[Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
thansen@moscow.com
thansen@moscow.com
Tue, 8 Apr 2003 00:09:58 GMT
Statistics for allied casualties are always more accurate than enemy
casualties. The best that statisticians can do (concerning enemy casualties)
is do arough estimate. This data (for obvious reasons) is not made readily
available.
Besides (if I remember correctly), the question concerned "friendlies" only.
Unless you want to taint the data with such information as civilian casualties,
armed civilian youth (such as reported six to ten year-olds being used by
Saddam). But that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, now does it?
Tom Hansen
> Tom,
>
> Those are just the American Casulties, what about the others?
>
> Donovan Arnold
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Tom Hansen" <thansen@moscow.com>
> >Reply-To: <thansen@moscow.com>
> >To: "Dale Courtney" <dale@courtneys.us>, "'vision2020'"
> ><vision2020@moscow.com>
> >Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 06:28:17 -0700
> >
> >MessageGreetings Visionaires -
> >
> >There is a statistical breakdown of the 58,178 casualties of the Vietnam
> >War
> >at:
> >
> >http://thewall-usa.com/stats/index.html
> >
> >Tom Hansen
> >Moscow, Idaho
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]On
> >Behalf Of Dale Courtney
> > Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 10:26 PM
> > To: 'vision2020'
> > Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >
> >
> > Ms. Huskey. You said that "a rich mix of non-whites in the frontlines of
> >combat."
> >
> > Can you tell me what the death rate has been for minorities on the front
> >line?
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]
> >On Behalf Of Melynda Huskey
> > Sent: Sunday, 06 April, 2003 21:04
> > To: Dale Courtney; vision2020
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >
> >
> > Dale Courtney suspects that I'd be either surprised or in denial if I
> >knew what the demographics of the U.S. Armed Forces are. I'm not sure why
> >he thinks so, but in the interests of extending the boundaries of
> >knowledge,
> >I took a quick look at "Population Representation in the Military Service
> >Fiscal Year 2002," a darned compelling little read by the Department of
> >Defense.
> >
> > Blacks represent 20% of total enlisted personnel (approximately 6%
> >more
> >than their representation in the general population)--23% in the Army, and
> >less in other branches. They also represent 8% of active duty officers.
> >
> > Latinos are under-represented in all branches of the services as
> >enlisted personnel, except in the Marine Corps, where they have reached
> >parity with the general population.
> >
> > "Other," which includes multi-racial, Asian, Native American, and
> >Pacific Islanders, are slightly over-represented in enlisted populations.
> >
> > 16% of all officers are non-white across all branches of the service.
> >
> > I didn't bother to get the details on the drastic under-representation
> >of women in all branches at all levels . . . but you can find it for
> >yourself very easily by googling the title of the report.
> >
> > Not exactly reeling with the shock of it all,
> >
> > Melynda Huskey
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Dale Courtney
> > Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 6:09 PM
> > To: 'vision2020'
> > Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >
> > Ms. Huskey,
> >
> > Would you care to provide the statistical breakdown of ethnic
> >minorities in the military? Then the ethnic breakdown of those who have
> >been
> >killed so far?
> >
> > I think you'd be surprised, or in denial.
> >
> > Best,
> > Dale
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com
> >[mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com] On Behalf Of Melynda Huskey
> > Sent: Saturday, 05 April, 2003 22:44
> > To: John Harrell; vision2020
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >
> >
> > Dear John,
> >
> > I shouldn't bother, but the information you quote below is only
> >part
> >of the story. Points-based admissions systems like Michigan's also award
> >points for being the child of alumni (at historically white schools, of
> >course, these points go most often to whites), for geographic diversity,
> >for
> >being a first-generation college student, for coming from a
> >less-represented
> >area of the state (in Michigan, that's the Upper Peninsula), for having
> >specialized athletic ability, for being a veteran, and for all kinds of
> >other things that provide a good mix of students. At some
> >schools--although
> >not, I believe, at Michigan--students who don't need financial aid receive
> >separate consideration . . . a form of affirmative action for the wealthy.
> >
> > Diversity at its finest, it seems, is a rich mix of non-whites in
> >the frontlines of combat, but not in the front rows of college classrooms.
> >
> > Melynda Huskey
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: John Harrell
> > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 7:09 PM
> > To: vision2020
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Isn't This Racist?
> >
> > {see below for article and URL.. I thought this article was
> >interesting}
> >
> > Excerpt:
> >
> > The facts in the Michigan undergraduate case are easily
> >understood:
> >
> > On a 150-point admissions scale, an applicant gets points for
> >various
> > achievements: three points for an outstanding essay, 12 points
> >for a
> > perfect SAT score, 80 points for a 4.0 grade-point
> >average--and
> >20 points
> > for being black, Hispanic or American Indian. White or Asian
> >students with
> > lower than a 950 SAT score are automatically rejected; but if
> >you are black,
> > Hispanic or Indian the rejection score is less than 850.
> >
> > And if race-based preferences are constitutional in university
> >admissions,
> > may there be race-based preferences in other areas--for job
> >applications,
> > juror selection or the election of state legislators?
> >
> >
> > >From Bad to Diverse - The Supreme Court debates whether the
> >14th
> >Amendment means what it
> > says
> >
> > WSJ ^ | April 4, 2003 | PETE DU PONT
> > http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pdupont/?id=110003289
> >
> > Is racial discrimination in the selection of applicants to
> >attend
> >colleges and law
> > schools acceptable--and constitutional--if its purpose is
> > to achieve diversity in the student body?
> >
> > That was the question argued before the Supreme Court Tuesday.
> >The
> >University of Michigan
> > says yes, the social goal of diversity is
> > paramount. The qualified students rejected because of their race
> >say no, such procedures
> > violate their rights under the 14th
> > Amendment, which guarantees "equal protection of the laws," and
> >Title VI of the 1964
> > Civil Rights Act, which makes discrimination
> > "on the ground of race, color, or national origin" illegal for
> >any
> >institution receiving
> > federal funds.
> >
> > The facts in the Michigan undergraduate case are easily
> >understood: On a 150-point
> > admissions scale, an applicant gets points for
> > various achievements: three points for an outstanding essay, 12
> >points for a perfect SAT
> > score, 80 points for a 4.0 grade-point
> > average--and 20 points for being black, Hispanic or American
> >Indian. White or Asian
> > students with lower than a 950 SAT score are
> > automatically rejected; but if you are black, Hispanic or Indian
> >the rejection score is
> > less than 850. The law-school preference program
> > is different but practices the same race-based discrimination in
> >favor of certain
> > minority applicants.
> >
> > There is an old law school adage: When you have the law on your
> >side, argue the law; when
> > you have the facts, argue the facts; and
> > when you have neither the law nor the facts, pound on the table
> >and scream like hell.
> > There was a polite bit of the latter in the
> > courtroom on Tuesday.
> >
> > Maureen Mahoney, arguing the law school's case, said that of the
> >"2,500 students who are
> > rejected each year, probably only 80 of
> > them . . . would have gotten an offer of admission from Michigan
> >under a race-blind
> > system." That, she concluded, "is a very small
> > and diffuse burden" relative to the benefits of the racial
> >preference program.
> >
> > To which Justice Antonin Scalia replied: "I don't know any other
> >area where we . . .
> > decide the case by saying, well, there are very
> > few people being treated unconstitutionally."
> >
> > In the undergraduate case, there is a two-track admissions
> >system,
> >one for selected
> > minorities, and the other for everyone else.
> > Solicitor General Theodore Olson, weighing in on the plaintiffs'
> >side, noted that "the
> > University of Michigan admissions program has
> > created a separate path and a separate door for preferred
> >minorities. . . . If they meet
> > basic qualifications, their path is always clear and
> > their door is always open. . . . Nonpreferred groups face
> >rigorous
> >competition to get
> > through the other door."
> >
> > Indeed, the university's lawyer, when pressed to identify a
> >single
> >minimally qualified
> > minority member who got the 20-point racial
> > bonus and was rejected for admission, admitted, "I can't give
> >you
> >one."
> >
> > All of which leads to deeper questions. If there are to be
> >race-based preferences, who
> > gets to pick the minorities that get the
> > preference? In the 1978 Bakke case, which involved University of
> >California medical
> > students, Asian-Americans were included in the
> > preference class; at Michigan they are not. The 14th Amendment
> >would not seem to give
> > state university admissions officials the
> > power to make such decisions, but that is what Michigan demands.
> >
> > And if race-based preferences are constitutional in university
> >admissions, may there be
> > race-based preferences in other areas--for job
> > applications, juror selection or the election of state
> >legislators?
> >
> > {..snip.. see URL for complete article..}
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> > http://tax.yahoo.com
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
> >http://explorer.msn.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
> >http://explorer.msn.com
> >
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
http://www.fsr.net/