked up with their
girlfriends, and got in various scrapes with the law. Going to school and
getting good grades was considered "acting white" by their peers who lived
in the projects in northwest Pasadena, and the last thing any black kid
wanted back then was to be accused of being "white". Despite the fact that
the Pasadena Unified School District did all the good and right liberal
things such as implementing a court-ordered busing plan, electing a hispanic
superitendent (Ramon Cortinez), promoting plenty of black and hispanic
teachers as "role models", and striving for AA, there was still an almost
predestined effort to fail among some of the black kids. The fact that
blacks and hispanics aren't making it in the year 2005 has less and less to
do with vestiges of some era of racial discrimination that ended 2
generations ago and more to do with cultural attitudes of people who not
only do not hold the same values as the rest of society, but often hold them
in contempt. Now whose fault is that?


I'm not getting through, am I, Stan? I keep asking you whether
we should consider this a problem (and if so whether we should try to
do something about it), or just assume it will fix itself, or just
ignore it. And you keep describing (accurately or not) the symptoms
of what I believe is a problem (and one that has, and will continue to
have, serious consequences for the problem), and whose fault it is.



OK! I'll bite. It's the problem of the local community. Thus it is
the responsibility of the community leaders. If they complain that the
kids won't listen to them then perhaps they aren't the actual leaders of
the community.

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...
"pigo" enscribed:

You made allegations of treason against Clinton and Democrats. I
still haven't seen back up your words yet.

I said aid and comfort. And though "aid and comfort" is part of the
definition of treason it's not necessarily so that all aid and
comfort rise to the level of treason. And in my opinion, for a
senator to stand up in congress and compare Gitmo to several
genocidal campaigns is giving the current enemy aid and comfort by
encourageing them. Not to mention that it's an outright lie. Normally
I would just right it off as speach of a buffoon and sore loser
(which it is also). But in the light of things like what happened to
Trent Lott I think it only fair the same thing happen to him.

He hasn't done that. Recognizing that there are groups that can be
seperated by color or whatever doesn't mean that he is saying that
they are "inherently" inferior. They might be perfoming that way
for
any number of reasons.

Are you really so stupid you cannot realize what you just typed? Or
do you think I'm going to swallow that crap.

Are you too ignorant to know that saying whites are stupid is not the
same as saying that whites are _inherently_ stupid? That goes for
any race too. I just wanted to write _whites_ so that you wouldn't
have the opportunity to snip and selectively quote (again).

Recognizing that there are groups that can be
seperated by color

What exactly do you think racism is?

So the congressional black caucus is racist? NAACP?

I've seen your spew three times so far, and I've already detected a
pattern. You make wild, unsubstantiated allegations, and when
challenged on them, you run away. How Republican of you.

Some of your replies are just soooooooo ignorant, obvious trolls and
parroting of the stuart smalley line that it's just not worth
responding to.

"pigo" enscribed:

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...
"pigo" enscribed:

You made allegations of treason against Clinton and Democrats. I
still haven't seen back up your words yet.

I said aid and comfort. And though "aid and comfort" is part of the
definition of treason it's not necessarily so that all aid and
comfort rise to the level of treason. And in my opinion, for a
senator to stand up in congress and compare Gitmo to several
genocidal campaigns is giving the current enemy aid and comfort by

So any dissenting speech during a war in legislature or elsewhere is treason? You're using the excuse of dictators everywhe democracy isn't robust enough to function during war, so they have to shut it down during the emergency. And the emergency drags on till after they die.

encourageing them. Not to mention that it's an outright lie. Normally

No, it is not lie. He quoted FBI and DoD papers. He asked a question, which neither you nor anyone else has answered. Here's the question again:

If you had read the accounts of Guantanamo without
knowing where it was or who was involved, just the
actions taken, would you have believed American
soldiers were capable of such actions?

Well? Do you have ethics enough to stand up and answer a simple question?

I would just right it off as speach of a buffoon and sore loser
(which it is also). But in the light of things like what happened to
Trent Lott I think it only fair the same thing happen to him.

Sorry, bozo, but if you want a parallel, you're going to have to look in the MLK side of the arena. Lott cheered on bigotry and Jim Crow laws, the oppression of other human beings. Durbin attacked the oppression of other human beings. What kind morality do you have that you think defending oppression and attacking oppression are the same thing?

Are you too ignorant to know that saying whites are stupid is not the
same as saying that whites are _inherently_ stupid? That goes for

I love it when you bigots cram your feet down your gullet on your own.
I've seen your spew three times so far, and I've already detected a
pattern. You make wild, unsubstantiated allegations, and when
challenged on them, you run away. How Republican of you.

Some of your replies are just soooooooo ignorant, obvious trolls and
parroting of the stuart smalley line that it's just not worth
responding to.

Run away!

By the way, for someone who whined about "proper english", you need some remedial classes yourself.

--
Feh. Mad as heck.

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...

If you had read the accounts of Guantanamo without
knowing where it was or who was involved, just the
actions taken, would you have believed American
soldiers were capable of such actions?

Well? Do you have ethics enough to stand up and answer a simple question?

The methods of interrogation to get information out of prisoners are well
known and used all over the world. No surprise there in Guantanamo,
elsewhere, and the rest of the world.

What was a surprise is the lack of discipline when techniques were used that
are known to be ineffective. Torture is well known to be ineffective.
Lack of discipline results in not getting critical information needed to
fight terrorism and is unacceptable.

"Merlin Dorfman" wrote in message
...
In ba.transportation Stan de SD wrote:

"Merlin Dorfman" wrote in message
...
In ba.transportation Frank F. Matthews
wrote:


Merlin Dorfman wrote:

...

only

2-3% of the students in those programs were black to begin with? I

recall

that out of nearly 1000 students in the natural sciences
department
(Chemistry, Physics, Biology) there were maybe a dozen black
students -

and

half of those were Africans. Fact of the matter was that black
students
simply weren't intrested in that academic track, despite the
effort
of

the

CC to offer all sorts of minority "outreach" programs to
minorities.

And why do you suppose that is? And do you see that as a
problem,
or should we just shrug our shoulders and move on?


I don't see that as a "problem" if there aren't a bunch of PC
assholes
insisting that the reason these groups are "underrepresented" is
somehow due
to "racism"...


Suppose all us PC assholes disappeared overnight, and we still
had a situation where only 2-3% of the students in the hard sciences
are black. Do you see that as a problem that the universities, or
the government, or private organizations ought to address, or do you
believe it will correct itself over time, or is it simply not a
problem and therefore it should be ignored?


If you want to force all students to take courses in mathematics and
science then, perhaps, you can do something. You can provide student
s
with an opportunity to take classes but it is difficult to see how to
force them into a major.

I was thinking more along the lines of working at the root cause
of the lack of minority students in these programs...surely it's not
a cultural aversion to high-paying, respected jobs...

You sure of that? I lived in a racially mixed, fairly "liberal"
neighborhood
in Southern California in the 1970's. Our neighbor was a black aerospace
engineer who worked for Hughes and who saved and scrimped to bring his
family out of the ghetto and into the suburbs. Both his kids attended
the
same suburban, racially mixed schools I did, but both of them became
ne'er-do-well types who dropped out of school, shacked up with their
girlfriends, and got in various scrapes with the law. Going to school
and
getting good grades was considered "acting white" by their peers who
lived
in the projects in northwest Pasadena, and the last thing any black kid
wanted back then was to be accused of being "white". Despite the fact
that
the Pasadena Unified School District did all the good and right liberal
things such as implementing a court-ordered busing plan, electing a
hispanic
superitendent (Ramon Cortinez), promoting plenty of black and hispanic
teachers as "role models", and striving for AA, there was still an
almost
predestined effort to fail among some of the black kids. The fact that
blacks and hispanics aren't making it in the year 2005 has less and less
to
do with vestiges of some era of racial discrimination that ended 2
generations ago and more to do with cultural attitudes of people who not
only do not hold the same values as the rest of society, but often hold
them
in contempt. Now whose fault is that?

I'm not getting through, am I, Stan? I keep asking you whether
we should consider this a problem (and if so whether we should try to
do something about it), or just assume it will fix itself, or just
ignore it. And you keep describing (accurately or not) the symptoms
of what I believe is a problem (and one that has, and will continue to
have, serious consequences for the problem), and whose fault it is.

I submit that the deliberate PC distortion of the issues that is prevalent
in government policy is no way to deal with this issue...

"Merlin Dorfman" wrote in message
...
In ba.transportation Stan de SD wrote:

...

Why do you think blacks are less "interested" in science and
technology? Is it genetic?

Many African-American academics and commentators have already answered
this,
and believe it is a cultural factor. Try reading "Race and Culture" and
"Black Rednecks, White Liberals" by Dr. Thomas Sowell for his take on
this
issue.

Hmmm, the views of (one) upper-class black seem to have a lot
of influence on you.

Yes, the views of intelligent, successful African-Americans who pulled
themselves up from working-class backgrounds and made something of their
lives does have a lot more influence on me that unsuccessful ones or their
professional apologists. Is there something wrong with that? Or should we
adapt the PC logic that successful black people can't have any more insight
on the keys to success than unsuccessful ones? :O(

But, indeed, why should the ethnic distribution of college students
within
specific majors match the ethnic distribution of the general
population?
Why must everyone like to study what American WASP culture likes to
study?

So it's not genetic, it's cultural...blacks are interested in
rap music and sports, while American WASPS (not to mention Asians,
Catholics, Jews, and other groups) are interested in things that
have a much better chance of leading to well-paying jobs. And you
are OK with that?

The fact that you and I may not be OK with that doesn't seem to affect
the
fact that a noticeable proportion of those people see it as just fine.
Again, that's not to say we shouldn't try to change the situation, but
do we
need to continually accept the blame for it?

I'm not blaming you for it, Stan. I'm not asking you to humble
yourself or wear a hair shirt or flagellate yourself. I'm just asking
if you think this is a problem that is causing serious problems for
the country, and will continue to do so, and whether some effort to
remedy it is in order.

I simply don't advocate the failed policies of conventional PC liberal
thinking. How hard is that to understand?

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...
"Frank Rizzo" enscribed:
Top post intentional....My opinion (take it for what its worth).

Merlin is very cordial in this thread. I applaud that. DC you are not
arguing fairly with Stan in that you keep accusing him of racism where
he

Accuse nothing. He states his racism himself.

Bull****. Your accusations of racism are unsubstantiated, and stem simply
from the fact that I disagree with you.

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...

You make wild, unsubstantiated allegations,

And what do you call it when you accuse others of being "racists" and
"bigots", NOT because you have any proof to back up your accusations, but
merely because they dare disagree with you on certain issue?

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...
"pigo" enscribed:

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...
"pigo" enscribed:

You made allegations of treason against Clinton and Democrats. I
still haven't seen back up your words yet.

I said aid and comfort. And though "aid and comfort" is part of the
definition of treason it's not necessarily so that all aid and
comfort rise to the level of treason. And in my opinion, for a
senator to stand up in congress and compare Gitmo to several
genocidal campaigns is giving the current enemy aid and comfort by

So any dissenting speech during a war in legislature or elsewhere is
treason?

No, he didn't say that. Once again, you are playing games by attempting to
put words in people's mouths, and attributing positions to them that they do
not take or support.

You're using the excuse of dictators everywhe

And you're using the excuse of liberals everywhere, who falsely assume that
they have some type of monopoly on morality. News flash: moral,
consciencious people can disagree with you without being racists or bigots.

democracy isn't robust enough to function during war, so they have to shut
it down during the emergency. And the emergency drags on till after they
die.

For one the discussion wasn't about "democracy", but about speech.
Disagreeing about policy and stating your differences in one thing - making
patently false, outrageous claims that only serve to benefit the enemy's
propaganda efforts is another, and could very well fall within the legal
definition of "aiding and abetting" the enemy...

encourageing them. Not to mention that it's an outright lie. Normally

No, it is not lie. He quoted FBI and DoD papers. He asked a question,
which neither you nor anyone else has answered. Here's the question again:

If you had read the accounts of Guantanamo without
knowing where it was or who was involved, just the
actions taken, would you have believed American
soldiers were capable of such actions?

Rhetorical question, along the lines of "did you stop beating your wife" -
it assumes that Americans were committing actrocities at Gitmo, which they
were not...

Well? Do you have ethics enough to stand up and answer a simple question?

Do YOU have ethics to be honest and stop accusing others of being racists
and/or bigots merely because they disagree with you? Better look in the
mirror first before you make accasusations about others. :O(

(rest of blatherings from foaming Lefty Liberal snipped for brevity...)

"Stan de SD" wrote in message
ink.net...
Rhetorical question, along the lines of "did you stop beating your
wife" -
it assumes that Americans were committing actrocities at Gitmo, which they
were not...

An atrocity would be to not interrogate prisoners to get information that
can be used to prevent the terrorist from killing others.