BBC: EU may institute MANDATORY vaccinations

9 views
Skip to first unread message

RichA

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 9:25:00 AM12/1/21
to

danny burstein

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 3:15:43 PM12/1/21
to
In <3e3cbdb3-b638-4c5d...@googlegroups.com> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> writes:

>https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-59487399

And this is bad, just why?


--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

RichA

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 4:55:29 PM12/1/21
to
On Wednesday, 1 December 2021 at 15:15:43 UTC-5, danny burstein wrote:
> In <3e3cbdb3-b638-4c5d...@googlegroups.com> RichA <rande...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-59487399
>
> And this is bad, just why?

To this point, as far as I know, only children have been under such a rule, when it comes to measles, polio, etc. Even then, I think there are
religious exemptions. Seems that it's a bit of a reach in this case as covid is basically harmless to 99.9999% of people under the age of 49.

Your Name

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 5:37:10 PM12/1/21
to
No it isn't "harmless" to anyone. Anybody can die from it (and have
done, from babies right through to 100+ year olds), anybody can have
on-going health issues caused by having had it and supposedly
"recovered". The virus does not look at your birth certificate and say,
"Oh, you're too young". :-\



BTR1701

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 7:48:29 PM12/1/21
to
On Dec 1, 2021 at 2:37:05 PM PST, "Your Name" <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:

> On 2021-12-01 21:55:25 +0000, RichA said:
>> On Wednesday, 1 December 2021 at 15:15:43 UTC-5, danny burstein wrote:
>>> In <3e3cbdb3-b638-4c5d...@googlegroups.com> RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-59487399
>>>
>>> And this is bad, just why?
>>
>> To this point, as far as I know, only children have been under such a
>> rule, when it comes to measles, polio, etc. Even then, I think there
>> are
>> religious exemptions. Seems that it's a bit of a reach in this case as
>> covid is basically harmless to 99.9999% of people under the age of 49.
>
> No it isn't "harmless" to anyone. Anybody can die from it (and have
> done, from babies right through to 100+ year olds), anybody can have
> on-going health issues caused by having had it and supposedly
> "recovered".

All of that can literally be said just as accurately about pneumonia, the flu,
tuberculosis, etc. But we don't force mandatory medical treatments at the
point of a gun on people for those diseases, some of which are much more
deadly to a wider range of people than Wuhan Flu is.


Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 8:27:04 PM12/1/21
to
We certainly did used to quarantine people with tuberculosis.

BTR1701

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 8:30:29 PM12/1/21
to
We also used to allow slavery. It's what we call progress.


Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 1, 2021, 8:49:09 PM12/1/21
to
Is it? There is treatment for tuberculosis but it requires consistency
over a period of weeks. With AIDS, tuberculosis made a big comeback and
became transmissable to people who weren't having the kind of sex that
communicated AIDS. Unlike COVID, there's no vaccine.

I've never heard that federal courts found these state quarantine laws
unconstitutional.

Tuberculosis sanatoriums were for long-term care and entirely separate
from hospitals. We should have kept COVID patients separate. Just had a
scandal here in which dozens and dozens of long-term VA patients at West
Side Hospital became infected with COVID from a staffer who knowingly
came to work with symptoms and the hospital was poorly following mask
protocols.

I never lived in a former slave state. We didn't all used to allow it.
Besides, my ancestors were in a shithole country at the time.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 2, 2021, 12:58:17 AM12/2/21
to
On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 18:48:21 -0600, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:

>All of that can literally be said just as accurately about pneumonia, the flu,
>tuberculosis, etc. But we don't force mandatory medical treatments at the
>point of a gun on people for those diseases, some of which are much more
>deadly to a wider range of people than Wuhan Flu is.

"At the point of a gun" is exaggeration. "Laying off from job without
severance or unemployment benefits" is NOT.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 2, 2021, 1:01:25 AM12/2/21
to
Neither did mine though my direct male line has been in the US since
1720 and I have Mayflower ancestors. These folks lived in MA, NY, WI,
MN, ID, WA - not a slave state amongst them.

Today there are no more than 1500 people in North America with our
last name and the ONLY one with our name who anybody remembers is a
black guy who got busted out of the NFL for cocaine use - sigh!

Micky DuPree

unread,
Dec 15, 2021, 7:53:58 PM12/15/21
to
Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty of
imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why the
U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token reparations.

It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
personally.

-Micky

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 15, 2021, 11:58:34 PM12/15/21
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>Thu, 2 Dec 2021 01:49:05 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:

>>>I never lived in a former slave state. We didn't all used to allow
>>>it. Besides, my ancestors were in a shithole country at the time.

>>Neither did mine though my direct male line has been in the US since
>>1720 and I have Mayflower ancestors. These folks lived in MA, NY, WI,
>>MN, ID, WA - not a slave state amongst them.

>>Today there are no more than 1500 people in North America with our
>>last name and the ONLY one with our name who anybody remembers is a
>>black guy who got busted out of the NFL for cocaine use - sigh!

>Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
>institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty of
>imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
>government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why the
>U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token reparations.

>It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
>personally.

Micky is trolling, resurrecting this crap again.

Some of the interned were still alive. There was someone to apologize
to. What does that have to do with slavery?

It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his land
back.

RichA

unread,
Dec 16, 2021, 12:31:39 AM12/16/21
to
On Wednesday, 1 December 2021 at 09:25:00 UTC-5, RichA wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-59487399

Looking back, now a LOT of places are forcing vaccines on everyone...

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 16, 2021, 6:15:05 PM12/16/21
to
On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:53:53 +0000 (UTC),
MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
>institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty of
>imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
>government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why the
>U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token reparations.
>
>It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
>personally.

And YOU'RE missing MY point. I'm arguing that the states of the former
Confederacy bear FAR FAR FAR more responsibility for slavery and Jim
Crow than those of the North who may well bear responsibility for
other wrongs.

Pierre Trudeau argued that historical apologies are ineffective since
while the victims are long gone their descendants HAVEN'T suffered
what they did. "It is our purpose to be just in our time"

By all means remember - but that's not a cause for shovelling $$$ to
descendents who have never borne the lash or any other wrong doing.

There were those who actually rebelled against their country and if
you want to take down their statues fine. But at least in Canada
statues of Founding Fathers have been taken down either by
historically revisionist governments or mobs. That's problematic to
put it mildly.

Where victims are still alive by all means restore them as much as can
be done - but when it's descendents I'm NOT a fan of 'reparation
payments' and things of that ilk. Governments have no money of their
own - it comes from the taxpayer and as I said, I never participated
in any of that stuff (and I think I've made a convincing case my
ancestors didn't either) and I bitterly resent those demanding I put
blood on my hands that just plain isn't there.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 16, 2021, 6:21:45 PM12/16/21
to
On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his land
>back.

Well for instance there was the recent case of some Toronto farmers
who in 1942 had their land taken for a WW2 air base that was never
built and post war became a since dissolved civil airport (e.g. not
Pearson Airport in Toronto - the main airport) - their children (many
of whom actually lived on these lands as children) sued for return of
their property.

There was a similar case in the US concerning beach front land taken
from a black couple for a municipal park that was never built that
their grandchildren sued successfully to reclaim the pont being that
"eminent domain" doesn't apply when once taken the government doesn't
actually USE the land for the reason for which it was taken. (There is
similar legislation in Canada but it is different enough that one
would be making a massive mistake to think the rules were the same)

(The US case cited was in Manhattan Beach, CA and a report can be
found at
https://www.kplctv.com/2021/10/01/california-moves-return-land-black-couples-heirs-100-years-after-it-was-taken/
)

Micky DuPree

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:44:01 AM12/31/21
to
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:53:53 +0000 (UTC),
> MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>> Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
>> institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty
>> of imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
>> government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why
>> the U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token
>> reparations.
>>
>> It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
>> personally.
>
> And YOU'RE missing MY point. I'm arguing that the states of the former
> Confederacy bear FAR FAR FAR more responsibility for slavery and Jim
> Crow than those of the North who may well bear responsibility for
> other wrongs.

It would be interesting to see the U.S. Dept. of Justice look into civil
rights prosecutions against individual U.S. states post-Reconstruction,
but I honestly don't know if there's any statute of limitation on same
if the defendant is an entire state. But be that as it may, no, I've
included your point about the slave states, and I've rejected it.

There's been a failure at the federal level of the U.S. government to
pursue legal protections and the prosecution of civil rights violations
all along. With the brief potential exception of Reconstruction, the
United States government has been in bed with slavery, the Fugitive
Slave Act, Jim Crow, redlining, unfair hiring practices, and the whole
putrid enchilada since the beginning just by allowing it (and sometimes
initiating it). Upstanding Northern states profited off of the triangle
trade with slavery even after disallowing slavery within their own
borders. The official United States position during the Civil War was
that there was no Confederacy save as a name for a traitorous band of
U.S. states. The Confederate "citizens" were U.S. citizens all along,
and most of them, except for their leaders, were granted full amnesty by
the U.S. government after the rebellion, including the retention of
property paid for by the theft of the labor of enslaved people.

Attempts to wriggle out of the institutional responsibility borne by the
U.S. still come down to saying, "It wasn't me," "It wasn't any of my
ancestors," "It wasn't my state," which all really collapse back down
to, "It wasn't me." No, of course it wasn't you. Yes, of course it was
the United States of America. After all, not every citizen in the slave
states was in favor of slavery, so would their descendents get to claim
themselves as exceptions? Putting aside the impossibility of
determining who voted for pro-slave politicians and who didn't (which
includes the impossibility of determining who was a secret Northern
pro-slavery "copperhead"), there comes a point where institutional
responsibility trumps individual responsibility precisely because we
don't live an an anarchy where the individual citizen gets a line-item
veto over everything their government does in their name. For example,
when there's a wrongful death suit successfully brought against a
municipality because a police officer wrongly killed someone, the
individual citizen doesn't get to say, "But I didn't shoot that innocent
bystander, so my taxes shouldn't have to pay the damages," or, "But I
didn't vote for any of the laws or politicians that enabled this tragedy
to happen, nor for the politicians who set 'qualified immunity' in
motion, so my taxes shouldn't have to pay the damages."

Even if your hands, your ancestors' hands, and the states or other
nations where they have lived along the way are as clean as new-fallen
snow, the country that you are a citizen of now can still bear
responsibility. You personally, Mr. Goat, no longer share in the
institutional responsibilities of the USA, since you hold single
citizenship in a different nation. Had your decisions and the laws
regarding citizenship been different, then that could have been
different too.


> Pierre Trudeau argued that historical apologies are ineffective since
> while the victims are long gone their descendants HAVEN'T suffered
> what they did. "It is our purpose to be just in our time"

Did Pierre Trudeau also believe that a nation does not have to honor the
constitution, the laws, or the treaties it signed before the current
citizens were born? Institutional responsibility transcends the lives
of individuals and generations so long as the *institution* itself
continues. Had Canada dissolved itself and new governments and
alliances formed in the aftermath, I might agree with him. Otherwise,
he was just trying to wriggle out of institutional responsibility,
probably because it was the popular thing to do.

It is for the people who are potentially owed an apology to determine
whether or not it is ineffective. It is not for the institution that
potentially owes it to make that determination.


> By all means remember - but that's not a cause for shovelling $$$ to
> descendents who have never borne the lash or any other wrong doing.

Official redlining is still easily within living memory. It's never
been a DOJ priority. The argument, borne out by study, is that the
generational transfer of wealth is the biggest single factor in wealth
inequality today, and that homeownership is the biggest single reservoir
of family wealth.

Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?


> There were those who actually rebelled against their country and if
> you want to take down their statues fine. But at least in Canada
> statues of Founding Fathers have been taken down either by
> historically revisionist governments or mobs. That's problematic to
> put it mildly.

The U.S. federal government has not removed state-owned or privately
owned statues or memorials.


> Where victims are still alive by all means restore them as much as can
> be done - but when it's descendents I'm NOT a fan of 'reparation
> payments' and things of that ilk.

So you disagree that any of the descendents of deceased
Japanese-Americans who were kidnapped, imprisoned, and their property
expropriated should have been offered an apology and token reparations
later on? That the solution to crimes and transgressions having been
perpetrated is simply to wait until the victims die, after which no
restitution should be made? (If we used that as a rule, then there
would be no such thing as a wrongful death suit.)

> Governments have no money of their own - it comes from the taxpayer
> and as I said, I never participated in any of that stuff (and I think
> I've made a convincing case my ancestors didn't either) and I bitterly
> resent those demanding I put blood on my hands that just plain isn't
> there.

"It wasn't me," "It wasn't my ancestors," "It wasn't my state." And no
one's saying it was. We're talking about the culpability of the United
States government as an institution. It has no "money of its own," but
it also has no life of its own save through its citizenry, though that
citizenry changes with each new birth and death. We inherit rights,
laws, and treaties as citizens of our nation. We also inherit its
responsibilities.

Not a single person is demanding that a Canadian citizen put blame on
his shoulders for crimes against humanity committed by the United States
government. The fact that you're rushing to defend yourself against
nonexistant demands against you is a bit bizarre.

-Micky

Micky DuPree

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:47:20 AM12/31/21
to
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>> It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his
>> land back.

Too little is better than nothing. Too late is better than never.
The determination belongs to the wronged, not to the institution
that wronged them. Waiting makes both worse, not better.


> Well for instance there was the recent case of some Toronto farmers
> who in 1942 had their land taken for a WW2 air base that was never
> built and post war became a since dissolved civil airport (e.g. not
> Pearson Airport in Toronto - the main airport) - their children (many
> of whom actually lived on these lands as children) sued for return of
> their property.

But they were descendants, not the actual property owners.


> There was a similar case in the US concerning beach front land taken
> from a black couple for a municipal park that was never built that
> their grandchildren sued successfully to reclaim the pont being that
> "eminent domain" doesn't apply when once taken the government doesn't
> actually USE the land for the reason for which it was taken. (There is
> similar legislation in Canada but it is different enough that one
> would be making a massive mistake to think the rules were the same)
>
> (The US case cited was in Manhattan Beach, CA and a report can be
> found at
> https://www.kplctv.com/2021/10/01/california-moves-return-land-black-couples-heirs-100-years-after-it-was-taken/)

Also restitution made to descendants, not the actual property owners. I
assume your citing of these cases means that you're O.K. with some
descendants, but not all. Where do you draw your line? Children?
Grandchildren? Great-grandchildren? How long before the institutional
intergenerational denial of rights finally becomes O.K.?

-Micky

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 10:08:18 AM12/31/21
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:

>>>It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his
>>>land back.

>Too little is better than nothing. Too late is better than never.
>The determination belongs to the wronged, not to the institution
>that wronged them. Waiting makes both worse, not better.

The determination? Congress passed a law that gave them token mitigation
for the wrongs that were done to the handful that were still alive. How
exactly did those wronged determine anything for themselves, given that
the majority of them had already gone to their graves?

You're being ridiculous. Justice delayed is justice denied may be a
cliche but it happens to be true. They lost their land. They were held
for years against their will. Society cannot give someone back the
liberty and life that was taken away.

>>Well for instance there was the recent case of some Toronto farmers
>>who in 1942 had their land taken for a WW2 air base that was never
>>built and post war became a since dissolved civil airport (e.g. not
>>Pearson Airport in Toronto - the main airport) - their children (many
>>of whom actually lived on these lands as children) sued for return of
>>their property.

>But they were descendants, not the actual property owners.

Right.

That's not actual justice.

>>. . .

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 10:31:33 AM12/31/21
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:53:53 +0000 (UTC), MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply:

>>>Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
>>>institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty
>>>of imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
>>>government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why
>>>the U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token
>>>reparations.

>>>It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
>>>personally.

>>And YOU'RE missing MY point. I'm arguing that the states of the former
>>Confederacy bear FAR FAR FAR more responsibility for slavery and Jim
>>Crow than those of the North who may well bear responsibility for
>>other wrongs.

>It would be interesting to see the U.S. Dept. of Justice look into civil
>rights prosecutions against individual U.S. states post-Reconstruction,
>but I honestly don't know if there's any statute of limitation on same
>if the defendant is an entire state. But be that as it may, no, I've
>included your point about the slave states, and I've rejected it.

There was a series of Supreme Court rulings during Reconstruction that
invalidated newly-passed civil rights legislation, hence the 14th and
15th amendments. Then we had the Slaughterhouse cases and Plessy vs.
Ferguson, all of which made federal support for protecting civil rights
against state intrasigence nearly impossible, till lawyers like Thurgood
Marshall figured out arguments that worked in federal court in the 1950s
that got courts to recognize that Reconstruction-era laws were valid, at
least those portions that hadn't been found unconstitutional.

States are shielded since none of this worked when it would have
protected anybody.

>There's been a failure at the federal level of the U.S. government to
>pursue legal protections and the prosecution of civil rights violations
>all along.

Well, that's not true at all. It's a mixed bag, and history isn't
pretty.

>With the brief potential exception of Reconstruction, the
>United States government has been in bed with slavery, the Fugitive
>Slave Act, Jim Crow, redlining, unfair hiring practices, and the whole
>putrid enchilada since the beginning just by allowing it (and sometimes
>initiating it). Upstanding Northern states profited off of the triangle
>trade with slavery even after disallowing slavery within their own
>borders. The official United States position during the Civil War was
>that there was no Confederacy save as a name for a traitorous band of
>U.S. states. The Confederate "citizens" were U.S. citizens all along,
>and most of them, except for their leaders, were granted full amnesty by
>the U.S. government after the rebellion, including the retention of
>property paid for by the theft of the labor of enslaved people.

>Attempts to wriggle out of the institutional responsibility borne by the
>U.S. still come down to saying, "It wasn't me," "It wasn't any of my
>ancestors," "It wasn't my state," which all really collapse back down
>to, "It wasn't me."

Oh, this is the troll that never ends.

There is no justice because ALL THE VICTIMS AND ALL THE PERPETRATORS
ARE LONG DEAD. Historical justice isn't a thing. The question because,
what are YOU going to do about contemporary problems?

>No, of course it wasn't you.

It wasn't any of my ancestors who were themselves peasants living in
a shithole country that Russia had held for centuries.

Can I get justice for that? Of course not. It didn't happen to me. If I
were compensated, gosh, it wouldn't be just at all because I'm not the
one who is owed anything.

But you can send a demand to Vladimir Putin on my behalf if it will make
you feel better.

>. . .

>>. . .

>Official redlining is still easily within living memory. It's never
>been a DOJ priority. The argument, borne out by study, is that the
>generational transfer of wealth is the biggest single factor in wealth
>inequality today, and that homeownership is the biggest single reservoir
>of family wealth.

bonk

I asked my mother what she had inherited from her parents. There were a
few trinkets. Her father died in his early 60s and her mother lived in a
nursing home at the end. The nursing home made sure that there was
absolutely no money left.

I've heard this generational transfer argument for a couple of years.
It's entirely bullshit. Adults are suppsed to make money to support
themselves and their children.

>Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?

I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal and
Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?

>>. . .

BTR1701

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 12:28:10 PM12/31/21
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>> It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his
>>> land back.
>
> Too little is better than nothing. Too late is better than never.
> The determination belongs to the wronged, not to the institution
> that wronged them.

No, it doesn't, DuPree. You yourself compared this to an innocent person
shot by a cop, where the city and taxpayers are held liable.

Well, we don't let the shooting victim just pick a number and pay him
whatever he wants. He has to prove his case in court or through settlement
negotiations and only then, after an independent arbiter has determined the
value of the case, does he get paid.

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 12:35:01 PM12/31/21
to
BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>>Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:

>>>>It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his
>>>>land back.

>>Too little is better than nothing. Too late is better than never.
>>The determination belongs to the wronged, not to the institution
>>that wronged them.

>No, it doesn't, DuPree. You yourself compared this to an innocent person
>shot by a cop, where the city and taxpayers are held liable.

>Well, we don't let the shooting victim just pick a number and pay him
>whatever he wants. He has to prove his case in court or through settlement
>negotiations and only then, after an independent arbiter has determined the
>value of the case, does he get paid.

Anjanette Young, not a shooting victim but targeted in a botched police
raid, is getting a $2.9 million settlement! This was not arbitrated.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:19:32 PM12/31/21
to
On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 07:43:57 +0000 (UTC),
MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:53:53 +0000 (UTC),
>> MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>
>>> Why can't people tell the difference between personal guilt and
>>> institutional responsibility? Very few people were personally guilty
>>> of imprisoning Japanese-Americans during WWII, but the United States
>>> government as an institution bore that responsibility, which is why
>>> the U.S. government (eventually) apologized and paid token
>>> reparations.
>>>
>>> It's not about you personally. It's not even about your ancestors
>>> personally.
>>
>> And YOU'RE missing MY point. I'm arguing that the states of the former
>> Confederacy bear FAR FAR FAR more responsibility for slavery and Jim
>> Crow than those of the North who may well bear responsibility for
>> other wrongs.
>
>It would be interesting to see the U.S. Dept. of Justice look into civil
>rights prosecutions against individual U.S. states post-Reconstruction,
>but I honestly don't know if there's any statute of limitation on same
>if the defendant is an entire state. But be that as it may, no, I've
>included your point about the slave states, and I've rejected it.

Essentially the Union won the Civil War and lost the peace mostly by
the willingness of Northern politicians to compromise principles for
votes. (Which I grant is by no means unique either to the United
States nor the Congress-critters in any era)

>There's been a failure at the federal level of the U.S. government to
>pursue legal protections and the prosecution of civil rights violations
>all along. With the brief potential exception of Reconstruction, the
>United States government has been in bed with slavery, the Fugitive
>Slave Act, Jim Crow, redlining, unfair hiring practices, and the whole
>putrid enchilada since the beginning just by allowing it (and sometimes
>initiating it). Upstanding Northern states profited off of the triangle

See my comments above. 1860-65 was won over principle but few were
talking of principles by the 1870s and 1880s.

>trade with slavery even after disallowing slavery within their own
>borders. The official United States position during the Civil War was
>that there was no Confederacy save as a name for a traitorous band of
>U.S. states. The Confederate "citizens" were U.S. citizens all along,
>and most of them, except for their leaders, were granted full amnesty by
>the U.S. government after the rebellion, including the retention of
>property paid for by the theft of the labor of enslaved people.

If citizens of the Confederate states were US citizens all along how
do you account for the federal confiscation of the lands that now make
up Arlington National Cemetary? (I assume you know who owned those
lands in 1860)

>Attempts to wriggle out of the institutional responsibility borne by the
>U.S. still come down to saying, "It wasn't me," "It wasn't any of my
>ancestors," "It wasn't my state," which all really collapse back down
>to, "It wasn't me." No, of course it wasn't you. Yes, of course it was
>the United States of America. After all, not every citizen in the slave
>states was in favor of slavery, so would their descendents get to claim
>themselves as exceptions? Putting aside the impossibility of
>determining who voted for pro-slave politicians and who didn't (which
>includes the impossibility of determining who was a secret Northern
>pro-slavery "copperhead"), there comes a point where institutional
>responsibility trumps individual responsibility precisely because we
>don't live an an anarchy where the individual citizen gets a line-item
>veto over everything their government does in their name. For example,
>when there's a wrongful death suit successfully brought against a
>municipality because a police officer wrongly killed someone, the
>individual citizen doesn't get to say, "But I didn't shoot that innocent
>bystander, so my taxes shouldn't have to pay the damages," or, "But I
>didn't vote for any of the laws or politicians that enabled this tragedy
>to happen, nor for the politicians who set 'qualified immunity' in
>motion, so my taxes shouldn't have to pay the damages."

I have long argued that Canadians have more reason to hate King George
III and his Royal Proclamation of 1763 than Americans since while
escaping the strictures of that proclamation (specifically the part
that prevented American settlers moving west of the Appalachians) was
the #2 grievance of the Founding Fathers (second only behind "No
Taxation without Representation!") the way the proclamation has been
interpreted by Canadian judges in the post WW2 era have hamstrung the
economies of Canada particularly in the west.

There was an item in the business section of today's Vancouver Sun
discussing a logging company that had had to make agreements with 100+
First Nations in BC to operate. (Bear in mind that aboriginal people
in BC make up under 6% of the provincial population and that there are
roughly 270k of them) If that was a 1 on 1 deal it would be more
bearable but to have to negotiate 100+ deals to operate is a crushing
overhead cost and is why my province is suffering well beyond "merely"
Covid. Furthermore - judges' interpretations have encouraged
exaggerated aboriginal land claims - all of which "have" to be taken
seriously even when they're absurd. 3 different aboriginal groups lay
claim the entire territory of the city of Vancouver and rather than
saying "we'll negotiate with one of you and you have to decide who"
governments are handing out $$$ to all of them. How do you think the
economy of New York City would be if 3 separate groups claimed land
ownership? And what would Albany's or Washington's response be?

>Even if your hands, your ancestors' hands, and the states or other
>nations where they have lived along the way are as clean as new-fallen
>snow, the country that you are a citizen of now can still bear
>responsibility. You personally, Mr. Goat, no longer share in the
>institutional responsibilities of the USA, since you hold single
>citizenship in a different nation. Had your decisions and the laws
>regarding citizenship been different, then that could have been
>different too.

I once gave a speech to my Toastmasters club on the War of 1812 which
was a strong rant on the British view of that conflict. Which was a
huge personal joke to me (which I shared with them later) as I have
lots of ancestors who served in that war and every last one of them
served either as regulars or NY state militia. (I assume you know the
area around lakes Ontario and Erie were major war zones in that
conflict)

[For what it's worth there was in 1921 a memorial built at the point
at which the 49th parallel aka 'international boundary' hits salt
water on the west coast celebrating the 100th anniversary of the War
of 1812 peace (it was supposed to be built earlier but Canada was at
war in 1915). Regretably the 100th anniversary of the Peace Arch was
one of the events of 2021 cancelled due to Covid. I had been planning
to attend as there's a time capsule inside the Arch that was to be
opened containing all sorts of things including a scroll with the
names of contributors one of which was my then schoolboy grandfather]

>> Pierre Trudeau argued that historical apologies are ineffective since
>> while the victims are long gone their descendants HAVEN'T suffered
>> what they did. "It is our purpose to be just in our time"

As I've said here multiple times, while I abhor the man (and his son)
over most everything they stand/stood for I do believe he had it right
with respect to doing good in our time rather than endlessly kvetching
over historical apologies to people who are long gone.

Besides if we're talking about historical apologies do we apologize to
Barack Obama? (who had no black ancestors in the US during the slavery
era) Or Meghan Markle (who did?) My point is the issue is a lot more
fuzzy than one might think.

>Did Pierre Trudeau also believe that a nation does not have to honor the
>constitution, the laws, or the treaties it signed before the current
>citizens were born? Institutional responsibility transcends the lives
>of individuals and generations so long as the *institution* itself
>continues. Had Canada dissolved itself and new governments and
>alliances formed in the aftermath, I might agree with him. Otherwise,
>he was just trying to wriggle out of institutional responsibility,
>probably because it was the popular thing to do.

Again when the aggrieved throw up multiple groups that 'need' to be
dealt with separately (and I'm NOT talking in different regional areas
but in the same area. The following URL presents a typical example:
https://bc.ctvnews.ca/elected-vs-hereditary-chiefs-what-s-the-difference-in-indigenous-communities-1.4247466

(CTV is one of the two major TV networks in Canada and as mainstream
as it gets)

>It is for the people who are potentially owed an apology to determine
>whether or not it is ineffective. It is not for the institution that
>potentially owes it to make that determination.

As we all know all sorts of well meaning acts go 'aft agley'
(apologies to Robbie Burns) and all sorts of things that were
considered mainstream 150-200 years ago are now considered beyond the
pale. The Canadian NDP party (who are mostly in the Sanders / British
Labour party vein) continue to be troubled by the fact that many if
not MOST of their founding fathers and mothers were strong supporters
of eugenics and forcible sterilization of the mentally disabled in the
post-WW1 era.
>
>> By all means remember - but that's not a cause for shovelling $$$ to
>> descendents who have never borne the lash or any other wrong doing.
>
>Official redlining is still easily within living memory. It's never
>been a DOJ priority. The argument, borne out by study, is that the
>generational transfer of wealth is the biggest single factor in wealth
>inequality today, and that homeownership is the biggest single reservoir
>of family wealth.

I dare say you're right though that's quickly unravelling as the cost
of home ownership continues to escalate (and in Canada at a little
over double the US rate) which is disenfranchising the majority of the
30-something generation. My kids tend to think I think "I'm all right
Jack" but it's simply not true and I tend to vote for candidates who
at least try to bring things under control.

>Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?

Absolutely as long as it's done sincerely. The US and Canada DON'T
need things like a national holiday for a 'Day of National
Reconciliation' such as Justin Trudeau instituted this year on Sept
30th - and THEN on that day instead of taking part in observations in
Ottawa flitted off to Tofino, BC on the west coast of Vancouver island
for some windsurfing with his kids.

Because Tofino is about as far as one can get from Ottawa without
going to the Arctic.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tofino,+BC/@51.5254845,-106.6822225,4.75z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x548990ccb0093843:0x331095695a741a35!8m2!3d49.1529842!4d-125.9066184

Imagine the political response if Biden created such a day then flew
from Washington for Honolulu on the appointed day!

I ask you - is that an act of sincerity or simply trying to gain
political brownie points? Any politician with a whit of sense would
know that on such a day you turn up at events in the capitol and say
all the right things and get your photo ops with leaders of the most
affected communities and THEN the following week flit off to wherever
you will once you've done the right thing. Whether you're actually
sincere or not.

I'm all for that - I'm not for meaningful gestures that aren't even
'feel good moments'. A LOT of North Americans have had a tough 2020
and 2021 and deserve some down-time but sensible ones don't do
embarass themselves that way.

>
>> There were those who actually rebelled against their country and if
>> you want to take down their statues fine. But at least in Canada
>> statues of Founding Fathers have been taken down either by
>> historically revisionist governments or mobs. That's problematic to
>> put it mildly.
>
>The U.S. federal government has not removed state-owned or privately
>owned statues or memorials.

I haven't talked to my sister-in-law on how she feels about the
renaming of her alma mater Ryerson University in Toronto.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:21:48 PM12/31/21
to
On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>There is no justice because ALL THE VICTIMS AND ALL THE PERPETRATORS
>ARE LONG DEAD. Historical justice isn't a thing. The question because,
>what are YOU going to do about contemporary problems?
>
Which is essentially the Pierre Trudeau quote that Mickey so abhors.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:24:34 PM12/31/21
to
On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>>Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>>would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?
>
>I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal and
>Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?
>
So should the Irish side of me hate the English side of me? Should the
French side of me hate the German side of me?

And my children are doubly confused since they would have to deal with
how the Polish side of them deals with their German and Russian
heritage.

(As you can tell, our household are an amalgam of Anglo/German/Slav
backgrounds and my daughter got some VERY interesting figures from
Ancestry.com on the DNA side)

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:28:06 PM12/31/21
to
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com>:

>>>Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>>>would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?

>>I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal and
>>Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?

>So should the Irish side of me hate the English side of me? Should the
>French side of me hate the German side of me?

Pay reparations to yourself. As far as French versus German, probably
equally responsible for starting whatever war was the reason your
ancestors left Europe.

>And my children are doubly confused since they would have to deal with
>how the Polish side of them deals with their German and Russian
>heritage.

>(As you can tell, our household are an amalgam of Anglo/German/Slav
>backgrounds and my daughter got some VERY interesting figures from
>Ancestry.com on the DNA side)

I wanna hear how blacks, descended of slave owners, are going to claim
reparations from themselves.

trotsky

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:30:05 PM12/31/21
to
On 12/31/2021 11:28 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:58:31 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>>> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> It was still too little, too late, considering that no one got his
>>>> land back.
>>
>> Too little is better than nothing. Too late is better than never.
>> The determination belongs to the wronged, not to the institution
>> that wronged them.
>
> No, it doesn't, DuPree. You yourself compared this to an innocent person
> shot by a cop, where the city and taxpayers are held liable.


"Taxpayers held liable" is a complete lie that no real lawyer would ever
say. I'd like to see a lawsuit where one of the parties being sued was
"taxpayers." Were you thrown out of law school for being a fucking moron?

shawn

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:33:27 PM12/31/21
to
So who decided on the final amount? My guess is it wasn't Anjanette
Young. As to why it didn't go through the courts my guess is the city
(I'm guessing they are the ones paying out the money) had their
attorneys look at the case and saw there was no chance of winning it.
I wonder if they consulted with Young on how much it would take to
settle the case or did the city just pick an amount they thought would
be enough.

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 2:51:02 PM12/31/21
to
shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 17:34:57 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:
I'm just going down a new tangent to point out the irony that, because
she wasn't shot and wasn't desperate to have medical bills paid, she was
better off. She didn't care if it went to trial after several years.

Furthermore, the city of Chicago was in a weak negotiating position
because Lori Lightfoot, infuriated that evidence was given to local
television news DESPITE the city obtaining a gag order, was so horrid
to her. She kept threatening to have her attorneys sanction or possibly
Young herself, and kept stalling discovery.

I am certainly not saying Micky DuPree made a valid point as she's done
nothing more than handwaive. It's just an oddball circumstance in which
the defendant makes everything worse and the plaintiff does indeed have
the upper hand in negotiation.

Young absolutely suffered a tort but not to so absurd an extent. If
Lightfoot had been reasonable from day 1, especially since she got to
blame the raid itself on Rahm, the taxpayers might have gotten off
writing a check for a few hundred thousand dollars.

The Horny Goat

unread,
Dec 31, 2021, 8:30:36 PM12/31/21
to
On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 19:28:02 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>I wanna hear how blacks, descended of slave owners, are going to claim
>reparations from themselves.

Presumably on the premise that they were the children
(grandchildren/great-grandchildren etc) and thus owe no duty to their
male progenitor but are in fact owed by him (nearly all of whom were
pre-1865)

Micky DuPree

unread,
Jan 14, 2022, 11:49:54 PM (11 days ago) Jan 14
to
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:

You may as well say that there is no historical or legal continuity to
nation-states, and they have no responsibility to uphold laws that were
written before anyone currently alive was born.

You see, it's not just the descendants of victims that are owed an
apology. The U.S. as an institution owes it to itself to clean its own
house.

-Micky

Micky DuPree

unread,
Jan 14, 2022, 11:58:24 PM (11 days ago) Jan 14
to
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:

> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>> Micky DuPree wrote:

>>> Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>>> would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?
>>
>> I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal
>> and Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?

Are there institutions or political states that survive from those
times? If not, then there is no continuity of legal or moral
responsibility. I think (in its glacially slow manner) that the Vatican
has apologized for some of its historical transgressions, as it should.
I don't keep up with the RCC details. Not my lane.


> So should the Irish side of me hate the English side of me? Should the
> French side of me hate the German side of me?

You're back to getting bogged down in personal responsibility, which, as
I've said multiple times, is not what I'm talking about.

-Micky

BTR1701

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 12:21:08 AM (11 days ago) Jan 15
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>
>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Micky DuPree wrote:
>
>>>> Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>>>> would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?
>>>
>>> I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal
>>> and Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?
>
> Are there institutions or political states that survive from those
> times?

Yes. The Catholic Church has survived since the time it imposed the horrors
of the Inquisition on Europe.

> I think (in its glacially slow manner) that the Vatican
> has apologized for some of its historical transgressions, as it should.

In 2000, the church asked pardon for "errors committed in the service of
the truth through recourse to non-evangelical methods."

Hardly the reparations-- or even the apology-- you're advocating for,
DuPree.

> I don't keep up with the RCC details. Not my lane.
>
>
>> So should the Irish side of me hate the English side of me? Should the
>> French side of me hate the German side of me?
>
> You're back to getting bogged down in personal responsibility, which, as
> I've said multiple times, is not what I'm talking about.

Hardly, DuPree. He's pointing out that the Irish/English and the
French/Germans have committed historical sins against one another, yet he's
received no apologies or reparations from any of them.

Adam H. Kerman

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 12:30:30 AM (11 days ago) Jan 15
to
Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:

>>>There is no justice because ALL THE VICTIMS AND ALL THE PERPETRATORS
>>>ARE LONG DEAD. Historical justice isn't a thing. The question
>>>because, what are YOU going to do about contemporary problems?

>>Which is essentially the Pierre Trudeau quote that Mickey so abhors.

>You may as well say that there is no historical or legal continuity to
>nation-states, and they have no responsibility to uphold laws that were
>written before anyone currently alive was born.

No. I'll make my position clear using my very own words. You play your
straw man games with someone who will fall for them.

>You see, it's not just the descendants of victims that are owed an
>apology. The U.S. as an institution owes it to itself to clean its own
>house.

Death was 100% effective at cleaning house.

trotsky

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 6:25:14 AM (11 days ago) Jan 15
to
On 1/14/2022 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 15:31:29 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>>> <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Micky DuPree wrote:
>>
>>>>> Out of curiosity, if no financial reparations were being discussed,
>>>>> would you be less hostile to the idea of an institutional apology?
>>>>
>>>> I think it's great! Where's my apology from Ghengis Kahn, the Vandal
>>>> and Mongol hordes, the Arab invasion, the Spanish Inquisition, etc?
>>
>> Are there institutions or political states that survive from those
>> times?
>
> Yes. The Catholic Church has survived since the time it imposed the horrors
> of the Inquisition on Europe.


That's a religious faction. Perhaps you didn't understand the question
because you're too fucking stupid? What say you? What, you're too
afraid to speak? I'm stunned!

The Horny Goat

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 1:33:56 PM (10 days ago) Jan 15
to
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 23:20:58 -0600, BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
All of the above concerning my parentage is true but what I was doing
was mocking those who insist apologies for acts 5-10 years ago are
appropriate. As I said, since my wife's heritage is equally mixed in
eastern Europe our kids are especially mixed.

I'm fine with making sure governmental policies are just and fair. But
it's equality of opportunity not equality of results - all of us
compete for our share daily and the best anybody can hope for is
removal of obstacles in their way. Mandating that RESULTS be equal
implies one's own efforts don't matter and if that's the mandate then
we may as well all be on the dole and eat soylent green.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages