this is a real photo? WHAT THE FUCK??!
What the fuck is this?
Moderator: Jesus H Christ
-
Bizzarofelice
- I wanna be a bear
- Posts: 10216
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:48 pm
http://www.michellemalkin.comPrimeX wrote:That is a picture on the internet.
Still on vacation, but wanted to bring you an update on the American flag vandal at Montebello H.S. (via the Whittier Daily News). He or she was from neighboring El Rancho USD:
A student protest that resulted in a Mexican flag being flown on top of an upside-down U.S. flag at a local school has prompted disciplinary action against one El Rancho High School student.
El Rancho Unified School District officials said the unnamed student was punished for being involved in the flag incident, which took place Monday at Montebello High School, about four miles east of El Rancho High School.
The punishment was consistent with the California Education Code, officials said. They did not give further details because of legal and privacy issues.
But Montebello Unified School District administrators said they were glad the neighboring district investigated the incident and took the proper action.
"We appreciate the diligence that \ district has taken in identifying the student who allegedly committed the infraction with the flagpole incident," said Assistant Superintendent Robert G. Henke.
Monday's image of the Montebello High flagpole sparked an uproar locally and across the nation after it was posted on various Web sites and featured in East Coast newspapers and national broadcast media.
The incident took place about noon Monday, when a group of about 1,000 students from the El Rancho and Whittier Union High school districts marched through Pico Rivera to Montebello High, where students had walked out of classes in the previous week to protest proposed immigration reform legislation.
By the time they reached Montebello High, the campus was on lockdown, district officials said.
That's when the protesters took to the flagpole, added the Mexican flag and turned the U.S. flag upside down. The school's California flag was stolen in the process, Henke said.
Rumors that more student walkouts were scheduled for today, the official Cesar Chavez holiday, has prompted Whittier-area police and sheriff's agencies to step up their efforts, with authorities threatening to give $165 tickets to any student who is caught protesting during school hours.
What are the odds that the guilty student and his/her collaborators are here illegally?
And the odds that anyone will do anything about it?
***
Meanwhile:
"Los Angeles is Ours Now"
***
Previous:
Another American flag is down
The American flag comes second
TrackBack <3>
on a short leash, apparently.
WTF is wrong with you? Meat is your friend.Bizzarofelice wrote:#4 vegetarian combo with cheese enchilada.
coke
EAT THE MEAT!
Risa, as I can barely understand what they speak I've become quite the pro at ignoring their existence anymore. Please don't make Primo angry on this beautiful Friday.
Last edited by PrimeX on Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Apologists are quick to argue that Latino supremacists are just a small fringe faction of the pro-illegal immigration movement (never mind that their ranks include former and current Hispanic politicians from L.A. mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to former California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Cruz Bustamante).
But you'll never hear or read such forgiving caveats in the mainstream press's hostile coverage of the pro-immigration enforcement members of the Minutemen Project—who are universally smeared as racists. For what? For peacefully demanding that our government enforce its laws and secure its borders.
Yes, borders. Last time I checked a map of North America, they still do exist.
Unless we give in and let the bullies and their appeasers whitewash those out of existence, too.
on a short leash, apparently.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004871.htm
The Stars and Stripes have been replaced by the Mexican flag at Chasewood North, and residents of the condominium community off Central Boulevard are puzzled as to who made the switch.
"I woke up Sunday morning and looked up from my patio and then realized that the American flag wasn't on the flagpole," said Sue Miller a Chasewood North board member. "What captured my attention were the colors — at first I thought it was an Italian flag, but one of our residents said it was the Mexican flag.
"I went to the flagpole, to see if the American flag was maybe on the ground, but they took it, and they cut the rope to get the American flag down and the Mexican flag up as well."
A best estimate of when the switch took place is Saturday night... It may be several weeks before the Stars and Stripes once again fly over Chasewood North, according to Miller, who at one time was the resident manager of the complex.
"We tried to get the flag down but couldn't, so we need to hire a company with a boom truck to get up there and replace the rope and put up the American flag," she said. "I would guesstimate that this would cost $500 or more to do."
on a short leash, apparently.
-
Bizzarofelice
- I wanna be a bear
- Posts: 10216
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:48 pm
Re: What the fuck is this?
It's the beginning of a race war. You should be eager and excited.Risa wrote:
this is a real photo? WHAT THE FUCK??!
-
ElvisMonster
- savvy fashionista
- Posts: 2311
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:46 am
- Location: All up in it.
-
tough love
- Iron Mike
- Posts: 1886
- Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:01 pm
- Location: Prison Urantia
-
Uncle Fester
- The Man broke me chain
- Posts: 3164
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:58 pm
- Location: Abandoned Hamm's Brewery, St. Paul
-
MgoBlue-LightSpecial
- Eternal Scobode
- Posts: 21259
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:35 pm
-
Screw_Michigan
Bizzarofelice wrote:malkin = cackling harpy with zero credibility
next time I go out of my way to read something written by her will be the first time.
Forming an opinion without having an opinion from reading her opinions...
“It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.”
-
See You Next Wednesday
- De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum
- Posts: 1487
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:34 pm
I'm down with that. But hey, I got this thing I need to do, so you go on ahead, I'll catch up with you later.Jack wrote:Maybe, we should all enter Mexico, illegally!!
just sayin'
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
-
Bizzarofelice
- I wanna be a bear
- Posts: 10216
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:48 pm
Don't worry. I don't use the Bob Dole method of reviewing movies. I've seen Malkin make plenty of appearances. Everytime she wanders off her talking points list she has her ass handed to her. Every damned time.The Seer wrote: Forming an opinion without having an opinion from reading her opinions...
Some of her crap has been C & P here and it isn't anything worth a damned. For Christs sake if you give an ounce of validity to her harping, I pray you search out new venues for info.
why is my neighborhood on fire
Michelle Malkin has been even more rabid, monkeyfuck insane than usual over the immigration bill protests. Bless her comically exaggerated facial features, she was all awake at 1:15 this morning, tapping her fingers bloody to reveal to all of us the outrages of the protests, including - holy fuck - the placement of a United States flag upside down under a Mexican flag. This was done by high school students, those models of subtlety, in California. Evacuates Malkin, "You will not see this heart-stopping photo on the front page of the NY Times or on the lead story of the major news networks." That's right - upside down American flag second on a pole - heart-stopping. Japanese Americans put into concentration camps for being Japanese - a-ok. Such is the morality of Malkin, for whom symbols are more important than people.
Malkin expands on her blog's bugfuckery in her column this week (if by "column," you mean, "flatulent banshee screeches sledgehammered into your head"), where she calls the protests "militant racism" from a "protected minority group." See, for Malkin, it's racism if Hispanics call out whites for hypocrisy, and they're "protected" so she can't write something like "Paco Taco and Senorita Chiquita Banana hate whitey and threaten to sleep under their sombreros on our porches if we don't let them fuck our children with chalupas" without sounding, you know, racist. Good thing Mexican immigrants are so goddamn protected - otherwise, white employers might exploit them.
But it's the protest themselves that have Malkin's Hello Kitty panties in a wad (see? That's a vaguely racist reference because Malkin ain't "protected," right?). Malkin belches, "One of the largest, boldest banners visible from aerial shots of the rally read: 'THIS IS STOLEN LAND.' Others blared: 'CHICANO POWER' and 'BROWN IS BEAUTIFUL.' (Can you imagine the uproar if someone had come to the rally holding up a sign reading 'WHITE IS BEAUTIFUL'?) Thugs with masked faces flashed gang signs on the steps of L.A.'s City Hall. Students walked out of classrooms all across Southern California chanting, 'Latinos, stand up!' Young people raised their fists in defiance, clothed in T-shirts bearing radical leftist guerrilla Che Guevara's face and Aztlan emblems." God, one a.m. must be a sad little time around Casa de Malkin.
Rush Limbaugh, Cal Thomas, and other jowly right wingers are besides themselves that Hispanics would dare protest, would dare raise up the Mexican flag (although one would bet that they have no problem with the flags raised on St. Patrick's Day or Columbus Day), would dare actually cry out en masse against the government.
And this is how we get back to Jason and the pussy. 'Cause for the most part, in the last couple of decades, protests in this nation have been long-planned events, not spontaneous outpourings of outrage (even if the Hispanic media was involved in getting out the message this time). But this is what real protest looks like - not like riots, not like well-conceived marches. It's messy, it's angry, it's sometimes over the top, it's sometimes offensive. Maybe it's the fact that many of the protesters come from countries with a more contemporary tradition of mass action that the demonstrations have mattered and been more energized.
Let the bottom feeders like Malkin get pissed off and confused and hurt by the protests. Let us go about embracing them, embracing the effectiveness of the form, and asking what it says about the nation surrounding them to figure out how to harness their energy and tactics for future action.
Malkin expands on her blog's bugfuckery in her column this week (if by "column," you mean, "flatulent banshee screeches sledgehammered into your head"), where she calls the protests "militant racism" from a "protected minority group." See, for Malkin, it's racism if Hispanics call out whites for hypocrisy, and they're "protected" so she can't write something like "Paco Taco and Senorita Chiquita Banana hate whitey and threaten to sleep under their sombreros on our porches if we don't let them fuck our children with chalupas" without sounding, you know, racist. Good thing Mexican immigrants are so goddamn protected - otherwise, white employers might exploit them.
But it's the protest themselves that have Malkin's Hello Kitty panties in a wad (see? That's a vaguely racist reference because Malkin ain't "protected," right?). Malkin belches, "One of the largest, boldest banners visible from aerial shots of the rally read: 'THIS IS STOLEN LAND.' Others blared: 'CHICANO POWER' and 'BROWN IS BEAUTIFUL.' (Can you imagine the uproar if someone had come to the rally holding up a sign reading 'WHITE IS BEAUTIFUL'?) Thugs with masked faces flashed gang signs on the steps of L.A.'s City Hall. Students walked out of classrooms all across Southern California chanting, 'Latinos, stand up!' Young people raised their fists in defiance, clothed in T-shirts bearing radical leftist guerrilla Che Guevara's face and Aztlan emblems." God, one a.m. must be a sad little time around Casa de Malkin.
Rush Limbaugh, Cal Thomas, and other jowly right wingers are besides themselves that Hispanics would dare protest, would dare raise up the Mexican flag (although one would bet that they have no problem with the flags raised on St. Patrick's Day or Columbus Day), would dare actually cry out en masse against the government.
And this is how we get back to Jason and the pussy. 'Cause for the most part, in the last couple of decades, protests in this nation have been long-planned events, not spontaneous outpourings of outrage (even if the Hispanic media was involved in getting out the message this time). But this is what real protest looks like - not like riots, not like well-conceived marches. It's messy, it's angry, it's sometimes over the top, it's sometimes offensive. Maybe it's the fact that many of the protesters come from countries with a more contemporary tradition of mass action that the demonstrations have mattered and been more energized.
Let the bottom feeders like Malkin get pissed off and confused and hurt by the protests. Let us go about embracing them, embracing the effectiveness of the form, and asking what it says about the nation surrounding them to figure out how to harness their energy and tactics for future action.
as well as the author.
-
Bizzarofelice
- I wanna be a bear
- Posts: 10216
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:48 pm
in other newsBizzarofelice wrote:once again, all wonderful or all horrible things are projected upon a piece of cloth.
grow up, people
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-new ... omment?q=1
Letter to Editor - Illegal Immigration - Ask Bishop when is okay to break law!
Georgia Bulletin ^ | 3/30/2006 | Lisa Olwine
Posted on 04/01/2006 1:05:20 PM PST by petkus
LETTER To the Editor. A s a Catholic who struggles to reconcile the U.S./Mexican illegal immigration crisis with Christian principles, I was grateful to see and eager to read Bishops Gregory and Boland's pastoral letter on immigration reform. However, after studying the document I was disappointed and dismayed—not by what was said but by what was left unsaid.
Expecting a comprehensive exploration of the moral responsibilities of all parties involved, I found the overwhelming focus of the letter to be, in essence, the failure of U.S. taxpayers to be sufficiently generous to those who reside here illegally. While I appreciated our bishops' insistence on the protection of the human rights of all immigrants, legal status or no, it is only one part of the moral equation.
Entirely ignored was the question of the extent to which immigrants are morally obligated to observe a country's laws governing entrance and residence. And if one's moral obligation to abide by the law is mitigated by one's difficult financial circumstances, how are we to discern to which situations this moral leniency does and does not apply? If 1 am in dire financial straits through no fault of my own, may I, with moral impunity, choose to cheat on my taxes (say, by forging Social Security numbers to obtain tax credits for nonexistent offspring) rather than attempt the lengthy process of going through the proper IRS channels for possible relief? Consistent pastoral guidance for individuals in such situations is essential.
Moreover, unlawful activity begets more of the same. Because they have chosen to enter the U.S. by other than legitimate means, illegal immigrants must choose between having their illegal status discovered or the breaking of additional laws—e.g., driving without a license or driving with a forged license. Paradoxically, the thing that gives the U.S. its stability—its rule of law—is the very thing being undermined by those who seek the stability offered by this country. To what degree can the escalating unlawfulness be morally justified? At what point does Jesus' injunction to "render unto Caesar" become applicable?
Referenced only in passing within the pastoral letter is the moral obligation of Mexico (a developed country with natural resources) to rise to its potential and provide adequate opportunities for its own citizens. As jointly stated by U.S. and Mexican bishops, its failure to do so is the root problem of illegal immigration. What pressure are Mexican bishops exerting to make their government more accountable to its people? Do not measures (by both the U.S. and Mexico) that embolden and encourage illegal immigrants ultimately serve to enable Mexico to persist in its dysfunctional state? If so, are our good intentions perhaps misguided compassion? If a person is not seeking asylum due to starvation, persecution, etc., is he ever morally bound not to simply abandon his troubled country but to work toward, fight for its improvement?
The purpose of my letter is not to argue but to beseech our bishops to shepherd us to a comprehensive understanding of the morality involved in all the various components of this dilemma.
Lisa Olwine Lawrenceville
so, when is it ok?
on a short leash, apparently.