Slashdot Mirror
IBM Employees Protest Cooperation With Donald Trump (theintercept.com)
Reader Presto Vivace shares a report on The Intercept: IBM employees are taking a public stand following a personal pitch to Donald Trump from CEO Ginni Rometty and the company's initial refusal to rule out participating in the creation of a national Muslim registry. In November, Rometty wrote Trump directly, congratulating him on his electoral victory and detailing various services the company could sell his administration. The letter was published on an internal IBM blog along with a personal note from Rometty to her enormous global staff. "As IBMers, we believe that innovation improves the human condition. ... We support, tolerance, diversity, the development of expertise, and the open exchange of ideas," she wrote in the context of lending material support to a man who won the election by rejecting all of those values. Employee comments were a mix of support and horror. Now, some of those who were horrified are going public, denouncing Rometty's letter and asserting "our right to refuse participation in any U.S. government contracts that violate constitutionally protected civil liberties." The IBMPetition.org effort has been spearheaded in part by IBM cybersecurity engineer Daniel Hanley, who told The Intercept he started organizing with his coworkers after reading Rometty's letter. "I was shocked, of course," Hanley said, "because IBM has purported to espouse diversity and inclusion, and yet here's Ginni Rometty in an unqualified way reaching out to an admin whose electoral success was based on racist programs."
IBM was happy to collaborate with Hitler. Why not Trump? Or any other despicable national leader? After all, business is business, right, IBM?
video of Trump calling for Muslim registry https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yahoo news dreamed that one up. He was asked and refused to answer the question... Which is the only way to handle that. He answered a question that wasn't asked, and wasn't ridiculous and stupid. If he spent all of his time denying that he beat puppies and raped ferrets.. and the headlines every day would be "Trump DENIES yet again that the raped that ferret"... he (nor any other politician) would not have won. It was a trap, set and sprung. It IS FAKE NEWS.
And, you fell for it because you wanted it to be true. You would have simply dismissed it if it were one of your favorite politicians and never looked for a rebuttal. Try being aware of your own position bias. It will help in the next 8 years.
They are protesting something that will never be created, because when the rhetoric was translated into reality, it was a proposal to reestablish the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS)[1], which was in force through half of President Obama's presidency, and which tracks certain individuals who enter the United States based on country/region of origin and other factors. Useless publicity stunt with commensurate absolutely abysmal coverage by The Intercept.
See also:
8 U.S. Code  1182 - Inadmissible aliens[2]
"Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President:
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
Flashback:
"The Secretary of State and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly."[3] -- President Jimmy Carter, April 7, 1980
[1] https://www.ice.gov/nseers
[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
[3] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu...
Seriously, how much of your own kool-aide can you drink?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics...
(warning, bs autoplaying video)
"âoePresident-elect Trump has never advocated for any registry or system that tracks individuals based on their religion, and to imply otherwise is completely false," Jason Miller, Communications Director of the Presidential Transition Team, wrote in a statement. "The national registry of foreign visitors from countries with high terrorism activity that was in place during the Bush and Obama Administrations gave intelligence and law enforcement communities additional tools to keep our country safe the President-elect will release his own vetting policies after he is sworn in.""
The article goes on to illustrate where the idea apparently came from, in a probably-misheard question during a rally.
From what I can see, a good 50% of the panic the left is feeling over the Trump presidency is being startled by THEIR OWN STRAWMEN.
-Styopa
You are right. The Quran does advocate for genocide. Here's just some of those verses, straight from the horse's mouth:
And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain.
And we utterly destroyed them, ... utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city.
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them.
And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them.
Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.
But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.
And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.
So smote all the country ... he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded.
Thus saith the LORD of hosts ... go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Oops! Sorry about that. Those are from the bible.
No, he advocated for an immigration registry to help with the immigration vetting process. The "Muslim Registry" was part of that fake news that people seem to think helped Trump win the election.
I must call you out on this: it is not "fake news". It is actual news based on something he said. The transcript is here. It's clear that to a degree he is being led on by the reporter and, as is often the case, isn't really thinking about the answers he's giving. He provides vague replies about "management" being the solution and appears distracted. Nonetheless, what's most striking is that he doesn't attach much significance to the concept of a Muslim database. It seems like a totally reasonable idea to him. If I was a Muslim in the US, this is what would worry me. My worry would be compounded by his reaction to the questions in the second half of this video. He's asked about the racial discrimination which a database might bring about and repeatedly avoids the question. He has an opportunity to clarify his views and reassure, but he doesn't take it. It is worrying when someone reacts in the way that he does and none of this information is in any way "fake".
soylentnews.org
Very good tu quoque argument. Except that the last time a war was fought over Christianity was in 1648 (the Thirty Year War), and in all Christian countries today, non-Christians are not persecuted the way they were during, say, the Spanish Inquisition. Theologically, Christianity has undergone a reformation over the centuries and things like the above are noted as being historical i.e. descriptive, but not prescriptive of how Christians should act.
On the flip side, there are no Muslim countries where non-Muslims have any real religious freedom. There are a few countries where Muslims are denied it as well - like in the stans, but any Muslim majority country ultimately ends up having shariah law at some level of government or the other. Also, there are Muslim groups all over the world that demand that the Quran be made their constitution. There are no Christian groups that demand that that for the Bible: the saying 'Render to Caesar that is Caesar's and God that is God's' is a plain recommendation for the separation of temporal and religious powers. No such separation exists in Islam
No, he advocated for an immigration registry to help with the immigration vetting process. The "Muslim Registry" was part of that fake news that people seem to think helped Trump win the election.
I don't know if it's part of the fake news so much has his own inability to communicate effectively. This article seems to provide a pretty unbiased perspective on the topic. He didn't reject the concept of a Muslim registry for a few days. However, he never flatly stated he wanted one either. He either wanted one, and changed his mind, or he didn't understand the questions being asked.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".