Doc Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 15 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: So do we believe Doc or a webpage called antislavery.Org? “Forced labour is the most common element of modern slavery. It is the most extreme form of people exploitation.” This is beyond this board being a cesspool that a person is promoting slavery and another is defending it. Shame Add UN or Doc: According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) more than 40 million people worldwide are victims of modern slavery. Although modern slavery is not defined in law, it is used as an umbrella term covering practices such as forced labour, debt bondage, forced marriage, and human trafficking. Essentially, it refers to situations of exploitation that a person cannot refuse or leave because of threats, violence, coercion, deception, and/or abuse of power. https://www.un.org/en/observances/slavery-abolition-day [/discussion]
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Doc said: [/discussion] Exactly. Now this where you apologize for defending slavery and denounce your fellow poster? 24 minutes ago, Irv said: You’re funny. Thanks. It’s really not that you’re pro-slavery. you said “Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them totruck driver and longshoreman training. ” I’m just glad for the sake of everyone you stopped short of saying they should be tossed in camps. It’s kind of implied with the rounding up tho. But you did say let’s round up a group a people and force them to work. If they don’t let’s point guns at them. Maybe the most sadistic is you want them to do a good job or else . If they’re not good at the job they still get guns pointed at them. Edited October 30, 2021 by Backintheday544
Tenhigh Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 I must have missed the slavery part, which I am wholly against. But I thought the implication was to offer illegals otherwise facing deportation the opportunity to stay in country if they agreed to drive trucks for a certain period of time? If they were properly vetted and went to work for private trucking concerns, it's an interesting idea, provided there were enough trucks available to support the influx of new drivers. It seems like a Snake Plisken kind of bargain though.
Doc Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 28 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: Exactly. Now this where you apologize for defending slavery and denounce your fellow poster? It’s really not that you’re pro-slavery. you said “Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them totruck driver and longshoreman training. ” I’m just glad for the sake of everyone you stopped short of saying they should be tossed in camps. It’s kind of implied with the rounding up tho. But you did say let’s round up a group a people and force them to work. If they don’t let’s point guns at them. Maybe the most sadistic is you want them to do a good job or else . If they’re not good at the job they still get guns pointed at them. Did you miss the part you quoted that I bolded? Again, not slavery.
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: I must have missed the slavery part, which I am wholly against. But I thought the implication was to offer illegals otherwise facing deportation the opportunity to stay in country if they agreed to drive trucks for a certain period of time? If they were properly vetted and went to work for private trucking concerns, it's an interesting idea, provided there were enough trucks available to support the influx of new drivers. It seems like a Snake Plisken kind of bargain though. Im done arguing this anymore with the others but this was the policy position put together: - Round up every able body illegal at the border. (Round up people) - Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. (Put them in “training” camps) -After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. (Order them/force them to work) -If they do a good job they can stay. -If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. The policy says to round up people. Force them to work )no guarantees of citizenship in what was provided). If they don’t work or if they do a bad job, they’re out in a dangerous position of swimming the Rio, apparently if it’s too dangerous and they turn around then US people are tasked to shoot them. Thats not my America and it’s a shame if that’s acceptable to other Americans. Edited October 30, 2021 by Backintheday544
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 10 minutes ago, Doc said: Did you miss the part you quoted that I bolded? Again, not slavery. I did. They can’t leave because of threats. You want people to swim the Rio if they do a bad. If they turn back they’re shot. How is that not a threat? Do this work… if you don’t, you’ll be out in a spot you could die…. If you do an we don’t approve, you’ll be put in a spot you can die. Sounds like a threat.
Doc Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 Just now, Backintheday544 said: I did. They can’t leave because of threats. You want people to swim the Rio if they do a bad. If they turn back they’re shot. How is that not a threat? Do this work… if you don’t, you’ll be out in a spot you could die…. If you do an we don’t approve, you’ll be put in a spot you can die. Sounds like a threat. They don't have to do anything and won't be threatened if they go back to their home countries.
Tenhigh Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: Im done arguing this anymore with the others but this was the policy position put together: - Round up every able body illegal at the border. (Round up people) - Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. (Put them in “training” camps) -After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. (Order them/force them to work) -If they do a good job they can stay. -If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. The policy says to round up people. Force them to work )no guarantees of citizenship in what was provided). If they don’t work or if they do a bad job, they’re out in a dangerous position of swimming the Rio, apparently if it’s too dangerous and they turn around then US people are tasked to shoot them. Thats not my America and it’s a shame if that’s acceptable to other Americans. I am ok with arresting people entering the country illegally, we should absolutely be doing that. And I am ok with offering them a path to citizenship which includes free training because we are kinda (@#$%ed from a logistics perspective right now. I also think you are confusing training camps, largely a football term, and concentration camps, a Holocaust reference. But if these people are willing to commit, it's not the worst idea ever. But nobody should have to swin the Rio, just deport them normally if they don't meet the government's terms. Edited October 30, 2021 by Tenhigh
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 47 minutes ago, Doc said: They don't have to do anything and won't be threatened if they go back to their home countries. not something in the original proposition you agreed to. 39 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: I am ok with arresting people entering the country illegally, we should absolutely be doing that. And I am ok with offering them a path to citizenship which includes free training because we are kinda (@#$%ed from a logistics perspective right now. I also think you are confusing training camps, largely a football term, and concentration camps, a Holocaust reference. But if these people are willing to commit, it's not the worst idea ever. But nobody should have to swin the Rio, just deport them normally if they don't meet the government's terms. Exactly. A path to citizenship is fine if they agree to it. But forcing people to work under threats is not.
Doc Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 13 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: not something in the original proposition you agreed to. The underlying understanding is that illegals who insist on remaining in the country can choose to do what IRV semi-seriously proposed...or go back to their home countries. They are no more "slaves" than NFL players are "slaves" to the NFL.
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Doc said: The underlying understanding is that illegals who insist on remaining in the country can choose to do what IRV semi-seriously proposed...or go back to their home countries. They are no more "slaves" than NFL players are "slaves" to the NFL. This is the position you were defending: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. You’re now adding elements that weren’t there , calling it a joke (which there’s no evidence of). The position you’re defending was a position of slavery. He wanted people to work in country under threat of being forced in a dangerous situation and if they retreated that situation they would be shot. Do you believe the position laid out by Irv is good position? Again to remind you what the position is and what you jumped to defend: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. Edited October 30, 2021 by Backintheday544
Tenhigh Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 3 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: not something in the original proposition you agreed to. Exactly. A path to citizenship is fine if they agree to it. But forcing people to work under threats is not. Well, threat of deportation seems ok, no? 2 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: This is the position you were defending: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. You’re now adding elements that weren’t there , calling it a joke (which there’s no evidence of). The position you’re defending was a position of slavery. He wanted people to work in country under threat of being forced in a dangerous situation and if they retreated that situation they would be shot. Do you believe the position laid out by Irv is good position? Again to remind you what the position is and what you jumped to defend: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. I think YOU kinds assumed they couldn't reject the job training thing here, Biddy.
Doc Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 3 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: This is the position you were defending: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. You’re now adding elements that weren’t there , calling it a joke (which there’s no evidence of). The position you’re defending was a position of slavery. He wanted people to work in country under threat of being forced in a dangerous situation and if they retreated that situation they would be shot. Do you believe the position laid out by Irv is good position? Again to remind you what the position is and what you jumped to defend: I could solve two problems Demented Biden Blunder Buttogag can't figure out in about a minute. Round up every able body illegal at the border. Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved. Go back and re-read my first response to your childish/idiotic claim that it was slavery. There was no defense of anything other than my saying that it's not even close to slavery. But hey, I realize it's easier to cry racism and ignore the real problems. So you do you.
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, Tenhigh said: Well, threat of deportation seems ok, no? I think YOU kinds assumed they couldn't reject the job training thing here, Biddy. If you do bad work, then “If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved” If that’s the punishment for bad work I’d hate to see the punishment for non-compliance and refusing to go to these re-education camps. 1 hour ago, Doc said: Go back and re-read my first response to your childish/idiotic claim that it was slavery. There was no defense of anything other than my saying that it's not even close to slavery. But hey, I realize it's easier to cry racism and ignore the real problems. So you do you. I did. In your original post, you were ignorant to the fact that forced labor is an issue in modern day slavery. I provided you with links to antislavery.Org and the UN to educate you. You’ve provided your “feelings” that what was provided is not a form of slavery. Should we trust your feels that forced labor is not slavery or should we trust international bodies that combat slavery that say forced labor is slavery? here’s another one that says forced labor is slavery http://www.endslaverynow.org/learn/slavery-today/forced-labor Edited October 30, 2021 by Backintheday544
Tenhigh Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Backintheday544 said: If you do bad work, then “If they do a good job they can stay. If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. Problems solved” If that’s the punishment for bad work I’d hate to see the punishment for non-compliance and refusing to go to these re-education camps. If all you are looking for is evil, that's all you are gonna see, no? And "re-education camps"? Lol really? Are you referring to Mao's or Stalin's?
Backintheday544 Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Tenhigh said: If all you are looking for is evil, that's all you are gonna see, no? Do good guys force people to swim across a dangerous river with weapons drawn so they can’t turn around? I don’t know if I missed that Batman comic.
Tenhigh Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 7 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: Do good guys force people to swim across a dangerous river with weapons drawn so they can’t turn around? I don’t know if I missed that Batman comic. Depends on what the bad guys did. Trespassing? Not appropriate, but I think he was just being hyperbolic.
Doc Posted October 31, 2021 Posted October 31, 2021 4 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: I did. In your original post, you were ignorant to the fact that forced labor is an issue in modern day slavery. I provided you with links to antislavery.Org and the UN to educate you. You’ve provided your “feelings” that what was provided is not a form of slavery. Should we trust your feels that forced labor is not slavery or should we trust international bodies that combat slavery that say forced labor is slavery? here’s another one that says forced labor is slavery http://www.endslaverynow.org/learn/slavery-today/forced-labor Again, since you didn't get it the first 4 times, they can easily return back to their countries of origin and not be forced to work at all and be free.
Backintheday544 Posted October 31, 2021 Posted October 31, 2021 8 minutes ago, Doc said: Again, since you didn't get it the first 4 times, they can easily return back to their countries of origin and not be forced to work at all and be free. Again since you’re about as quick as Trent Edwards scrambling. I called Irvs statement support of slavery. His statement laid out this: - Round up every able body illegal at the border. (Round up people) - Take them to truck driver and longshoreman training. (Put them in “training” camps) -After one week training take them to the ports and order them to work. (Order them/force them to work) -If they do a good job they can stay. -If not, make them swim back across the Rio Grand at gunpoint. You jumped in and supported that statement. That statement. You later added a bunch of qualifiers or whatever. But you defended that statement. Thats who you are. That’s the poster you are. Defending that statement. Add whatever qualifiers you want after the fact. But that’s the policy position you chose to defend. That’s who you are. 1
Recommended Posts