Take action now:

Tennie Pierce Part 2: supervisors sue city

Tennie Pierce is the black firefighter who sued Los Angeles for racial discrimination. As a prank, fellow firemen put some dog food in his spaghetti and he ate two bites of it. For that, the L.A. City Council voted to give him $2.7 million. Oh, and by the way: at the time he didn't think it was racial, he'd played several pranks on other firefighters, and his nickname was "Big Dog".

The Council backtracked after bad publicity and has since hired outside lawyers to fight Pierce's suit. The original settlement was "negotiated" by City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo; the outside lawyers could cost as much as $750,000.

Now, Eric Leonard (no permalink) says:
Two Los Angeles City Fire Department captains accused of racial harassment by firefighter Tennie Pierce have filed a reverse racial discrimination lawsuit against the City accusing fire department administrators of unfairly punishing them.

Court documents filed jointly by captains Chris Burton and John Tohill say they were suspended and transferred without due process after Pierce accused them of taking part in a fire station prank in October, 2004...

Burton says he was summarily demoted, transferred, and suspended for 30 days and says despite his request for an, "advocate investigation," of the discipline, no formal investigation of the Pierce incident or Burton's discipline was ever conducted by the fire department.

Tohill says he was suspended for 24 days and transferred, again, he says, without a formal investigation.

The Hispanic firefighter who put the dog food in Pierce's spaghetti was suspended for only six days, they say...

MultiCultiCult · Tue, 02/06/2007 - 14:59 · Importance: 1

Tue, 02/06/2007 - 18:36
perroazul del norte

Dennis Dale elaborates on the burdens of diversity:
(...)
And what was the product of Putnam's half-decade of deliberation? That rather than attempting the old assimilationist model, forging Americans out of immigrants (as this seems no longer possible) America needs to change itself, into a "new us." How this is anything more than a succinct statement of increasingly discredited ( by the very study necessitating it) multicultural orthodoxy is beyond me.

What I find striking about this assertion is that it seems even less desirable than it is possible. But it is widely held sentiment among those who make policy and fabricate consensus for power. What on earth, one must ask, is so very wrong with us that so many well-intended elites think nothing of tossing "us" over the side to make room for a "new us", whoever that might be? And why can't they bring themselves to allow that something other than rank bigotry might be behind resistance to the acceleration of this loss of identity promised by open borders? But this is what it has come to, by silent, unminded, gradual abnegation: no sacrifice is too great to avoid the unpleasantness of race.

In those rare instances that the problems inherent in mass immigration are begrudgingly acknowledged by the elite the single most obvious and sensible answer doesn't merely get short shrift, it goes unmentioned: an immigration policy that lets in fewer, weighted by skills and education.
We have reached the point where a majority of those in the respectable media and the political class have transformed their denial of these problems, perhaps by virtue of having held and enforced it upon the mass for so long, into a quasi-religious faith in the superiority of egalitarian sentiment over reality. It becomes harder and harder not to conclude they've decided no hardship can be too great to endure defending the faith, the faith being the utterly discredited doctrine of the Blank Slate.

Thus we will sacrifice not our lives, which anyway become increasingly disconnected from any communal whole and benumbed by electronic amusement as part of the whole process, but merely anything that gives them meaning, or that differentiates them from the great churning mass of humanity in thrall to the global economy.
We're surrendering the one thing humans have instinctively given their lives for as long as they have been recognizably human: our culture; we do this rather than come clean that diversity is more of a challenge to be met than a benefit to be pursued with zeal above all else, rather than recognizing the importance of culture, the existence of racial differences, and the impact of IQ and its uneven distribution. Rather than expose ourselves as heretics. It is a durable faith indeed.
(...)
AND A LOT MORE ELABORATION ON THE SAME THEME

Tue, 02/06/2007 - 17:03
Fred Dawes

I Love it! and the bull keep rolling along, sad fact is L.A. Is now Mexico.