Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Left Wing Democratic Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rarebird who wrote (488)	2/23/2017 11:16:54 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2202

"You are whatever you choose to be. That's how you are defined. " Or not Mischling Test refers to the legal test under Nazi Germany's Nuremberg Laws that was applied to determine whether a person was considered a " Jew" or a " Mischling" (mixed-blood). The Test[ edit]The Decree sets up the legal test defined here. Part One[ edit]The first part of the test is implemented by setting up three categories as follows: A person with either three or four Jewish grandparents is considered to be a Jew.A person with exactly two Jewish grandparents is considered to be either a Jew or a Mischling of the first degree [8](discussed below, second part of test)A person with only one Jewish grandparent is considered to be a Mischling of the second degree. [9]Part Two[ edit]The remaining problem was the treatment of a person with two Jewish, and two non-Jewish, grandparents. This leads to the second part of the test, which has four subdivisions. A person with exactly two Jewish grandparents was deemed a Jew [10] if either: a) he is a member of the Jewish religious community on 14 November 1935 or later becomes a member; orb) he is married to a Jew on 14 November 1935 or later marries a Jew; orc) his parents were married on or after 17 September 1935, and one of his parents is Jewish; ord) he is born out of wedlock after 31 July 1936, and one of his parents is Jewish.If such a person is not classified as a Jew under any of these four subtests, then he is a Mischling of the 1st degree (by the terms of Part One). Examples[edit] Racial classification chart based on the Nuremberg Laws. The following Examples demonstrate how Part Two of the Decree's legal test operates. Remember that in every case, X always has exactly two Jewish grandparents. Unless this initial condition applies, there is no point in applying these tests, as the categorization into the three basic classes (Jew, Mischling, German) is only complicated in the case of "exactly two" Jewish grandparents. Test A[edit] X had always worshiped as a Jew but on 1 November 1935 he converted to Catholicism. He is a Mischling (1st degree) as a result. If he had waited two more weeks to convert, he would be classified as (and would always remain) a Jew. X had left the Jewish religious community but rejoins it on 1 December 1935. He was a Mischling but on 1 December he will be classified as a Jew. Test B[edit] X had been married to a Jew for years but on 1 November 1935, their divorce becomes final. He is a Mischling (1st degree) as a result. If the divorce proceedings had lasted for two more weeks, he would be classified as (and would always remain) a Jew. X was a lifelong bachelor but married a Jew on December 1, 1935. He was a Mischling but on December 1 he will be classified as a Jew. Test C[edit] X has one Jewish and one non-Jewish parent and they are married 15 September 1935. He is born two years thereafter. He is a Mischling (1st degree). Same result if he is born on 1 October 1935. X has one Jewish and one non-Jewish parent and they are married 15 October 1935. He is born two years thereafter. He is classified as a Jew. Same result if he is born 1 November 1935. Test D[edit] X has one Jewish and one non-Jewish parent, who never marry. He is born 10 August 1936. He is classified as a Jew. If he had been born two weeks earlier (e.g. 27 July 1936), he would have been classified as a Mischling (1st degree). X has one Jewish and one non-Jewish parent. He is born 27 July 1936. if his parents were married on 15 September 1935, he is a Mischling (1st degree). if his parents were married on 15 October 1935, he is a Jew. if his parents never marry, he is a Mischling (1st degree). en.wikipedia.org

To: Rarebird who wrote (488)	2/23/2017 2:39:41 PM
From: benwood	1 Recommendation Recommended By Cogito Ergo Sum Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2202

I've seen a lot of places which have two restrooms and they just made them genderless. That actually is so much more efficient anyway... only developmentally disabled designers and planners would go back to the old way. I've also seen a restroom setup in places including the flagship Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Seattle where the wash up area is common, and all restrooms are closed, private rooms off this area. Just pick an open door. But who wants a layout devoid of controversy where you cannot rally the moral high ground control freaks into your corner?

To: Rarebird who wrote (488)	2/24/2017 4:05:26 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2202

It's official Thump will continue Obama's Legacy; i.e. we're never leaving Iraq just like O decided we were never leaving Afghanistan. : Joint Chiefs Chairman: US Mulling ‘Long-Term Commitment’ to Iraq US, NATO Would Commit to Backing Iraqi Military in the Future by Jason Ditz, February 23, 2017 Print This \| Share This Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford says that the Pentagon is considering a “long-term commitment” to operations in Iraq, intending to keep troops in the country after the ISIS war, with an eye toward keeping Iraq’s military propped up. Exactly what form this would take remains to be seen, as the US already has thousands of ground troops in Iraq, and they have already made a point to say that their existing operation has “no fixed end date.” US officials have previously indicated that the US would likely be in Iraq more or less forever, believing ISIS or something similar would crop up if the US was ever not occupying the nation. Dunford’s comments suggest the US is considering something above and beyond this, but might portend both an increase in US military aid to Iraq and an even bigger deployment of ground troops in a nation-building capacity, though this would clearly run contrary to President Trump’s position that the US is spending too much money having troops abroad in so many different countries. It does, however, explain why the Pentagon has been comfortable with pushing Iraq’s anti-ISIS military offensive across the Sunni Arab parts of the country, despite little to no serious effort being made to end the sectarian unrest that set the stage for ISIS’ original capture of those regions. Keeping the Iraqi Sunnis pacified is going to be an open-ended job, and it’s a job the Pentagon leadership is fine with taken up.