All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Tami]

It depends on the era. My grandfather on my Dad's side came over with his Polish bride to work in the American Bridge company in Indiana as a laborer. My Dad served in WWII and brought home a British war bride. A lot of American G.I. married European women. My mom came over in a ship load of war brides.

I'm pretty sure that I don't have any Native American in my linage, though my husband does. My father speculated that there might be some Asian in his side of the family, being East European/Slavic who knows? I have been tempted to take one of those DNA tests just to find out. If there is, I think that would be very cool. If not, that's okay too.

[Mister Mets]

I like some of the replies.

What if the Native Americans put a limit on all the European settlers?

Isn't the argument that it would have been better for them?

[Dalak]

It depends on the era. My grandfather on my Dad's side came over with his Polish bride to work in the American Bridge company in Indiana as a laborer. My Dad served in WWII and brought home a British war bride. A lot of American G.I. married European women. My mom came over in a ship load of war brides.

Well I'm still right unless you've snagged yourself a war spouse!

[zinderel]

While everyone is talking about a Trump tweet, this is happening:

AP NewsBreak: US Army quietly discharging immigrant recruits



I'm sure it's nothing.

[Tazirai]

Yeah, yet another shot at Warren's Native-American roots, AND a dig at #MeToo. Trump just doesn't stop. He should just come out and say before a nationwide audience what everyone already knows: that he's a knuckledragging racist, homophobe, xenophobe and misogynist who's fighting to return white people to the top of America's societal food chain while keeping minorities, gays and women down and disadvanataged. Chances are he wouldn't lose much, if anything in the way of support among his deplorable base, or in Congress.



Glad to have been of service. Enjoy!

Trump nor the Trumpeteers are #civility and think going after this issue with Warren is a good thing when it certainly isn't. I refuse to allow the Media or Democrats to try and force me ot be #Civility with these people. I have Native blood in me, and not from centuries ago. I can call that side right now. Fuck these bigots. I hope once all is said and done they get shunned by REAL Civil people.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/sta...78720556564481

That's a damn shame. You know their parents are telling them that crap and have Fox News on all the time. It is Montana ffs they are like 88% white and barely anyone lives there

There's more people in my backyard than in that state.

[Tazirai]

Oh, you follow Right Wing Watch, too?

Apparently, a $50 box of coffee can be traded for a car during the End of days.

See the thing about RWW is that There is NO way to take these morons out of context if you play their full words. The Right can't say we take them out of context when you just play their own words.

[Tazirai]

I see why America left the HRC, we allow Israel to do it to the Palestinians and we do it to the Mexicans, but KIDNAPPING their kids.

Israeli Officers Were Filmed Appearing To Rip A Palestinian Woman’s Headscarf Off
Israeli authorities are attempting to demolish the Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar.

[Michael Watkins]

Isn't the argument that it would have been better for them?

I thought that the message was to not trust white people? The native Americans were not the only people to be displaced.

[Mister Mets]

While everyone is talking about a Trump tweet, this is happening:

AP NewsBreak: US Army quietly discharging immigrant recruits



I'm sure it's nothing.

It might be.

NPR's Washington Bureau Chief Tim Mak thinks the AP hasn't provided evidence of a shift in policy.

My first impression on this AP story about the Army discharging immigrant recruits is that there is less than meets the eye here.

What the AP needs to show is evidence of a policy shift in the Army. It hasn't done that.

This AP article is about immigrants who have enlisted but not gone to basic training.

People who enlist but then cannot go to basic for whatever reason are discharged all the time.

I bet I could find 40 recruits discharged bf basic for being too fat.

There are a number of innocuous explanations for these discharges.

Perhaps these immigrant recruits could not pass a background check (by the way there are jobs in the military that don't require clearance)

The AP does not answer the simple question: Did a policy change here?

There are hints and anecdotes in the AP story, for e.g. the former Army lawyer who works on military immigrant cases saying she has gotten a spike in interest

If I was the editor on this story I would have asked for more meat on the bones. Show me evidence of a change in policy.

John Noonan, a conservative security analyst, albeit one who was consistently anti-Trump, looks at the story.

Took the time to dig deeper into this @AP story. Earning citizenship through military service is one of those things that just about everyone agrees with, left or right.

My first reaction was surprise. We have some 70,000 non-naturalized service members in the Armed Forces, and we are also having trouble hitting some recruitment targets. Army being the worst. Military wants more recruits, not less. Didn't make sense.

I texted with a few friends at DoD who were caught totally flat-footed by the story, and were scrambling to put out answers without violating privacy laws.

I suspect we'll see some clarifying data from either Office of the Secretary of Dept of the Army today.

I also read the 2017 SECDEF guidance from the fall, that updated their naturalization policy. When the Secretary speaks, the military tends to follow those orders to a T. Figured this was an overly conservative interpretation of policy guidance, as is the custom in the service.

Linking it here. I'm not sure if this memo takes a harder line on background investigations than prior administrations. But it seems to state the obvious. If you're not a citizen and you want to serve, we have to check your background. Aggressively. https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Do...tification.pdf …

So here's where I think the @AP reporter got a little confused. When you raise your hand and take an oath, you belong to the military. But you're not technically *in* the military. It's common to get the oath out of the way while initial background checks are on-going.

If you clear a background investigation, great! Offto basic training and then to specialty training. Congrats private, airman, or sailor, you're in. But, if you have some issues pop up during the background investigation and *don't* go off to training, it's a canceled contract

If you separate within 180 days of service, you are given an entry-level separation. It's not an honorable discharge. It's not a dishonorable discharge. It's just "hey, this isn't going to work." This 180 days requirement reiterated in Section 3A of the memo

Hypothetical example:

You come to the US on a work Visa from Brazil. You decided to serve. You work with a recruiter, fill out the forms, take the PT test and the oath. But while you wait to ship out to basic, investigators learn you were once a runner for a Rio drug cartel.

Sorry, but DoD is going to separate you. Does it happen often? Not really... which is why AP is talking about 40 or so people out of 70,000 immigrants in service. But is it indicative of a wider policy to expunge non-citizens from active service (as AP story suggested)? No.

To summarize:
1. Immigrants are still welcome to earn citizenship through service.
2. DoD is not conducting widespread expulsion of non-citizens.
3. Participation in this program is down, but may be due to external factors like strong economy or stricter federal immigration law.

4. I am not sure if the 2017 memo instituted a tougher crackdown on non-citizen applicants, or was a departure from prior policy. I do know the MAVNI program came under scrutiny for just that, and had to relax standards after good reporting from Stars & Stripes.

5. Security clearance reform has long been a hot topic in Washington for both citizens and non-citizens. But it's common sense that non-US citizens would have an extra layer of scrutiny (as anyone who's filled out an SF86 can attest).

Final. I had my own issue with this. I was born on an overseas military base, and almost lost a slot in ICBM training because I needed a Top Secret clearance. The confusion was that investigators thought I still had citizenship in that country (I had dual until age 18).\\

I'd renounced that citizenship before joining AFROTC. My case was a little different, as I was already a commissioned lieutenant during investigation. My commander went to bat for me and told the investigators to get their sh*t together. But it was a close one.

(also one addendum) Sometimes disqualifying information can come out *before* the investigation starts. In which case, you will get an entry level separation. No one is going to start an expensive background investigation for a pre-ordained conclusion (illegal status an example)

[BeastieRunner]

Mueller added a whole new line of prosecutors today and Manafort is in 23 hour solitary after a second attempt on his life was made.

Fun day in Trump land.

[zinderel]

It might be.

NPR's Washington Bureau Chief Tim Mak thinks the AP hasn't provided evidence of a shift in policy.



John Noonan, a conservative security analyst, albeit one who was consistently anti-Trump, looks at the story.

I hope these takes are true. You'll pardon me if I trust nothing and no one who defends this monstrous administration with maybes and mights. Until i hear clearly stated that 'This isnt happening, and here is the proof', then I'll accept it. Til then, nothing is too low or too awful, when it comes to the things I believe Trump and his cronies is capable of.

[ouroboros]

Again, the movie shows Killmonger repeatedly doing heinous things. The article you linked to even says the movie "reminds the audience that he's supposed to be the bad guy." The fact that some people found him sympathetic doesn't change that.

The movie *has* to remind audiences that KM is the bad guy because Coogler allows the moral message to be compromised, for the sake of appeasing the extremist section of his audience.

Farubi isn't merely saying that KM is sympathetic, but that his aims are the really moral ones, despite the film's gestures toward keeping him villainous through killing his subordinates and the like. Toward the essay's end:

There’s a lot to play with in the Black Panther universe, if Marvel’s willing to take some risks. What would the world look like if Wakanda had sided against colonisers throughout history, not just in Africa but across India, Asia, the Caribbean and Ireland? What would happen if Killmonger, or someone like him, had succeeded in leading armed rebellion throughout the contemporary world?
Hopefully future Black Panther films will delve into these more radical concepts.

Coogler knows his audience, He knew that the film would probably take hits from some reviewers for featuring a black revolutionary as the villain, so he constructed things so that KM's basic goal was laudable.

the film ends by acknowledging Killmonger’s desire for Wakanda to play a role in helping the oppressed was the right one.

[ouroboros]

That is what I meant. I prolly misused 'wrong'. My intent wasto say that while his motives were understandable and he did have a point, the things he did with those motives were wrong. Wakanda absolutely did a HUGE disservice to the world by remaining insular and xenophobic, even if I understand the reasons they had for doing so. No one in that movie was completely 'black or white', morally, except maybe Klaue. Everyone else was complex shades of grey.

Another subject the movie dodges is the feasibility of Wakanda being able to reverse the historical trend of colonialism. I'm sure that the script would like viewers to believe that colonialism could be reversed if the European powers simply beheld the magnificence of Wakanda's super-scientific wonderland. The real result would probably be that Europe would have made war upon Wakanda to loot it instead of all the poorer countries, and I personally think that many if not all real-world African countries would have joined the invaders, having no more racial affinity with the Wakandans than real-world African slave-dealers had for the captives they sold.

[Gray Lensman]

I hope these takes are true. You'll pardon me if I trust nothing and no one who defends this monstrous administration with maybes and mights. Until i hear clearly stated that 'This isnt happening, and here is the proof', then I'll accept it. Til then, nothing is too low or too awful, when it comes to the things I believe Trump and his cronies is capable of.

I have to agree - the benefit of the doubt stopped applying to Trump a long time ago. Every time it has been given to him, he has managed to show us that our worst instincts about him weren't bad enough.

And from Slate...

Summary -
while some of the changes do go back to the Obama administration, MAVNI is taking no new applicants, recruits are having their contracts abruptly cancelled (and in some cases un-cancelled when the press starts to look into it - which is suspicious all by itself), and all INS offices at basic training locations have been shuttered, making it harder for those still in the program to actually complete the process of becoming citizens.

[ed2962]

The movie *has* to remind audiences that KM is the bad guy because Coogler allows the moral message to be compromised, for the sake of appeasing the extremist section of his audience.

Farubi isn't merely saying that KM is sympathetic, but that his aims are the really moral ones, despite the film's gestures toward keeping him villainous through killing his subordinates and the like. Toward the essay's end:

Coogler knows his audience, He knew that the film would probably take hits from some reviewers for featuring a black revolutionary as the villain, so he constructed things so that KM's basic goal was laudable.

Yeah...this makes no sense.