I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
thanks TMB. Much more direct. I tried to get WW to think outside of his comfort zone, but Yes he shut me down too.
I didn't intend to shut anyone down. I could get into this topic but past experiences have taught me that some beliefs cannot be discussed in a positive way. Although discussion and collaboration is needed on a higher level, right now on this forum is not the time.
You know how when emotions and tension are high and productive collaboration is not possible?
I did not mean any disrespect. I'm the new one here and so far I have mostly enjoyed my communication with everyone!
Please forgive some repetitivness from me and spelling as well. This is my challenge with ADHD. And feel free to mention it, or if I go off topic. Oh the struggle of an ADHD life!
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
31 minutes ago, Weetywill said:
Yes of course we need to teach our children all of that history. I most certainly do teach mine.
I come from a generation that we do not associate peoples actions or crimes based on the color of their skin. Or asign collective guilt for crimes of the past or present on a person's race. I learned in school and from my parents and was never taught that the history of racism was any less evil than it truly is.
If there are areas that it is not being taught,then that's something I would take interest in changing.
I find it it risky to teach the atrocities of humans based on skin color and religion. To do so will open up areas that may put marginalized communities more at risk. It opens up an opportunity for people to do it to everyone. I most certainly would not point out crime stats according to skin color. I simply do not see fellow humans as a race or skin color(although I do respect and reconize their culture and past and present disparities and strengths that may be assiciated with race) .I see them as humans. We speak of tolitarian fascist governments. The big example is the Big H in Germany. He too asigned collective guilt and sin on one group of people. We know how that turned out. Where as I do not believe this could happen here, it is still cut from the same discusting cloth. I will not teach my children to think that way. Nor will I allow anyone to teach them that either. Does this make me confused about CRT?
The confusion from CRT can be remedied by allowing school comitties, parents and the community to communicate and collaborate with what is being taught and how. Taking into consideration of the age of the child and some other factors. Parents have always taught their children values they felt were important. This is a good thing. Racism at at a time was accepted and taught to children. However not all parents thought that this was a good value to teach their children and that's how things change. I think the solution is to involve parents more. I believe that most people are good. I believe most people and schools want what's best for children. You know when as nurses we have different personalities of patients families? Some are very open and others are set in a certain way? We always collaborate with the entire family and take into consideration of everyone(patient is primary of course) most of the time all family members want what's best for their loved one. Same idea with this.
Open respectful communication regardless of race, religion or political affiliation.
Is this storm called DeSantis? LOL.
What is your concern, specifically, with how the history of American slavery is currently taught in public schools. My concern is that public education whitewashed the reality and consequences of the racist system during my youth. What's your concern? Is it closer to mine or closer to the parents complaining about CRT?
You currently live in a society that still associates race with crime, criminality, increased threat. There aren't more black men in jail for minor law infractions because black men are more prone to break minor laws, they are just more likely to be arrested and prosecuted.
The proportion of people of color who are incarcerated in the nation compared with their representation in the general population epitomizes the need to achieve racial justice. The nation incarcerates almost two million people1—more than any other country in the world—and over five times more per capita than just 40 years ago.2 But the burden of criminal sentencing and imprisonment is not inflicted equally. Black and Latinx residents are incarcerated at rates five and three times higher than white residents, respectively.3 One of every 81 Black adults in the U.S. is in prison.4
These staggering disparities create individual and community barriers to full and equal participation in American society. Criminal convictions and imprisonment can prevent individuals from voting and gaining employment, undermine access to safe housing, negatively impact the life outcomes of children, and substantially lower lifetime earnings, amongst other social, political and economic disadvantages.5 While these are individual consequences, there are also societal consequences: high levels of imprisonment in communities bring about crime, poverty and neighborhood deterioration through decreased political power that fuels greater disparities.6 This cycle of suffering, social exclusion and disempowerment is primarily experienced by African Americans and other people of color.
The enormous racial disparities, discrimination and inequality created by the United States’ system of mass incarceration did not occur by happenstance. They are the product of deliberate legal and policy choices created by a dominant white population supported by a culture of white supremacy. For instance, it is now clear that the so-called “War on Drugs” which greatly accelerated America’s mass incarceration build-up starting in the 1970’s was initiated as a deliberate effort by President Richard Nixon and his administration to disrupt, vilify and oppress communities of color for political gain and control, rather than a legal initiative primarily concerned about improving public safety.7
In terms of involving parents more, when do you think that schools started limiting parent access and input? I ask because I was active with local and state school board decisions and elections when my kids were young. I went to the meetings. I volunteered in the classrooms occasionally and observed the safe, supportive and inclusive instruction. What do you think changed and when do you think it changed? I think conservative parents just got riled up by their media preferences but I'm open to hear something different.
If you've watched any of the school board meetings with angry crowds you realize that the people shouting and wanting books removed aren't interested in open or respectful dialog.
I recommend listening to the podcast Ultra. It recounts an episode in American history (1940s) when Nazi Germany sent agents to the US to spread propaganda and involved congressmen.
I know some will reject this suggestion because it is produced by Rachel Maddow, but try googling William Dudley Pelley and the Silver Shirts.
I recommend listening to the podcast Ultra. It recounts an episode in American history (1940s) when Nazi Germany sent agents to the US to spread propaganda and involved congressmen.
I know some will reject this suggestion because it is produced by Rachel Maddow, but try googling William Dudley Pelley and the Silver Shirts.
I thought it was common knowledge and a know strategy of Nz's to try and make all countries follow the Nz ideology?
(Using Nz to prevent repetition of the word)
And I think you're correct about Rachel Maddow! LOL
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
6 minutes ago, Weetywill said:
I thought it was common knowledge and a know strategy of Nz's to try and make all countries follow the Nz ideology?
(Using Nz to prevent repetition of the word)
And I think you're correct about Rachel Maddow! LOL
Then call them right wing authoritarians or right wing extremists or call them fascists... all of those would be accurate descriptors and if you associate with a place or time period those who read history will understand.
It is true that some conservatives are increasingly isolated in a very narrow and shallow media pool. IMV
Are you going to mention Stacy Abrams? You think that her questioning the activities of her gubernatorial opponent taken while he was secretary of state that purged roughly hundreds of thousands of voters from the Georgia voter rolls was inappropriate? Why? Aren't we supposed to question things like that?
In reality, what Democrat has denied an election with bold faced lies and refusal to concede that comes anywhere close to Trump's unacceptable and corrupt refusal to accept defeat? It's hard to imagine any other refusal to accept loss that comes close. Help me out.
I missed this before. In regards to Stacey Abrams. Fist I should clarify that questioning and/or noting possible irregularities such as described above, is not "election denying".
I would define "election denial " as consistently claiming without proper investigation and/or when an investigation that is done without bias and prejudice has not found any evidence of fraud,collusion etc. So I would not consider what you described above as election denying.
However, questioning a process, irregularities and suspicious events whether it be at the voting stations or other is also not election denying. I consider it necessary.
So in relation to how some republicans have been deemed election deniers, I would say yes, she is an election denier. So is Hillary Clinton(2016) , Maxine Waters (2016). Even the Bush administration that successfully got a recount.
But personally, I do not think any are "election deniers". Eventhough people have been claiming stolen or fraudulent elections in almost every election, the term "election denier" is relatively new, doesn't have a defined definition.
I think people can think and say what they want. Even believe that an election was illegitimate. It doesn't make them a threat to democracy. Only a threat that people will think they are stupid, and they are.
I thought it was common knowledge and a know strategy of Nz's to try and make all countries follow the Nz ideology?
(Using Nz to prevent repetition of the word)
And I think you're correct about Rachel Maddow! LOL
Sorry, you seem to know more about Nazis than other posters here. I do not think Nazi strategy is common knowledge.
And I fail to see the humor about Ms. Maddow. She is a Rhodes Scholar and has a PhD in political science. While one may not agree with her politics, she is quite knowledgeable and a skilled writer and speaker.
Sorry, you seem to know more about Nazis than other posters here. I do not think Nazi strategy is common knowledge.
And I fail to see the humor about Ms. Maddow. She is a Rhodes Scholar and has a PhD in political science. While one may not agree with her politics, she is quite knowledgeable and a skilled writer and speaker.
I have several WW2 Vetrans in my family so I was given education from them. However I don't consider knowing more than the average person. I did think it was common knowledge though. I could be wrong?
And I heard Herschel Walker claim that people are using the cash from student loan forgiveness to buy video games.
a) loan forgiveness has not been granted
b) cash won't be awarded, the forgiveness will go directly to the loans.
There is harm is spreading false information/lies. People lose trust and refuse to follow laws. Some lies incite violence.
Interesting:
Quote
Any day now, federal student loan borrowers throughout the U.S. could see their balances reduced by up to $20,000 thanks to President Biden's student debt forgiveness plan. The administration is waiting on a green light from a federal judge to actually start reducing balances, but still says applicants can expect good news in the coming weeks.
While recipients won't see that aid in the form of a check, any remaining balances will be re-amortized, meaning monthly payments will be recalculated to reflect the new balance. For borrowers, that means monthly payments could drop by up to $300 per month.
That extra cash will be a much needed lifeline to cover other bills or necessary expenses for many. But some borrowers plan to spend the money more freely.
In fact, 73% of anticipated recipients say they expect to spend their debt forgiveness on non-essential items, including travel, dining out and new tech, according to a recent survey from Intelligent.com.
Yes of course we need to teach our children all of that history. I most certainly do teach mine.
I come from a generation that we do not associate peoples actions or crimes based on the color of their skin. Or asign collective guilt for crimes of the past or present on a person's race. I learned in school and from my parents and was never taught that the history of racism was any less evil than it truly is.
If there are areas that it is not being taught,then that's something I would take interest in changing.
I find it it risky to teach the atrocities of humans based on skin color and religion. To do so will open up areas that may put marginalized communities more at risk. It opens up an opportunity for people to do it to everyone.
You've said so much here. Just so I understand, are you saying that you would rather NOT teach children about the atrocities that occurred from American slavery? And if so, your reasoning is because you don't want children to learn about how people were/are treated because of their skin color? is this correct?
Weetywill
147 Posts
I didn't intend to shut anyone down. I could get into this topic but past experiences have taught me that some beliefs cannot be discussed in a positive way. Although discussion and collaboration is needed on a higher level, right now on this forum is not the time.
You know how when emotions and tension are high and productive collaboration is not possible?
I did not mean any disrespect. I'm the new one here and so far I have mostly enjoyed my communication with everyone!
Please forgive some repetitivness from me and spelling as well. This is my challenge with ADHD. And feel free to mention it, or if I go off topic. Oh the struggle of an ADHD life!